Upon further investigation into the 1st of construction agreements Promax has completed for Ms*** Our sales rep did agree to install a new garage opener as an add on to the original contract with no additional charge This awas not in the original scope of the signed contract, but a service we agreed to provide for Ms*** The garage however did not have electrical service The deal was Ms [redacted] was supposed to hire another company to run electrical service to the garage and we would install the opener The electrical service was never run to the garage If Ms [redacted] wants to continue with running electrical service to the garage we would still honor our commitment to install the opener In lieu of installing an opener, we would offer Ms [redacted] a $refund We offer the $refund for the opener on top of the $refund we are offering for the gutters that we attempted to install before Mr [redacted] instructed our installers off the property In summary we our offering a $settlementFor the record, we would like to reiterate the facts of this complaint The complaint is being made by Ms***'s nephew, Mr***, who is not a party to this transaction Ms [redacted] called our company to arrange for estimates and we were upfront with all of our pricing and the scope of work We completed two contracts for Ms [redacted] and she paid in full When we collected the payment in person from Ms***, she expressed to our sales repthat she was very satisfied with our servicesMr***, is getting involved after the contract was closed and we performed our services and fulfilled our contractThe time for Mr [redacted] to press these issues would have been before or during the construction In Mr [redacted] rebuttal, he states that the back part of the roof is decaying The roof repair was part of our 1st contract with Ms*** We have attached that contract to the complaint response Repairing the back part of the roof was not in our scope It was clearly stated on our first contract we would repair the roof on the front of the garage Mr [redacted] is wondering why we would work on a "decaying structure." This is precisely the reason Ms [redacted] asked us to work on it The garage had major safety issues and we created a solution in Ms***'s budget The garage is still standing today and Ms [redacted] is parking her car in the garageMr [redacted] continually states that Ms [redacted] was released from surgery on Sep4, and we took advantage of her condition Ms [redacted] called us in the spring of for the initial estimate of the 2nd construction phase This was something she had planned since the fall of The appointment we made with her in Sepwas a follow up This was not an impulsive decision by Ms*** She was calling our office to arrange for appointments We encourage Ms [redacted] and Mr [redacted] to accept our settlement of $which we feel is more than generous
I am rejecting this response because: Promax states that they offered my Aunt a 55.00 dollar Refund to show good faith and would put in a garage door opener, this garage door opener should have been installed on my Aunts garage back in Sept. 22, 2016 as per the receipt stamped paid says (F. Fix 1 garage door on north side ... new opener . ) the total bill was for 2,800. The back part of the roof in decayed and the wood is rotten so I am not understanding why a reputable company would agree to work on such a decaying structure. On Sept. 8, 2017 Promax wrote another contract with my Aunt where they charged her 400.00 dollars to paint 3 flower boxes, 800.00 to put up new railing which is not done professionally and 1200.00 to put a facing on a decaying garage total bill 2,400.00 I feel Promax took advantage of my Aunt because of her Age and weaK Health she had just been released from a nursing home after surgery the 4th of Sept. 2017 4 days prior to signing this last contact my Aunt is not a contractor and for Promax to take such Advantage of her is a form of Elder Abuse and just plain Bad Business. My Aunt is a VA widow and on a small pension she cannot afford to be Hustled by anyone. We really feel she should get a total Refund but will settle for 3,500.00. Claim No. # [redacted] and # [redacted]
Please let mw know you have received the response since I was having difficulty with the website. For the record, I'd like to note that the person filing the complaint was not a party to the agreement, nor has he shown any power of attorney documentation to represent the customer in this...
