Pepper Construction Company of Indiana

12/3/received phone callSame day went out found 5" pleated filter totally clogged; which had not been replaced for a period of yrs...resulting In undue stress and abuse on equipment(see attachment on recommendation from filter
manufacturer)- Homeowner opted to replace on their ownUnit ran for weeks before next service call (Why should I be responsible for any of the homeowner's electric bill for December 2013? As asked for- due to lack of maintenance.)-Piease see manufacturer's recommendation on preventive maintenance- 2"d call January 6th made appointment for preventive maintenance
for January 10th per homeowner(see technician's work order #11644) Unit operating properly at this3rd Call 1/15/found defrost board and sensors bad...ordered thru Lennox 1/15-received parts by 1/28/and installed 1/29/This is a mechanical piece of equipment just as your car Is and I ask what did R&D Heating do to be responsible for paying any of the homeowner's electric bill for months coming off the 3rd coldest winter since keeping records? Don't you think if Kristi Moore thought that she was deservant of the monies she is asking for, she would have taken me to court? She would not win in court, why should she win here Ill On January 29th, after fixing her equipment with the new parts, Ialso informed her at that time to find another hvac company, Now reading her desire settlement sent from the Revdex.com, she also now wants my company to pay for whatever the new company finds wrongShe owns this piece of equipment,this should be at her expense, not my company and as to the mold situation in the blower unit and the $for a UV light????? Again this Is her equipment
!I!I!! Now she wants her electric bill for months (which now includes February) when on January 29th,
I informed her to find another hvac company It is my belief that my company did absolutely nothing wrong other than provide fast & responsible service that Is required by my company I hope that by reading my response you can see that this consumer is looking for anything and everything that she can receive for nothingOne last note, all the services provided by this company have been 100% free t'o herReimbursement of the $(dirty filter and lack of maintenance 12/3/see attached) and
$for the annual Preventive Maintenance Plan (which we preformed) will returned to her

In response to *** *** *** complaint reference ID , we provide below the sequence of events based upon our documentation and technical analysis of her heat pump system:
2007- Lennox system installed by R&D Heating and Cooling (add detail)
March 5, -The client contacted us regarding an Issue with the unit which after inspection the technician received a locked out stat s code (3) yellow (short cycling) which after further diagnostic testing was determined to be a defective Lennox control boardA new control board was ordered through Lennox an installed under warranty at no cost on 3-16-All of the mechanical reading of the clients unit were documented and supplied to Lennox Technical Support for historical documentation At the time of the service the client was advised that the air filters needed to be changed because they had not been changed since th unit was installed in Upon installation of the system, the accompanying documentation does specify that the unit's air filter should be checked and or replaced monthly to ensure proper operationSubsequent the installation of the new control board the client ordered (2) Merv 16x25xreplacement filters to be Installed by the client
January 28, 2011- The client contacted our office to schedule a service call for their heating unit which w s not operating properlyUpon Inspection of the unit the.technician received a locked out status code (3) yellow (short cycling)The technician reset the lockout and checked the operation of the unit which was determined to be good a d operating within the unit's rangeThe cause of the Issue was identified to be ice buildup on one of the unit's outdoor sensors After resolving the Issue the technician observed the unit for a period of minutes to further ensure he unit was fully operationalDue to the client not being enrolled in our preventive maintenanceprogram the client was billed for ao evaluation fee of $
December 3, 2013- The client contacted our office to schedule a service call for their heating unit which was not working properly Upon inspection of the unit the technician found the unit in a locked out status code {3) yellow (short cycling) After Inspection the technician reset the unit and verified proper operation Further diagnosis revealed the unit was running high head pressure due to a blocked air filter which was cleaned by the technician The client was advised that the air filter needed to be replaced
and the technician offered to replace the air filter to which the client declined during the service callThe technician supplied the client with the proper Merv air filter sizing for future reference and the client Indicated he would follwith our office with regards to ordering an air filterThe client was not enrolled in our preventive maintenance program and therefore was billed $for a service call
January 6, 2014- The client came to our office and enrolled in our Basic Preventive Maintenance Plan for a Heat Pump unitThe client was charged $for enrollment In Basic Preventive Maintenance Program
January 10, 2014- A technician was deployed to the client's home for a preventive maintenance service at which time the technician conducted the following; (1) checked the air filter, (2) cleaned the unit's blower motor, and {3) replaced the thermostat and verified proper operationThe client wa provided a bill for the new Honeywell Pro thermostat in the amount of $
January 13, 2014- The client contacted our office to report the system was not working properly A technician was sent to the clients home and upon Inspection of the unit the technician discovered that the defrost board was defectiveA replacement was ordered from Lennox which was received and installed on January 29, along with a new sensor harnessThe client was not charged for any parts
or labor and the technician determined that the original thermostat was not part of the issue and the client's prior payment of $for a new thermostat was returned resulting in no charge
The technician advised the client that if the problem persist that Lennox would have to become involved due to the number of failures with the same component
In each service request in which R&D Heating and Cooling serviced the clients unit it was left In working condition and determined to be operating within the systems operating range All issues that were caused by a component failure were fixed without cost to the clientAs with all mechanical devices, whether that is an automobile or appliances within our homes, continual maintenance is required and specified by the manufacturer In this case the clients unit was not being maintained properly with routine replacement of the unit's air filter which caused undue stress on the system and a degradation of performance as air flow was progressively blocked by debrisThe client was offered a preventive maintenance program during each visit to alleviate having to keep up with the maintenance of the unit on their own to which they declined until most recently
R&D Heating and Cooling strives to maintain 100% customer satisfaction and to always be an advocate for the client, if we make a mistake we will make it right at our expense In this instance the client's failure to maintain the unit properly resulted in an initial servi to evaluate and rep.a;r the u-'it which resulted in a $chargeSubsequent visits were the result not following the routine maintenance of the unit coupled with faulty equipment from the manufacturer which is of no fault of R&D Heating and
Cooling who is not the manufacturerAll service visits and associated parts and labor as a result of the component failures were completed at no charge to the clientWe elected to terminate our service agreement with the client and we would be willing to refund the clients payment of $for enrollment With regards to the blower motor installed by another company unfortunately It was an unnecessary expenditure as It was tested and cleaned by our technician during the recent preventive maintenance service The installation of a UV unit to deter mold build up could have been averted by proper maintenance of the unit as specified In the documentation for proper maintenance supplied to
the client with the system when it was installedR&D Heating and Cooling has done everything possible to error on the side of the client, in the six (6) service .;:ails to the client's home they were billed once (1) for a service call which due to improper system maintenanceThe client Is seeking a refund in the amount of $439.00, to conclude this matter we would be willing to accommodate the clients request if the client is willing to rescind any and all comments and reviews from all media sources and agree that no future reviews whether online or via print media will be madeIn no way is this settlement offer admitting any type of wrong doings on behalf of this company

