We have reviewed the allegations submitted by Mr [redacted] and provide the foregoing responseOtis Elevator Company (“Otis”) was informed that the building located at Westwood had been sold and was under new ownership, effective 9/14/Otis attempted to contact the new ownership via email and by phone, but did not receive a response until 11/21/when Mr***, the manager for the new owner informed Otis that the State of California had issued the Annual State Preliminary Orders (SPOs) for his elevator, which must be completed by a licensed and certified elevator companyOtis then submitted a time and material proposal to complete the SPOs along with a separate addendum to transfer the existing elevator service agreement into Mr***’s nameThis documentation was submitted for review and approval on 11/21/The proposal and addendum clearly detailed the scope and requirements, terms and conditionsMr [redacted] did not respond to numerous inquiries as to the approval status of the proposal or addendumTherefore Otis was unable to complete the SPOsUnfortunately, the State of California imposed fines and penalties against Mr [redacted] because the SPOs were not completed in a timely fashionOtis again reached out to Mr [redacted] on 2/1/by phone and emailOn 2/2/17, Otis and Mr [redacted] negotiated a 10% reduction to the time and material proposal price in exchange for executing the retroactive addendumThe proposal and addendum were then signed by both partiesAs is standard, one must remit payment for services renderedOtis had continued to fulfill its contractual obligations to service the elevator, but Mr [redacted] refused to remit paymentIt was assumed that Mr [redacted] followed standard due diligence practices when acquiring ownership of the building in question and had copies of all vendor contractsHowever, on 3/6/17, Mr [redacted] claimed he did not have a copy of the service agreement; Otis provided a copy to him the following dayIn light of Mr***’s refusal to pay for service invoices the proposal to complete the SPOs was deferred until Mr [redacted] brought his account balance to zeroOn several occasions, from 3/7/– 4/20/17, Otis attempted to partner with Mr [redacted] and amicably resolve the situationOtis offered to waive several of the open service invoices in an attempt to appease Mr***Regrettably, the offers were rejected and rebuffed by Mr***Therefore, on 4/21/17, Otis sent Mr [redacted] to a third party collection agencyIt is Otis’ position that Mr [redacted] violated the terms of the service agreement by not remitting payment for services renderedA fully executed contract is a linchpin in the business world, as is integrityOne cannot refuse to honor an agreement simply because the terms and conditions no longer suit themBest Regards, [redacted] T [redacted] Otis Elevator Company Account Manager
They basically baited and switched me and now trying to throw me to some third party collection without ever providing me the contract or fees associated. It's basically they had me sign documents to do some new work, but by signing that document they sent me bills for things I never authorized or made aware of. They never have been to our facility since we bought it either because the door has been locked, so it is very unprofessional. The company is big so they are trying to bully us into paying something we did not have service for.I appreciate your help.Thanks,
We have reviewed the allegations submitted by Mr. [redacted] and provide the foregoing response. Otis Elevator Company (“Otis”) was informed that the building located at 7891 Westwood had been sold and was under new ownership, effective 9/14/16. Otis attempted to contact the new ownership via email...
and by phone, but did not receive a response until 11/21/16 when Mr. [redacted], the manager for the new owner informed Otis that the State of California had issued the Annual State Preliminary Orders (SPOs) for his elevator, which must be completed by a licensed and certified elevator company. Otis then submitted a time and material proposal to complete the SPOs along with a separate addendum to transfer the existing elevator service agreement into Mr. [redacted]’s name. This documentation was submitted for review and approval on 11/21/16. The proposal and addendum clearly detailed the scope and requirements, terms and conditions. Mr. [redacted] did not respond to numerous inquiries as to the approval status of the proposal or addendum. Therefore Otis was unable to complete the SPOs. Unfortunately, the State of California imposed fines and penalties against Mr. [redacted] because the SPOs were not completed in a timely fashion. Otis again reached out to Mr. [redacted] on 2/1/17 by phone and email. On 2/2/17, Otis and Mr. [redacted] negotiated a 10% reduction to the time and material proposal price in exchange for executing the retroactive addendum. The proposal and addendum were then signed by both parties. As is standard, one must remit payment for services rendered. Otis had continued to fulfill its contractual obligations to service the elevator, but Mr. [redacted] refused to remit payment. It was assumed that Mr. [redacted] followed standard due diligence practices when acquiring ownership of the building in question and had copies of all vendor contracts. However, on 3/6/17, Mr. [redacted] claimed he did not have a copy of the service agreement; Otis provided a copy to him the following day. In light of Mr. [redacted]’s refusal to pay for service invoices the proposal to complete the SPOs was deferred until Mr. [redacted] brought his account balance to zero. On several occasions, from 3/7/17 – 4/20/17, Otis attempted to partner with Mr. [redacted] and amicably resolve the situation. Otis offered to waive several of the open service invoices in an attempt to appease Mr. [redacted]. Regrettably, the offers were rejected and rebuffed by Mr. [redacted]. Therefore, on 4/21/17, Otis sent Mr. [redacted] to a third party collection agency. It is Otis’ position that Mr. [redacted] violated the terms of the service agreement by not remitting payment for services rendered. A fully executed contract is a linchpin in the business world, as is integrity. One cannot refuse to honor an agreement simply because the terms and conditions no longer suit them. Best Regards, [redacted] T. [redacted] Otis Elevator Company Account Manager
Review: We canceled the monthly service with them at [redacted] E. [redacted] St. in [redacted] verbally on the phone and also in writing and they refuse to let us out.