matter. Our response is copied below with attachments to the email. "Ms. [redacted] is a repeat customer of Promax Construction and we would like to make it clear for the record that she reached out to Promax to complete this project. Ms. [redacted] was not solicited by Promax Construction. Promax completed a previous project for Ms. [redacted] in the fall of 2016 to replace the roof on the front of the garage, replace the bad wood, repair roof frame, fill holes in soffit, repair garage door and replace the garage door opener. Ms. [redacted] 's intention over the course of the year was to make repairs to the garage over time. Ms. [redacted] has a luxury vehicle and wanted to store it in the garage. She did not want to pay for a new garage, so we completed the repairs as she requested. We completed several tasks in the garage to make it more accessible for her to accommodate her condition. It was also of value to Ms. [redacted] to improve the aesthetics/curb value of the garage and we believe our repairs accomplished that while staying in her budget. The contract at issue was signed on Sep. 8, 2017. Ms. [redacted] made an appointment with Promax Construction for an estimate on April 10, 2017 for the garage and a follow up appointment on Sep. 8, 2017. This was not an impulsive decision by Ms. [redacted], and she had every opportunity to decline services. Ms. [redacted] signed the agreement at the agreed price of $2400.00. Promax at no time altered the balance of $2400. Promax did however offer additional services to Ms. [redacted] at no cost. Those additional services included repairs to soffit/fascia board, install handrail, reinforce corners of garage to strengthen the structure, haul the existing debris and trash out of garage, trimmed doors on garage and replaced rotten wood that was discovered during the siding repair. Typically we charge for additional wood repairs that are evident after the demo of the existing siding. We did not charge Ms. [redacted] for any additional services that were not on the original signed agreement. Promax also offered to replace the gutters on the garage at no cost, but Mr. [redacted] would not allow us on the property. I would also like to note that Mr. [redacted] made no issue of our agreement until after the job was completed and paid for by Ms. [redacted]. To my knowledge, Mr. [redacted] was present during the construction and when the contract was paid. In the complaint Mr. [redacted] states that the garage is dilapidated. I have attached before and after photos of the garage from the curb showing that the garage is in a functional state. I am unable to provide detailed photos as we are not allowed access to property at this point. Mr. [redacted] makes issues about Promax adding items to the contract, but he does not mention that the added items were not altering the balance of the contract. Mr. [redacted] called our office for detailed paperwork and we wrote in the extra items on the original contract for convenience. He was upset with our service and we wanted to list the extra services to give him a better idea of what we completed. We wrote the additional items on a copy of the original contract. I have attached this document to the claim. Mr. [redacted] is requesting we show him detailed material and labor expenses receipts. We are unable to fulfill the request because many of the materials were purchased in bulk for multiple projects and we do not have records of the exact materials our carpenter used. Furthermore, our cost of materials and labor are not really relevant considering this is a flat price contract with an agreed amount. We'd also kindly ask Mr. [redacted] to also consider the overhead of the company including payroll taxes, insurance, workers comp, office staff, rent etc. Mr. [redacted] should also consider that our carpenters are in high demand and Ms. [redacted] asked us to complete this project fast. We scheduled one of our carpenters to work overtime on the weekend and we completed this project in less than 20 days. In less then 20 days, we were able to get the agreement signed, job completed and respond to a Revdex.com claim which I believe to be a testament to the efficiency and proficiency of the company. Ms. [redacted] had no issue with the contract workmanship and paid promptly for the service after completion. Ms. [redacted] has not made any complaints to the company directly. Mr. [redacted] was never a party to this transaction, but we are doing our best to please him. We feel a refund is unfair to the company considering we have more exceeded our obligations under the contract in a speedy and quality manner. We would be happy to install new gutters on the garage at no cost if Mr. [redacted] would allow us on the property. "