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.
Without getting into the drama that defines [redacted]'s business, I have emails which contradict what [redacted] stated in his response.  I can send these along if needed along with a voice mail message left by his assistant, Ann Bush, if necessary. The reason I did not attached them to this email is not to protect me, but at this point, this is not a court case and attaching them does not serve a purpose for my settlement request; having said that, his emails are quite inappropriate.  When the staff of  Angieslist.com read them, their reply was: "I’m sorry you are having to deal with this unprofessional reaction. I would encourage you to not respond, and let me handle correspondence with R&D Heating & AC Inc going forward. Also, if
the $160 refund isn’t enough to resolve your complaint, please don’t cash the check. If you do, the case would be resolved and your review would be removed. His comment about unwarranted deformation of character”, doesn’t have much bearing if your review is true and accurate. Most of the time a company says this out of defense. But if he continues to be threatening, let me know and I can contact the company on your behalf about our policies."
The facts are that:
1. The filter was replaced December 2012 (order attached) which was one year prior to the service date of December 3, 2013. R&D Heating & Cooling installed the unit and nowhere in the information they left did they inform us how often to change the filter.
2. The issue which occurred was the same as happened January 28, 2011 (see attached invoice), so it was logical that when the unit stopped functioning, that it was the same problem.
3. The 3rd call was January 13th, not the 15th. The technician came on Friday 1/10/14 and the heat pump stopped working 1/11/14, so I called the office Monday 1/13/14.  The next visit was on January 15th.
4. During all of the visits, each technician told me how the GM had "diagnosed" the problem which influenced (correctly or not) how they performed the service call. For example, the technician who was told that it was a thermostat problem went downstairs first and shut down the unit rather than going outside to check the codes on the heat pump. By shutting down the circuit, it reset the codes.
5. After the defrost board and sensor harness were installed, the technician informed me that if this did not fix the problem, they were going to have to contact Lennox to have a technician come look at the unit with them to assist in the repair of the unit.  After [redacted] terminated our contract, Lennox said we had to hire another Lennox certified dealer to look at the unit and they recommended that since R&D terminated our contract, they should have to pay for the service call of the new company.
6. The actual electric bills over the time the heat pump was not operating correctly (to date) total over $1,800. My request was for the difference based on prior usage of months with that average temperature and electrical usage. It was a conservative estimate.
7. The new HVAC service provider found mold in the unit which caused health problems (which I am not asking compensation for), but this should have been reported to me if, in fact, the unit had been examined as many times as [redacted] said it was.  
[redacted] asked why I didn't take him to court. He neglected to mention that when I told him he would be contacted by Angieslist.com as part of their Complaint Resolution Process,
his reply was: "Be very careful for unwarranted deformation of character can get very expensive." He refused to settle with me in that process and the representative at Angie's List gave me a list of next options and I chose Revdex.com as my next step.  With what I have in writing, if [redacted] would like to settle this in court, then my next step will be to contact the Attorney
General's office.
Since the unit was never completely repaired while being serviced by R&D Heating & Cooling, their Limited Warranty (which was on the invoices faxed to Revdex.com) would mean that the consumer would not pay until the repairs had been successfully made. Since [redacted] refused to complete the repairs, the least he pay is the $99 for the first visit which did not repair the unit, $160 for the Preventative Maintenance Plan, and $180 for the service visit of the company who did repair the unit. That is a total of $439.
Please note that this does not include the labor costs of $277 for the replacement of the fan and motor, $700 for the UV unit, or the additional charges incurred by auxiliary coils utilizing more electricity (which [redacted] should know) than if the heat pump worked. The fact that the winter was colder than most, means that the electricity costs would be even higher if the only source of heat was the coils for three months. If he rejects this proposed (very generous) settlement, I will include these charges when I contact the Attorney General's office.
Since R&D Heating & Cooling had told me three times before that checks have been sent and only 1 has ever been received by me, I will notify Revdex.com when I receive the check (for $439.00) in order to resolve the complaint and avoid court costs for [redacted].