Paul Davis Restoration & Remodeling of Columbus

We will be sending a roofer out to inspect the roof based on our estimate and scope of work This inspection will happen sometime within the next 7-days, weather permitting I sounds from her complaint like Ms [redacted] is having problems with her chimney flashing According to the estimate upon which the contract and payment was based, there was no work performed to the chimney flashing, as it would not have been damaged by wind The photos I reviewed showed that the chimney flashing was heavily caulked at the time of our repairs If it is determined the problems are coming from the chimney flashing we would not hold any liability for water infiltration We will inspect to make sure all the repairs called forth in the estimate were completed and are in working order Adam

We certainly acknowledge that parts of the repairs performed at this house have required additional attention WE have attempted to work with the customer to resolve these issues The customer has been difficult to deal with throughout the entire process, delaying the timeframes given to us to address the areas by either not responding to emails for days or by requiring work to be scheduled on certain dates and times that are usually weeks out We have tried repeatedly to resolve the issues to her satisfaction and found that she sometimes has unrealistic expectations about what the finished product should be I will not address all the items listed, I will only say that there are not health risks in this house We are certainly willing to address any outstanding issues, and have been throughout the entire process We will not refund the amounts to the homeowner that she is requesting, as that is no where near a reasonable request My company is willing to work to address her concerns but understand some of the items listed are not outstanding issues ***

We were contacted by Mr [redacted] in September regarding a property he was purchasing and a potential 203k loan for the renovations.? Mr [redacted] called us directly and I met with him at the property located at [redacted] ***? to walk the property and get a feel for what he wanted to accomplish with the renovation.? After our initial meeting the information I gathered was placed into an estimate to be reviewed by the homeowner as well as the lending company.? There were multiple conversations back and forth between myself and J [redacted] ? [redacted] ? regarding documents needed by the lender and some revisions to the estimate itself.? This process went on until the property ultimately closed on approximately October 18, 2017.? Please note that this is already days after we were first involved with the rehab and has nothing to do with anything we have control over.? At the time of closing we were then able to approach the city of Columbus for a permit.? Based on the work requested we needed to have the permit pulled and also no work could commence until it was received.? In an email from myself to Mr [redacted] on November I explained that the permit had been applied for on October (the day after closing) and was not issued by the city of Columbus until November 25, 2017.? Prior to that I had been in contact with both Mr [redacted] and [redacted] from [redacted] regarding the progress as work must start within days of the closing on a 203k load.? Both parties were aware of the delays with the city of Columbus as well as our attempts and the homeowners attempts to get the permit issued.? At this time everyone was frustrated, including myself, with the length of time it was taking.? Prior to that email Mr [redacted] had asked whether or not he could change contractors.? After the permit was posted the demolition at the house was performed the final week of November.? We were then in the process of scheduling the remaining repairs when Mr [redacted] he wanted to remove us as the contractor.? At no time during those conversations was I ever irate or disrespectful to Mr [redacted] in our conversations.? I am not sure where that statement even comes from.? Regardless we agreed to be removed from the project.? The protocol for removal, as explained to me, was to submit an invoice for work completed and then have that inspected for validity.? We submitted our invoice and the property was inspected sometime around the beginning of January 2018.? Based on that inspection we were paid for work we completed.If there was a problem with the invoice total for work completed the mortgage company would have brought that to our attention.? I had no control over the disbursement of those funds to our company.? Based on the fact the lender inspected and agreed with the invoice I believe we billed fairly and see no reason to return any funds to Mr [redacted] .? In addition, any request or question of our business practices is welcome as there is a very specific process that must be followed when dealing with a 203k loan and a city building department.? I believe my documentation outlines that we adhered to those requirements.I understand Mr [redacted] ’s frustration with the process.? I know that during this time he was living with friends who were recently married and I’m sure that added to his stress.? No one wants to be out of their home any longer than necessary and we were doing as much as we could to advance the process.? I wish Mr [redacted] nothing but the best going forward and I hope that he was able to have his project completed in a timeframe he deemed as acceptable