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Upon further investigation into the 1st of 2 construction agreements Promax has completed for Ms. [redacted]. Our sales rep did agree to install a new garage opener as an add on to the original contract with no additional charge. This add-on was not in the original scope of the signed contract, but a service we agreed to provide for Ms. [redacted]. The garage however did not have electrical service. The deal was Ms. [redacted] was supposed to hire another company to run electrical service to the garage and we would install the opener. The electrical service was never run to the garage. If Ms. [redacted] wants to continue with running electrical service to the garage we would still honor our commitment to install the opener. In lieu of installing an opener, we would offer Ms. [redacted] a $500 refund. We offer the $500 refund for the opener on top of the $500 refund we are offering for the gutters that we attempted to install before Mr. [redacted] instructed our installers off the property. In summary we our offering a $1000 settlement. For the record, we would like to reiterate the facts of this complaint. The complaint is being made by Ms. [redacted]'s nephew, Mr. [redacted], who is not a party to this transaction. Ms. [redacted] called our company to arrange for estimates and we were upfront with all of our pricing and the scope of work. We completed two contracts for Ms. [redacted] and she paid in full. When we collected the payment in person from Ms. [redacted], she expressed to our sales rep. that she was very satisfied with our services. Mr. [redacted], is getting involved after the contract was closed and we performed our services and fulfilled our contract. The time for Mr. [redacted] to press these issues would have been before or during the construction. In Mr. [redacted] rebuttal, he states that the back part of the roof is decaying. The roof repair was part of our 1st contract with Ms. [redacted]. We have attached that contract to the complaint response. Repairing the back part of the roof was not in our scope. It was clearly stated on our first contract we would repair the roof on the front of the garage. Mr. [redacted] is wondering why we would work on a "decaying structure." This is precisely the reason Ms. [redacted] asked us to work on it. The garage had major safety issues and we created a solution in Ms. [redacted]'s budget. The garage is still standing today and Ms. [redacted] is parking her car in the garage. Mr. [redacted] continually states that Ms. [redacted] was released from surgery on Sep. 4, 2017 and we took advantage of her condition. Ms. [redacted] called us in the spring of 2017 for the initial estimate of the 2nd construction phase. This was something she had planned since the fall of 2016. The appointment we made with her in Sep. 2017 was a follow up. This was not an impulsive decision by Ms. [redacted]. She was calling our office to arrange for appointments. We encourage Ms. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted] to accept our settlement of $1000 which we feel is more than generous.
Upon further investigation into the 1st of construction agreements Promax has completed for Ms*** Our sales rep did agree to install a new garage opener as an add on to the original contract with no additional charge This awas not in the original scope of the signed contract, but a service we agreed to provide for Ms*** The garage however did not have electrical service The deal was Ms [redacted] was supposed to hire another company to run electrical service to the garage and we would install the opener The electrical service was never run to the garage If Ms [redacted] wants to continue with running electrical service to the garage we would still honor our commitment to install the opener In lieu of installing an opener, we would offer Ms [redacted] a $refund We offer the $refund for the opener on top of the $refund we are offering for the gutters that we attempted to install before Mr [redacted] instructed our installers off the property In summary we our offering a $settlementFor the record, we would like to reiterate the facts of this complaint The complaint is being made by Ms***'s nephew, Mr***, who is not a party to this transaction Ms [redacted] called our company to arrange for estimates and we were upfront with all of our pricing and the scope of work We completed two contracts for Ms [redacted] and she paid in full When we collected the payment in person from Ms***, she expressed to our sales repthat she was very satisfied with our servicesMr***, is getting involved after the contract was closed and we performed our services and fulfilled our contractThe time for Mr [redacted] to press these issues would have been before or during the construction In Mr [redacted] rebuttal, he states that the back part of the roof is decaying The roof repair was part of our 1st contract with Ms*** We have attached that contract to the complaint response Repairing the back part of the roof was not in our scope It was clearly stated on our first contract we would repair the roof on the front of the garage Mr [redacted] is wondering why we would work on a "decaying structure." This is precisely the reason Ms [redacted] asked us to work on it The garage had major safety issues and we created a solution in Ms***'s budget The garage is still standing today and Ms [redacted] is parking her car in the garageMr [redacted] continually states that Ms [redacted] was released from surgery on Sep4, and we took advantage of her condition Ms [redacted] called us in the spring of for the initial estimate of the 2nd construction phase This was something she had planned since the fall of The appointment we made with her in Sepwas a follow up This was not an impulsive decision by Ms*** She was calling our office to arrange for appointments We encourage Ms [redacted] and Mr [redacted] to accept our settlement of $which we feel is more than generous