They are continuing to send us monthly bills and refusing to respond to our letters or calls. We gave them a written letter to cancel the monthly services on 4/2/13. They are not doing the monthly service, as we asked them not to, but we are still getting a monthly bill. They bought out Elevator Services Co.around April 2012. We did not sign any contract with Otis when they took over and the original contract we had with the old Co. Elevator Services was signed back on 01/05/1995 and Otis is telling us we have to stay with them and cannot be let out of the monthly service until Jan. 2014. We had asked to be let out of the other service contract we had with them at [redacted] Ave. in F airfield, CA at [redacted] and they let us out of that one, but are refusing to let us out on [redacted] E. [redacted] St.at [redacted] & [redacted] There is no rhyme or reason on this matter. We have another Elevator Co. that we use and are very happy with them.
We want Otis to stop sending us monthly bills close out our account. Desired Settlement: To close out our account.
I have an OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY residential elevator, installed by OTIS in 1994. Although the unit is labeled “OTIS”, it was manufactured by the [redacted] company , a company OTIS later bought and soon afterwards closed.
In the fall of 2013 my elevator stalled between floors and I was locked inside for a good bit of time. I called OTIS in Roanoke, Virginia. It took several weeks for OTIS to figure out what the problem could be and find parts. It turned out Otis had no replacement parts for [redacted] elevators.
Otis proposed either to replace the floppy valve at a cost that varied from $500.00 (verbal November) to $1970.00 (11/20/14) and is now $1220.00 or to replace the entire control valve ($7927.60).
I opted for the floppy valve replacement. This was done on December 6, 2013. Two OTIS technicians took 1.5 hours to replace the floppy valve disk (a thin 3/4 in. diameter plastic disk), 4hrs total, including travel time. The disk they installed differed from the original disk in both material and shape. Nevertheless after the repair the elevator functioned again. Sometime in late February I was again stuck in the elevator between floors. Whereas the original disk had lasted 20 years, the “new” one lasted less than 3 months.
In February I asked the [redacted] Elevator Company. located of Danville, Virginia to replace the control valve. They installed a new Blain valve on March 28 for $5340.00. In the process of removing the old valve they found that during the 1994 elevator installation OTIS had omitted to remove a shipping bracket that tied the oil pump rigidly to the control valve. Who knows what effect this has had regarding the overall reliability of the control valve and the oil pump. Removing it though quieted the operation of the elevator considerably.
In summary: OTIS’s original installation was faulty,
OTIS omitted to store spare parts for [redacted] elevators they sold as OTIS elevators
OTIS took weeks to effect a repair
OTIS’s repair failed in less than 3 months
OTIS charges were excessive
OTIS”s control valve replacement cost proposal exceeded the [redacted] charge by $2587.60 or 48%Desired Settlement: OTIS should recognize that their work did not solve the problem and therefor not expect payment.
Business
Response:
I am writing in response to your letter dated Friday, June 27,2014 regarding Revdex.com Complaint ID [redacted].