From: [redacted] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 9:AM To: [redacted] Subject: Fw:paul davis for [redacted] settlement [redacted] -------- Original message -------- From: [redacted] Date:10/16/8:AM (GMT-05:00) To: [redacted] Cc: Subject: Fw:paul davis for [redacted] settlement ----Forwarded message---- From: [redacted] To: [redacted] Sent: Mon, Dec 13, 12:PM EST Subject: Fw: ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: [redacted] [redacted] To: [redacted] [redacted] Cc: [redacted] Sent: Tue, July 29, 8:14:PM Subject: Re: the only dollar amount given by me was in regard to the tools that were inadvertently disposed of in removing the items from the basement The worker assumed all the items he was removing was being disposed of and they were placed in the dumpster When we realized what had happened, the items were buried and not able to be retrieved At that point I was told to provide a list later as I unpacked so that those items could be figured out The other credits that were given were a direct result of what you calculated as an allowance per our discussion ----- Original Message ---- From: [redacted] [redacted] To: [redacted] [redacted] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 1:00:PM Subject: RE: As for our conversation, you had disputed issues and placed a monetary value on those items I have forwarded your dispute to Paul Davis as well as the insurance company If Paul Davis Restoration does not receive the balance of the 11,check then the insurance company has every right to demand that money back If you claim that tools were stolen and boxes of shoes only had one shoe as well as computer equipment etc, you will need to produce receipts for those items if asked by the insurance company As a consumer you have the legal right to dispute any and all parts of any work that has been performed I allowed you to dispute those items in writing The total amount that was paid was on my calculation based on the dollar amount given by you of the items missing [redacted] -----Original Message----- [redacted] [redacted] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 12:PM To: [redacted] Cc: [redacted] Subject: Re: Per our conversation on July 23, with [redacted] , Ms [redacted] and myself, [redacted] , there was to be a written confirmation of settlement to be rendered agreed upon by Paul Davis restoration, myself and Ms [redacted] I not only sent the dispute asked upon by me, but submitted the funds requested by Ms [redacted] and agreed for the completion of what was asked for It was also agreed that there would be something written and signed for my documents faxed to Ms [redacted] which she nor I have received Would you please make that paperwork available for me Thank you, Ms [redacted] ----- Original Message ---- From: [redacted] [redacted] To: [redacted] Sent: Thursday, July 24, 7:43:PM Subject: We received $7,from [redacted] this is on behalf of Invoice # [redacted] for Paul Davis Restoration We also received a letter of dispute for the balance The original invoice was 12,so the balance in dispute is $4, I will forward the list of things disputed to Paul Davis and the insurance company If you have any further questions, please feel free to call me direct [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:This is unacceptableWe spent 10K on this work, and according to the estimates we have received we need to spend about 5k more to have the job repaired and finished PDR is directly responsible for the damages done to our home and the fact that the work was not performed properlyAccording to them, the work is completed However, according to EVERY SINGLE PROFESSIONAL we have to the home to check the work, the work is far from completeWe sought out these second opinions to ensure that we do not have "unrealistic expectations” and that in fact, the work is sub-par/ incompleteWe are not willing to have PDR attempt to finish the work, as every single time they come to our home, they claim the work is finished- only for us to come home to find half of the issues were not addressed; the half that were addressed, are still shoddy workmanship The drywall contractor that we had review the job even went as far as to say that PDR should not offer this kind of work if they are incapable of doing it (which is clearly evidenced by our home)The drywall on our ceiling is not even fastened properly in some areas, which is definitely a safety hazardTo say that the home has "required additional attention" is an understatementPDR has been to our home to repair their initial work at least separate times Of course the work has to be scheduled according to the homeowner’s schedule, that is common sense It is infuriating that the owner of the company would say “My company is willing to work to address her concerns but understand some of the items listed are not outstanding issues”If we, as the customers, say they are outstanding issues, and the second opinion contractors state that they are indeed outstanding issues, who is PDR to say that these are NOT outstanding issues?! There is no accountability herePDR did not finish the work that they were contracted to performPDR damaged our homePDR is directly responsible for the unfinished state that our home is in right nowPDR should be responsible for paying the second contractors to FINISH the work they were originally hired to doPDR should have never been paid in full from the start, however, they wereSince only half of the work has been completed, the monies should be returned so that the work can be PROPERLY completed by actual professionals Regards, [redacted]

This, is [redacted] *** I am just finding out that Paul Davis did a whole house restoration under my insurance claim complete with plumbing, electrical and structure repair never pulling any required permits from the city therefore by passing any inspections I am assuming the substandard work and shortcuts were the reason This adds merit to my claims and is public knowledge through the Franklin county auditor website

Again, I can understand Mr [redacted] 's frustration Not having ample limits of coverage can cause instances like this It would appear however that his issue lies more with his carrier than with us , the vendor The communication of limits should have come from them as we do not have access to that information After our phone call with the carrier they could have informed us of the limits or Mr [redacted] of the steps being taken Regardless of this we are still working with Mr [redacted] to assist him in his reconstruction short fall and hope to have an agreed upon resolution by the end of the week I would suggest that Mr [redacted] also follow up with his carrier for explanation on this process as it seems like we, the vendor, are bearing the brunt complaint I would also suggest he contact his local agent to discuss his coverage's so that if this were to happen in the future he would be able to know that he has the proper limits of coverage

