[redacted]August 29, 2017VIA EMAIL: [redacted] Ms. [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com, Inc. 2800 Euclid Avenue, 4th Floor Cleveland, OH 44115-2408 Re: Complaint ID [redacted] [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: This letter shall serve as Kinetico Incorporated's response to your August 23, 2017 letter incorporating additional comments from [redacted]. Unfortunately, there is no more documentation or information that Kinetico can share with the Revdex.com in this matter that would or could constructively lead to a resolution of [redacted] complaint. It appears that [redacted] feels the same way since he has now initiated a complaint with the [redacted] that is directly related to the same issues we have mediated over the past several weeks. Therefore, rather than attempt to deal with the same issues through two different complaint channels, Kinetico believes that it is now best to direct its attention to this new complaint and consider the Revdex.com matter closed. Thank you for your conciliation efforts in this matter. Very truly yours, KINETICO INCORPORATED Sr. Legal Administrator
Business responded to complaint. See attached.Business response also copied and pasted below by Revdex.com staff 1/21/15.January 20, 2015 VIA FAX: 216-861-6365Ms. [redacted]Trade Assistant Revdex.com, Inc. 2800 Euclid Avenue, 4th FloorCleveland, OH 44115-2408Re: [redacted]...
[redacted], ID [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: I have received and reviewed your January 7, 2015 correspondence enclosing the complaint filed by [redacted] against Kinetico Incorporated. Kinetico Incorporated is an international manufactureand distributor of water treatment systems that primarily sells these systems through a network ofauthorized, independent dealers. It also sells its systems through a few company owned retail stores.The prior owner of Mr. [redacted]‘s home purchased a Kinetico water softener and Plus Deluxe ROdrinking water system from Kinetico's company owned Indianapolis retail store on July 17, 2007. At thetime of purchase, the limited warranty on the Plus Deluxe drinking water system was seven (7) years. The limited warranty did not cover freight or labor-charges.Kinetico has reviewed Mr. [redacted]‘s complaint with the Indianapolis retail store. The only record of any service requested by Mr. [redacted] to his home was in October 2013. Apparently Mr. [redacted] contactedthe store to arrange a service call to confirm that his water treatment system, including the drinking watersystem, was operating properly. The service technician arrived at Mr. [redacted]‘s home on October 18,2013. The drinking water system was operating properly at that time. No other parts or repairs wererequired. The Indianapolis retail store does not have any record of Mr. [redacted] contacting the store afterOctober 18, 2013. The drinking water system is now out of warranty. If Mr. [redacted] has any records or other documentation from the retail store of the October 18th service call that differs from what l have statedabove, Kinetico would be happy to review that documentation and supplement its response. However,since the drinking water system is now out of warranty, any further service to Mr. [redacted]‘s drinkingwater system would be a charged service. Should you have any further questions or ,comments concerning this matter, please do not hesitate tocontact me. Very truly yours,KINETICO INCORPORATED [redacted]Sr.Leg Administrator
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
[redacted]
I have many complaints against the Kinetico business model and Kinetico's refusal to provide any documentation of independent testing of the K5 I purchased that broke and flooded my home.I initially rejected the offer of a replacement K5 since the local dealer, who installed the original K5 and a Kinetico water softener in July 2012, was going to charge me almost $500 for the install.So a supposed goodwill gesture was another $500 bill on top of the $1226.00 water damage clean up fee I paid out of pocket.I hired a licensed plumber and had the leaky Kinetico water softener removed and replaced with copper plumbing and a 3M system, to fix the problems caused by the Kinetico faulty installation and leaky water softener.The plumber told me the Kinetico dealer/installer was not correct in the installation of the water softener as it blocked the household shut off valve and impacted the household water pressure regulator. The plumber also said the Kinetico installer was mistaken in the assessment of how the water softener should be connected to the household plumbing.I am though with Kinetico, after spending over $10,000 on their products since 1998.I am happy to tell all my friends and colleagues to avoid Kinetico since it is so overpriced and installed by dealers who are not licensed plumbers and are not sure what they are doing.Avoid Kinetico! Goodby Kinetico and good riddance. Also, I did not use a caulking sealant when installing these filters.I have installed filters on the two K5s I owned, with the first K5 purchased around 1998.I have never had a problem until the K5 installed July 2012, under a 10 year warranty since it was purchased with a Kinetico water softener installed at the same time at a cost of around $5000 (five thousand dollars) through [redacted].This K5 installed July 2012 must be defective for the Kinetico sales person to say caulking was used when the filters were installed.The caulking reported by Kinetico must have been used by Kinetico in Ohio or the dealer in [redacted], WA to try and fix a broken K5 that was then installed in my home.[redacted]
[redacted]August 29, 2017VIA EMAIL: [redacted] Ms. [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com, Inc. 2800 Euclid Avenue, 4th Floor Cleveland, OH 44115-2408 Re: Complaint ID [redacted] [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: This letter shall serve as Kinetico Incorporated's response to your August 23, 2017 letter incorporating additional comments from [redacted]. Unfortunately, there is no more documentation or information that Kinetico can share with the Revdex.com in this matter that would or could constructively lead to a resolution of [redacted] complaint. It appears that [redacted] feels the same way since he has now initiated a complaint with the [redacted] that is directly related to the same issues we have mediated over the past several weeks. Therefore, rather than attempt to deal with the same issues through two different complaint channels, Kinetico believes that it is now best to direct its attention to this new complaint and consider the Revdex.com matter closed. Thank you for your conciliation efforts in this matter. Very truly yours, KINETICO INCORPORATED Sr. Legal Administrator
Business responded to complaint. See attached.Business response also copied and pasted below by Revdex.com staff 1/21/15.January 20, 2015 VIA FAX: 216-861-6365Ms. [redacted]Trade Assistant Revdex.com, Inc. 2800 Euclid Avenue, 4th FloorCleveland, OH 44115-2408Re: [redacted]...