The equipment referenced in the complaint is a residential elevator manufactured by [redacted] Elevator Company (at the time of the installation a fully owned subsidiary of Otis Elevator Company), and installed by Otis Elevator Company in 1994. This unit has not been maintained by Otis Elevator Company, and to the best of our knowledge the unit has not received periodic preventative maintenance or service of any kind. The industry standard life expectancy for similar elevators is typically 15-20 years, provided the units are properly maintained by rained and qualified elevator mechanics.
In the fall of 2013, the owner called us and inquired about the installation of a new elevator in his residence to replace the existing unit. Specifically, he asked about the Otis Gen2 and HydroFit elevators. We informed him that these products were for commercial use and typically not suited to his intended purpose. Upon further investigation, we learned that the owner was an engineer and had diagnosed his residential elevator with a problem in the hydraulic valve. We informed the owner that the RV-100 valve parts were no longer in production, but that it may be possible to retrofit the existing valve. We provided a quote in the amount of $7,927.00 for this work on 11/4/2013. The owner did not choose to have Otis perform this work. At the owner's request we also provided a less costly option to replace the flapper valve at an estimated cost of $1,970.00. Rather than signing the proposed contract, the owner chose to allow Otis Elevator Company to perform the work on a "time and material" basis at Otis customary billing rates. The owner signed the Otis Service Order and Certificate of Time in two places. By his signatures he agreed to have Otis make the repairs, and agreed that the work was completed and satisfactory.
To date the owner has failed to provide payment to Otis Elevator Company for the work performed. Only after several attempts to collect the past due amount, the owner informed us that the unit had mal-functioned over
100 days after we had completed the work. Otis was not called to examine the unit. The unit was not maintained by Otis. We believe we have a legal and binding agreement with the owner and are due payment in ft¡ll for the work provided to the owner. We intend to take all necessary actions to collect on this debt.
Consumer
Response:
I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I read the Otis response to my complaint as signed by Mr. [redacted] and conclude that he didn't answer any of my complaints instead he insists that OTIS will do what ever to collect the money for a repair the failed in less than three months when it should have lasted several years. He also states that the [redacted] ELEVATOR CO was part of OTIS when according to the attached article OTIS acquired the company only in 1999, 5 years after OTIS sold me the elevator as an OTIS product.
We have reviewed the allegations submitted by Mr [redacted] and provide the foregoing responseOtis Elevator Company (“Otis”) was informed that the building located at Westwood had been sold and was under new ownership, effective 9/14/Otis attempted to contact the new ownership via email and by phone, but did not receive a response until 11/21/when Mr***, the manager for the new owner informed Otis that the State of California had issued the Annual State Preliminary Orders (SPOs) for his elevator, which must be completed by a licensed and certified elevator companyOtis then submitted a time and material proposal to complete the SPOs along with a separate addendum to transfer the existing elevator service agreement into Mr***’s nameThis documentation was submitted for review and approval on 11/21/The proposal and addendum clearly detailed the scope and requirements, terms and conditionsMr [redacted] did not respond to numerous inquiries as to the approval status of the proposal or addendumTherefore Otis was unable to complete the SPOsUnfortunately, the State of California imposed fines and penalties against Mr [redacted] because the SPOs were not completed in a timely fashionOtis again reached out to Mr [redacted] on 2/1/by phone and emailOn 2/2/17, Otis and Mr [redacted] negotiated a 10% reduction to the time and material proposal price in exchange for executing the retroactive addendumThe proposal and addendum were then signed by both partiesAs is standard, one must remit payment for services renderedOtis had continued to fulfill its contractual obligations to service the elevator, but Mr [redacted] refused to remit paymentIt was assumed that Mr [redacted] followed standard due diligence practices when acquiring ownership of the building in question and had copies of all vendor contractsHowever, on 3/6/17, Mr [redacted] claimed he did not have a copy of the service agreement; Otis provided a copy to him the following dayIn light of Mr***’s refusal to pay for service invoices the proposal to complete the SPOs was deferred until Mr [redacted] brought his account balance to zeroOn several occasions, from 3/7/– 4/20/17, Otis attempted to partner with Mr [redacted] and amicably resolve the situationOtis offered to waive several of the open service invoices in an attempt to appease Mr***Regrettably, the offers were rejected and rebuffed by Mr***Therefore, on 4/21/17, Otis sent Mr [redacted] to a third party collection agencyIt is Otis’ position that Mr [redacted] violated the terms of the service agreement by not remitting payment for services renderedA fully executed contract is a linchpin in the business world, as is integrityOne cannot refuse to honor an agreement simply because the terms and conditions no longer suit themBest Regards, [redacted] T [redacted] Otis Elevator Company Account Manager
They basically baited and switched me and now trying to throw me to some third party collection without ever providing me the contract or fees associated. It's basically they had me sign documents to do some new work, but by signing that document they sent me bills for things I never authorized or made aware of. They never have been to our facility since we bought it either because the door has been locked, so it is very unprofessional. The company is big so they are trying to bully us into paying something we did not have service for.I appreciate your help.Thanks,
We have reviewed the allegations submitted by Mr. [redacted] and provide the foregoing response. Otis Elevator Company (“Otis”) was informed that the building located at 7891 Westwood had been sold and was under new ownership, effective 9/14/16. Otis attempted to contact the new ownership via email...