I am still very dissatisfied with response of this company[redacted] , [redacted] ***

We were contacted by Mr*** in September regarding a property he was purchasing and a potential 203k loan for the renovations. Mr*** called us directly and I met with him at the property located at *** *** *** *** ** *** to walk the property and get a feel for
what he wanted to accomplish with the renovation. After our initial meeting the information I gathered was placed into an estimate to be reviewed by the homeowner as well as the lending company. There were multiple conversations back and forth between myself and J*** *** *** *** *** regarding documents needed by the lender and some revisions to the estimate itself. This process went on until the property ultimately closed on approximately October 18, 2017. Please note that this is already days after we were first involved with the rehab and has nothing to do with anything we have control over. At the time of closing we were then able to approach the city of Columbus for a permit. Based on the work requested we needed to have the permit pulled and also no work could commence until it was received. In an email from myself to Mr*** on November I explained that the permit had been applied for on October (the day after closing) and was not issued by the city of Columbus until November 25, 2017. Prior to that I had been in contact with both Mr*** and *** *** from *** *** regarding the progress as work must start within days of the closing on a 203k load. Both parties were aware of the delays with the city of Columbus as well as our attempts and the homeowners attempts to get the permit issued. At this time everyone was frustrated, including myself, with the length of time it was taking. Prior to that email Mr*** had asked whether or not he could change contractors. After the permit was posted the demolition at the house was performed the final week of November. We were then in the process of scheduling the remaining repairs when Mr*** *** he wanted to remove us as the contractor. At no time during those conversations was I ever irate or disrespectful to Mr*** in our conversations. I am not sure where that statement even comes from. Regardless we agreed to be removed from the project. The protocol for removal, as explained to me, was to submit an invoice for work completed and then have that inspected for validity. We submitted our invoice and the property was inspected sometime around the beginning of January 2018. Based on that inspection we were paid for work we completed.If there was a problem with the invoice total for work completed the mortgage company would have brought that to our attention. I had no control over the disbursement of those funds to our company. Based on the fact the lender inspected and agreed with the invoice I believe we billed fairly and see no reason to return any funds to Mr***. In addition, any request or question of our business practices is welcome as there is a very specific process that must be followed when dealing with a 203k loan and a city building department. I believe my documentation outlines that we adhered to those requirements.I understand Mr***’s frustration with the process. I know that during this time he was living with friends who were recently married and I’m sure that added to his stress. No one wants to be out of their home any longer than necessary and we were doing as much as we could to advance the process. I wish Mr*** nothing but the best going forward and I hope that he was able to have his project completed in a timeframe he deemed as acceptable

I am rejecting this response because: I asked for estimates several times. I kept being told that everything is handled through the insurance company. From both the insurance company and the restoration company. How could I make an informed decision if I had no idea what the cost would be? I did not authorize any demolition or after hours work, I was not told there would be an extra charge when the company was late getting to the house. I never signed off on what was going to be done. My girlfriend was asked to sign AFTER the work was done
Regards,
*** ***

Again, you disputed certain charges and I allowed you to do that per collection laws. That in no way means that you can keep the money and spend it anyway you see fit
*** *** * *** *** *** ***
-----Original Message-----
From: *** ***
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 8:
PM
To: *** ***
Cc: ***
Subject: Re:
the only dollar amount given by me was in regard to
the tools that were inadvertently disposed of in removing the items from the
basement. The worker assumed all the items he was removing was being
disposed of and they were placed in the dumpster. When we realized what
had happened, the items were buried and not able to be retrieved. At that
point I was told to provide a list later as I unpacked so that those items
could be figured out. The other credits that were given were a direct
result of what you calculated as an allowance per our discussion
----- Original Message ----
From: *** *** ***
To: *** *** ***
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 1:00:PM
Subject: RE:
As for our conversation,
you had disputed issues and placed a monetary value on those items. I
have forwarded your dispute to Paul Davis as well as the insurance company
If Paul Davis Restoration does not receive the balance of the 11,check
then the insurance company has every right to demand that money back.
If you claim that tools
were stolen and boxes of shoes only had one shoe as well as computer equipment
etc, you will need to produce receipts for those items if asked by the
insurance company. As a consumer you have the legal right to dispute any
and all parts of any work that has been performed. I allowed you to
dispute those items in writing. The total amount that was paid was on my
calculation based on the dollar amount given by you of the items missing
*** *** * *** ***
** ***
** ***
***
-----Original Message-----
From: *** ***
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 12:
PM
To: *** ***
Cc: ***
Subject: Re:
Per our conversation on July 23, with ***
***, Ms*** and myself, *** ***, there was to be a written
confirmation of settlement to be rendered agreed upon by Paul Davis
restoration, myself and Ms***
I not only sent the dispute asked upon by me, but submitted the funds requested
by Ms*** and agreed for the completion of what was asked for.
It was also agreed that there would be something written and signed for my
documents faxed to Ms*** which she nor I have received. Would you
please make that paperwork available for me. Thank you, Ms***
----- Original Message ----
From: *** *** ***
To: ***
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 7:43:PM
Subject:
We received $7,from *** ***
*** this is on behalf of Invoice # *** for Paul Davis
Restoration. We also received a letter of dispute for the balance
The original invoice was 12,so the balance in dispute is
$4,965.00. I will forward the list of things disputed to Paul Davis and
the insurance company. If you have any further questions, please feel
free to call me direct
*** *** * *** ***
PH ***
FX ***