I am rejecting this response because: Promax states that they offered my Aunt a 55.00 dollar Refund to show good faith and would put in a garage door opener, this garage door opener should have been installed on my Aunts garage back in Sept. 22, 2016 as per the receipt stamped paid says (F. Fix 1 garage door on north side ... new opener . ) the total bill was for 2,800. The back part of the roof in decayed and the wood is rotten so I am not understanding why a reputable company would agree to work on such a decaying structure. On Sept. 8, 2017 Promax wrote another contract with my Aunt where they charged her 400.00 dollars to paint 3 flower boxes, 800.00 to put up new railing which is not done professionally and 1200.00 to put a facing on a decaying garage total bill 2,400.00 I feel Promax took advantage of my Aunt because of her Age and weaK Health she had just been released from a nursing home after surgery the 4th of Sept. 2017 4 days prior to signing this last contact my Aunt is not a contractor and for Promax to take such Advantage of her is a form of Elder Abuse and just plain Bad Business. My Aunt is a VA widow and on a small pension she cannot afford to be Hustled by anyone. We really feel she should get a total Refund but will settle for 3,500.00. Claim No. # [redacted] and # [redacted]
Please let mw know you have received the response since I was having difficulty with the website. For the record, I'd like to note that the person filing the complaint was not a party to the agreement, nor has he shown any power of attorney documentation to represent the customer in this...
matter. Our response is copied below with attachments to the email. "Ms. [redacted] is a repeat customer of Promax Construction and we would like to make it clear for the record that she reached out to Promax to complete this project. Ms. [redacted] was not solicited by Promax Construction. Promax completed a previous project for Ms. [redacted] in the fall of 2016 to replace the roof on the front of the garage, replace the bad wood, repair roof frame, fill holes in soffit, repair garage door and replace the garage door opener. Ms. [redacted] 's intention over the course of the year was to make repairs to the garage over time. Ms. [redacted] has a luxury vehicle and wanted to store it in the garage. She did not want to pay for a new garage, so we completed the repairs as she requested. We completed several tasks in the garage to make it more accessible for her to accommodate her condition. It was also of value to Ms. [redacted] to improve the aesthetics/curb value of the garage and we believe our repairs accomplished that while staying in her budget. The contract at issue was signed on Sep. 8, 2017. Ms. [redacted] made an appointment with Promax Construction for an estimate on April 10, 2017 for the garage and a follow up appointment on Sep. 8, 2017. This was not an impulsive decision by Ms. [redacted], and she had every opportunity to decline services. Ms. [redacted] signed the agreement at the agreed price of $2400.00. Promax at no time altered the balance of $2400. Promax did however offer additional services to Ms. [redacted] at no cost. Those additional services included repairs to soffit/fascia board, install handrail, reinforce corners of garage to strengthen the structure, haul the existing debris and trash out of garage, trimmed doors on garage and replaced rotten wood that was discovered during the siding repair. Typically we charge for additional wood repairs that are evident after the demo of the existing siding. We did not charge Ms. [redacted] for any additional services that were not on the original signed agreement. Promax also offered to replace the gutters on the garage at no cost, but Mr. [redacted] would not allow us on the property. I would also like to note that Mr. [redacted] made no issue of our agreement until after the job was completed and paid for by Ms. [redacted]. To my knowledge, Mr. [redacted] was present during the construction and when the contract was paid. In the complaint Mr. [redacted] states that the garage is dilapidated. I have attached before and after photos of the garage from the curb showing that the garage is in a functional state. I am unable to provide detailed photos as we are not allowed access to property at this point. Mr. [redacted] makes issues about Promax adding items to the contract, but he does not mention that the added items were