and by phone, but did not receive a response until 11/21/16 when Mr. [redacted], the manager for the new owner informed Otis that the State of California had issued the Annual State Preliminary Orders (SPOs) for his elevator, which must be completed by a licensed and certified elevator company. Otis then submitted a time and material proposal to complete the SPOs along with a separate addendum to transfer the existing elevator service agreement into Mr. [redacted]’s name. This documentation was submitted for review and approval on 11/21/16. The proposal and addendum clearly detailed the scope and requirements, terms and conditions. Mr. [redacted] did not respond to numerous inquiries as to the approval status of the proposal or addendum. Therefore Otis was unable to complete the SPOs. Unfortunately, the State of California imposed fines and penalties against Mr. [redacted] because the SPOs were not completed in a timely fashion. Otis again reached out to Mr. [redacted] on 2/1/17 by phone and email. On 2/2/17, Otis and Mr. [redacted] negotiated a 10% reduction to the time and material proposal price in exchange for executing the retroactive addendum. The proposal and addendum were then signed by both parties. As is standard, one must remit payment for services rendered. Otis had continued to fulfill its contractual obligations to service the elevator, but Mr. [redacted] refused to remit payment. It was assumed that Mr. [redacted] followed standard due diligence practices when acquiring ownership of the building in question and had copies of all vendor contracts. However, on 3/6/17, Mr. [redacted] claimed he did not have a copy of the service agreement; Otis provided a copy to him the following day. In light of Mr. [redacted]’s refusal to pay for service invoices the proposal to complete the SPOs was deferred until Mr. [redacted] brought his account balance to zero. On several occasions, from 3/7/17 – 4/20/17, Otis attempted to partner with Mr. [redacted] and amicably resolve the situation. Otis offered to waive several of the open service invoices in an attempt to appease Mr. [redacted]. Regrettably, the offers were rejected and rebuffed by Mr. [redacted]. Therefore, on 4/21/17, Otis sent Mr. [redacted] to a third party collection agency. It is Otis’ position that Mr. [redacted] violated the terms of the service agreement by not remitting payment for services rendered. A fully executed contract is a linchpin in the business world, as is integrity. One cannot refuse to honor an agreement simply because the terms and conditions no longer suit them. Best Regards, [redacted] T. [redacted] Otis Elevator Company Account Manager
Review: We canceled the monthly service with them at [redacted] E. [redacted] St. in [redacted] verbally on the phone and also in writing and they refuse to let us out.
They are continuing to send us monthly bills and refusing to respond to our letters or calls. We gave them a written letter to cancel the monthly services on 4/2/13. They are not doing the monthly service, as we asked them not to, but we are still getting a monthly bill. They bought out Elevator Services Co.around April 2012. We did not sign any contract with Otis when they took over and the original contract we had with the old Co. Elevator Services was signed back on 01/05/1995 and Otis is telling us we have to stay with them and cannot be let out of the monthly service until Jan. 2014. We had asked to be let out of the other service contract we had with them at [redacted] Ave. in F airfield, CA at [redacted] and they let us out of that one, but are refusing to let us out on [redacted] E. [redacted] St.at [redacted] & [redacted] There is no rhyme or reason on this matter. We have another Elevator Co. that we use and are very happy with them.
We want Otis to stop sending us monthly bills close out our account. Desired Settlement: To close out our account.