Again, I can understand Mr***'s frustration. Not having ample limits of coverage can cause instances like this. It would appear however that his issue lies more with his carrier than with us , the vendor. The communication of limits should have come from them as we do not have access to that information. After our phone call with the carrier they could have informed us of the limits or Mr*** of the steps being taken. Regardless of this we are still working with Mr*** to assist him in his reconstruction short fall and hope to have an agreed upon resolution by the end of the week. I would suggest that Mr*** also follow up with his carrier for explanation on this process as it seems like we, the vendor, are bearing the brunt complaint. I would also suggest he contact his local agent to discuss his coverage's so that if this were to happen in the future he would be able to know that he has the proper limits of coverage

We were able to meet with Ms*** and walk the house. There are a number of complaints listed that are wear and tear related. We discussed possible settlement for the items we felt are related. A mitigation factor is Ms*** hired the subcontractor to perform additional work on the house and is complaining about that as well. We explained we could not cover any of that work, but are willing to compensate her the amounts allowed by the carrier for the items we deem as poor workmanship. Ms*** was asking for money in excess of that amount and we explained we can only pay her back what we were paid, as no additional damage was incurred as a result. She stated she was going to get a price from another contractor to fix these items. We are now waiting on that information and once received will attempt to reach a monetary settlement with her

We received a direct assignment from Mr***'s insurance company in regards to damages in his basement. When we arrived it appeared the basement was damaged by a sump pump backup caused by heavy rains. We are required to call the isurance company, *** ***, and report our
findings. After having this phone call and reviewing our drying plan and stategy demolition and mitigation was begun at the direction of the carrier. When we returned a couple days later it was obvious another sump pump backup had occurred with meant a few of the mitigation operations needed to be repeated. Again we called the carrier, explained the situation and strategy, and were directed to continue.At the conclusion of the mitigation process we prepare our invoice and submit it to the carrier. This is the same process for any and every emergency service loss as you do not know what is going to need to be done until it is completed. That invoice is sent to our corporate office for review and then to the carrier for review. The review process ensures that what was being performed is reasonable, approved, and priced according to an industry set price-list. After this review by both our franchise office and the insurance carrier payment was approved and sent directly to us.Mr*** is upset because he does not have the necessary funds remaining after this bill to fully complete the repairs to his basement. This is because he was carrying limits that did not meet this demand. It has nothing to do with what we did, how we did it, or when we did it. The process the carrier has in place is there to ensure that all operations fall under the guidelines of the IICRC Sfor water damage mitigation. This process of mitigating took I believe close to days. At no point in that process did Mr*** ask for a bill, question the operations, or inquire about the charges, his concern was drying his damaged house. Again when it came time to determine reconstruction costs is the first and only time our bill was brought into question.We feel for Mr*** and can appreciate his situation. No one likes to be told they don't have the money to fully rebuild. However this is an issue between him and his agent, not us the restoration contractor. We do not control the cost and all our operations are reviewed on levels.In the spirit of trying to help out our mitigation manager , Dan C***, reached out to Mr*** to talk through the invoice to determine if any changes would/could be made. He was originally schedule to meet him last Monday but Mr*** cancelled. My understanding is Dan is still attempting to meet with Mr*** to reschedule as a result