[redacted], ID [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: I have received and reviewed your January 7, 2015 correspondence enclosing the complaint filed by [redacted] against Kinetico Incorporated. Kinetico Incorporated is an international manufactureand distributor of water treatment systems that primarily sells these systems through a network ofauthorized, independent dealers. It also sells its systems through a few company owned retail stores.The prior owner of Mr. [redacted]‘s home purchased a Kinetico water softener and Plus Deluxe ROdrinking water system from Kinetico's company owned Indianapolis retail store on July 17, 2007. At thetime of purchase, the limited warranty on the Plus Deluxe drinking water system was seven (7) years. The limited warranty did not cover freight or labor-charges.Kinetico has reviewed Mr. [redacted]‘s complaint with the Indianapolis retail store. The only record of any service requested by Mr. [redacted] to his home was in October 2013. Apparently Mr. [redacted] contactedthe store to arrange a service call to confirm that his water treatment system, including the drinking watersystem, was operating properly. The service technician arrived at Mr. [redacted]‘s home on October 18,2013. The drinking water system was operating properly at that time. No other parts or repairs wererequired. The Indianapolis retail store does not have any record of Mr. [redacted] contacting the store afterOctober 18, 2013. The drinking water system is now out of warranty. If Mr. [redacted] has any records or other documentation from the retail store of the October 18th service call that differs from what l have statedabove, Kinetico would be happy to review that documentation and supplement its response. However,since the drinking water system is now out of warranty, any further service to Mr. [redacted]‘s drinkingwater system would be a charged service. Should you have any further questions or ,comments concerning this matter, please do not hesitate tocontact me. Very truly yours,KINETICO INCORPORATED [redacted]Sr.Leg Administrator
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
[redacted]
I have many complaints against the Kinetico business model and Kinetico's refusal to provide any documentation of independent testing of the K5 I purchased that broke and flooded my home.I initially rejected the offer of a replacement K5 since the local dealer, who installed the original K5 and a Kinetico water softener in July 2012, was going to charge me almost $500 for the install.So a supposed goodwill gesture was another $500 bill on top of the $1226.00 water damage clean up fee I paid out of pocket.I hired a licensed plumber and had the leaky Kinetico water softener removed and replaced with copper plumbing and a 3M system, to fix the problems caused by the Kinetico faulty installation and leaky water softener.The plumber told me the Kinetico dealer/installer was not correct in the installation of the water softener as it blocked the household shut off valve and impacted the household water pressure regulator. The plumber also said the Kinetico installer was mistaken in the assessment of how the water softener should be connected to the household plumbing.I am though with Kinetico, after spending over $10,000 on their products since 1998.I am happy to tell all my friends and colleagues to avoid Kinetico since it is so overpriced and installed by dealers who are not licensed plumbers and are not sure what they are doing.Avoid Kinetico! Goodby Kinetico and good riddance. Also, I did not use a caulking sealant when installing these filters.I have installed filters on the two K5s I owned, with the first K5 purchased around 1998.I have never had a problem until the K5 installed July 2012, under a 10 year warranty since it was purchased with a Kinetico water softener installed at the same time at a cost of around $5000 (five thousand dollars) through [redacted].This K5 installed July 2012 must be defective for the Kinetico sales person to say caulking was used when the filters were installed.The caulking reported by Kinetico must have been used by Kinetico in Ohio or the dealer in [redacted], WA to try and fix a broken K5 that was then installed in my home.[redacted]