Review: Dear Sir or Madam:
I have an OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY residential elevator, installed by OTIS in 1994. Although the unit is labeled “OTIS”, it was manufactured by the [redacted] company , a company OTIS later bought and soon afterwards closed.
In the fall of 2013 my elevator stalled between floors and I was locked inside for a good bit of time. I called OTIS in Roanoke, Virginia. It took several weeks for OTIS to figure out what the problem could be and find parts. It turned out Otis had no replacement parts for [redacted] elevators.
Otis proposed either to replace the floppy valve at a cost that varied from $500.00 (verbal November) to $1970.00 (11/20/14) and is now $1220.00 or to replace the entire control valve ($7927.60).
I opted for the floppy valve replacement. This was done on December 6, 2013. Two OTIS technicians took 1.5 hours to replace the floppy valve disk (a thin 3/4 in. diameter plastic disk), 4hrs total, including travel time. The disk they installed differed from the original disk in both material and shape. Nevertheless after the repair the elevator functioned again. Sometime in late February I was again stuck in the elevator between floors. Whereas the original disk had lasted 20 years, the “new” one lasted less than 3 months.
In February I asked the [redacted] Elevator Company. located of Danville, Virginia to replace the control valve. They installed a new Blain valve on March 28 for $5340.00. In the process of removing the old valve they found that during the 1994 elevator installation OTIS had omitted to remove a shipping bracket that tied the oil pump rigidly to the control valve. Who knows what effect this has had regarding the overall reliability of the control valve and the oil pump. Removing it though quieted the operation of the elevator considerably.
In summary: OTIS’s original installation was faulty,
OTIS omitted to store spare parts for [redacted] elevators they sold as OTIS elevators
OTIS took weeks to effect a repair
OTIS’s repair failed in less than 3 months
OTIS charges were excessive
OTIS”s control valve replacement cost proposal exceeded the [redacted] charge by $2587.60 or 48%Desired Settlement: OTIS should recognize that their work did not solve the problem and therefor not expect payment.
Business
Response:
I am writing in response to your letter dated Friday, June 27,2014 regarding Revdex.com Complaint ID [redacted].
The equipment referenced in the complaint is a residential elevator manufactured by [redacted] Elevator Company (at the time of the installation a fully owned subsidiary of Otis Elevator Company), and installed by Otis Elevator Company in 1994. This unit has not been maintained by Otis Elevator Company, and to the best of our knowledge the unit has not received periodic preventative maintenance or service of any kind. The industry standard life expectancy for similar elevators is typically 15-20 years, provided the units are properly maintained by rained and qualified elevator mechanics.
In the fall of 2013, the owner called us and inquired about the installation of a new elevator in his residence to replace the existing unit. Specifically, he asked about the Otis Gen2 and HydroFit elevators. We informed him that these products were for commercial use and typically not suited to his intended purpose. Upon further investigation, we learned that the owner was an engineer and had diagnosed his residential elevator with a problem in the hydraulic valve. We informed the owner that the RV-100 valve parts were no longer in production, but that it may be possible to retrofit the existing valve. We provided a quote in the amount of $7,927.00 for this work on 11/4/2013. The owner did not choose to have Otis perform this work. At the owner's request we also provided a less costly option to replace the flapper valve at an estimated cost of $1,970.00. Rather than signing the proposed contract, the owner chose to allow Otis Elevator Company to perform the work on a "time and material" basis at Otis customary billing rates. The owner signed the Otis Service Order and Certificate of Time in two places. By his signatures he agreed to have Otis make the repairs, and agreed that the work was completed and satisfactory.
To date the owner has failed to provide payment to Otis Elevator Company for the work performed. Only after several attempts to collect the past due amount, the owner informed us that the unit had mal-functioned over
100 days after we had completed the work. Otis was not called to examine the unit. The unit was not maintained by Otis. We believe we have a legal and binding agreement with the owner and are due payment in ft¡ll for the work provided to the owner. We intend to take all necessary actions to collect on this debt.
Consumer
Response:
I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I read the Otis response to my complaint as signed by Mr. [redacted] and conclude that he didn't answer any of my complaints instead he insists that OTIS will do what ever to collect the money for a repair the failed in less than three months when it should have lasted several years. He also states that the [redacted] ELEVATOR CO was part of OTIS when according to the attached article OTIS acquired the company only in 1999, 5 years after OTIS sold me the elevator as an OTIS product.
Best regards,