Ms*** has withheld payment from our company willingly and will continue to be placed in collection. There is no documentation of proof of theft from her residence. Items disposed of by our office as a result of the fire were compensated to her by her carrier. there were no
issues of documentation "substandard" work as she claims. Ms*** was paid $30,by her carrier and also owed a $deductible for a total claim of $31,328.19. Her mortgage company was sent $23,506.82, we received 50%, or $11,on 3/20/which is 50% of the monies sent to the mortgage company. The additional 11,was invoiced, along with the $deductible on 7/11/(see attached). This money was withheld by the homeowner for no reason. See attached documents dated 4/15/and 6/3/08, both endorsed by the homeowner stating the work was 90% and 100% completed and she was satisfied. It should also be pointed out that the mortgage company inspected the property and if there were issues with workmanship they would have pointed them out
At this point we were still owed $19,574.78. We received checks for $5,and $5,from our collection agency (they withheld 25% in fees). This leaves a balance due of $8,617.44. I have reviewed the file see the amount is only in collections for $6,so I will be amending that amount. I want to further point out Ms*** was given a check from *** *** on 5/14/for $7,and it was made payable to Paul Davis Restoration and *** ***. This check was cashed by Ms*** and the funds were not turned over to us
I have all the documentation needed to show Ms*** owes us this debt. I placed the debt into collections with the hope that any government aid she is received would be pulled from her. She has clearly taken advantage of the system here and will continue to remain in collections until we receive the monies she rightfully owes us
*** ***
*** *** ** ***

I am still very dissatisfied with response of this company.*** ***, *** *** *** *** ***

I am rejecting this response because: I asked for estimates several times.? I kept being told that everything is handled through the insurance company.? From both the insurance company and the restoration company.? How could I make an informed decision if I had no idea what the cost would be?? I did not authorize any demolition or after hours work, I was not told there would be an extra charge when the company was late getting to the house.? I never signed off on what was going to be done.? My girlfriend was asked to sign AFTER the work was done
Regards,
***? ***

We received a direct assignment from Mr***'s insurance company in regards to damages in his basement.? When we arrived it appeared the basement was damaged by a sump pump backup caused? by heavy rains.? We are required to call the isurance company, *** ***, and report our
findings.? After having this phone call and reviewing our drying plan and stategy demolition and mitigation was begun at the direction of the carrier.? When we returned a couple days later it was obvious another sump pump backup had occurred with meant a few of the mitigation operations needed to be repeated.? Again we called the carrier, explained the situation and strategy, and were directed to continue.At the conclusion of the mitigation process we prepare our invoice and submit it to the carrier.? This is the same process for any and every emergency service loss as you do not know what is going to need to be done until it is completed.? That invoice is sent to our corporate? office for review and then to the carrier for review.? The review process ensures that what was being performed is reasonable, approved, and priced according to an industry set price-list.? After this review by both our franchise office and the insurance carrier payment was approved and sent directly to us.Mr*** is upset because? he does not have the necessary funds remaining after this bill to fully complete the repairs to his basement.? This is because? he was carrying limits that did not meet this demand.? It has nothing to do with what we did, how we did it, or when we did it.? The process the carrier has in place is there to ensure that all operations fall under the guidelines of the? IICRC Sfor water damage mitigation.? This process of mitigating took I believe? close to days.? At no point in that process did Mr*** ask for a bill, question the operations, or inquire about the charges, his concern was drying his damaged? house.? Again when it came time to determine reconstruction costs is the first and only time our bill was brought into question.We feel for Mr*** and can appreciate his situation.? No one likes to be told they don't have the money to fully rebuild.? However this is an issue between him and his agent, not us the restoration contractor.? We do not control the cost and all our operations are reviewed on levels.In the spirit of trying to help out our mitigation manager , Dan C***, reached out to Mr*** to talk through the invoice to determine if any changes would/could be made.? He was originally schedule to meet him last? Monday but Mr*** cancelled.? My understanding is Dan is still attempting to meet with Mr*** to reschedule as a result.? ?

Ms. [redacted] and our company have had an extremely hard time communicating with each other to address these complaints.  We were able to reach Ms. [redacted] on March 16 and we are scheduled to walk the project on March 22, Tuesday.  At that time we will review her complaints and determine if...

any of the issues presented are directly related to workmanship issues or some other reason.

Again, I can understand Mr. [redacted]'s frustration.  Not having ample limits of coverage can cause instances like this.  It would appear however that his issue lies more with his carrier than with us , the vendor.  The communication of limits should have come from them as we do not have access to that information.  After our phone call with the carrier they could have informed us of the limits or Mr. [redacted] of the steps being taken.  Regardless of this we are still working with Mr. [redacted] to assist him in his reconstruction short fall and hope to have an agreed upon resolution by the end of the week.  I would suggest that Mr. [redacted] also follow up with his carrier for explanation on this process as it seems like we, the vendor, are bearing the brunt complaint.  I would also suggest he contact his local agent to discuss his coverage's so that if this were to happen in the future he would be able to know that he has the proper limits of coverage.