not altering the balance of the contract. Mr. [redacted] called our office for detailed paperwork and we wrote in the extra items on the original contract for convenience. He was upset with our service and we wanted to list the extra services to give him a better idea of what we completed. We wrote the additional items on a copy of the original contract. I have attached this document to the claim. Mr. [redacted] is requesting we show him detailed material and labor expenses receipts. We are unable to fulfill the request because many of the materials were purchased in bulk for multiple projects and we do not have records of the exact materials our carpenter used. Furthermore, our cost of materials and labor are not really relevant considering this is a flat price contract with an agreed amount. We'd also kindly ask Mr. [redacted] to also consider the overhead of the company including payroll taxes, insurance, workers comp, office staff, rent etc. Mr. [redacted] should also consider that our carpenters are in high demand and Ms. [redacted] asked us to complete this project fast. We scheduled one of our carpenters to work overtime on the weekend and we completed this project in less than 20 days. In less then 20 days, we were able to get the agreement signed, job completed and respond to a Revdex.com claim which I believe to be a testament to the efficiency and proficiency of the company. Ms. [redacted] had no issue with the contract workmanship and paid promptly for the service after completion. Ms. [redacted] has not made any complaints to the company directly. Mr. [redacted] was never a party to this transaction, but we are doing our best to please him. We feel a refund is unfair to the company considering we have more exceeded our obligations under the contract in a speedy and quality manner. We would be happy to install new gutters on the garage at no cost if Mr. [redacted] would allow us on the property. "
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Upon further investigation into the 1st of 2 construction agreements Promax has completed for Ms. [redacted]. Our sales rep did agree to install a new garage opener as an add on to the original contract with no additional charge. This add-on was not in the original scope of the signed contract, but a service we agreed to provide for Ms. [redacted]. The garage however did not have electrical service. The deal was Ms. [redacted] was supposed to hire another company to run electrical service to the garage and we would install the opener. The electrical service was never run to the garage. If Ms. [redacted] wants to continue with running electrical service to the garage we would still honor our commitment to install the opener. In lieu of installing an opener, we would offer Ms. [redacted] a $500 refund. We offer the $500 refund for the opener on top of the $500 refund we are offering for the gutters that we attempted to install before Mr. [redacted] instructed our installers off the property. In summary we our offering a $1000 settlement. For the record, we would like to reiterate the facts of this complaint. The complaint is being made by Ms. [redacted]'s nephew, Mr. [redacted], who is not a party to this transaction. Ms. [redacted] called our company to arrange for estimates and we were upfront with all of our pricing and the scope of work. We completed two contracts for Ms. [redacted] and she paid in full. When we collected the payment in person from Ms. [redacted], she expressed to our sales rep. that she was very satisfied with our services. Mr. [redacted], is getting involved after the contract was closed and we performed our services and fulfilled our contract. The time for Mr. [redacted] to press these issues would have been before or during the construction. In Mr. [redacted] rebuttal, he states that the back part of the roof is decaying. The roof repair was part of our 1st contract with Ms. [redacted]. We have attached that contract to the complaint response. Repairing the back part of the roof was not in our scope. It was clearly stated on our first contract we would repair the roof on the front of the garage. Mr. [redacted] is wondering why we would work on a "decaying structure." This is precisely the reason Ms. [redacted] asked us to work on it. The garage had major safety issues and we created a solution in Ms. [redacted]'s budget. The garage is still standing today and Ms. [redacted] is parking her car in the garage. Mr. [redacted] continually states that Ms. [redacted] was released from surgery on Sep. 4, 2017 and we took advantage of her condition. Ms. [redacted] called us in the spring of 2017 for the initial estimate of the 2nd construction phase. This was something she had planned since the fall of 2016. The appointment we made with her in Sep. 2017 was a follow up. This was not an impulsive decision by Ms. [redacted]. She was calling our office to arrange for appointments. We encourage Ms. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted] to accept our settlement of $1000 which we feel is more than generous.