Rattlesnake Drain Cleaning & Plumbing

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2015/11/06) */
To whom it may concern,
This letter is in response to a complaint filed against Rattlesnake Drain Cleaning.
Rattlesnake Drain Cleaning strives to provide excellent service to all of its customers. We understand the frustration of not...

receiving services that live up the customer's expectations. We do not tolerate or provide the type of service described in the customer's complaint. For this reason, we have completed an in depth review of the actions Rattle Snake Drain took when initially contacted to complete the work and immediately after this customer voiced dissatisfaction with the service they received.
1. Complaint about sales practice issues/Rattle Snake Drain's suggestion would absolutely solve irrigation/water pressure issues
-Rattle Snake Drain excavated a water line at the well head and installed a stop box and yard hydrant for the customer on May 7, 2015. This was completed per the customer's request after a verbal consultation regarding possible solutions to irrigation issues/water pressure issues the customer explained to Rattle Snake Drain. The stop box installation was explained to the customer prior to completion of the work. It was placed in the event the work did not resolve his issue. Its placement allowed the customer to return to the system that he was using prior to the installation of the new hydrant. This demonstrates that no guarantee that the change in the system would resolve the customer's irrigation/water flow issues. Even after all of the above was explained, the customer requested Rattle Snake Drain complete the work. Since this was suggested as possible solution, no written guarantee was completed or appropriate. The process of providing education to the customer, explaining the work as a possible solution, the reason for the installation of the stop box and giving the customer the choice to have the work completed demonstrates excellent and ethical sales practice. By allowing Rattle Snake Drain to complete the work, the customer agreed to see if this solution would resolve his irrigation/water pressure issues.
-Upon completion of the work, items were tested and all tested good as indicated on the invoice the customer received.
-The office manager for Rattle Snake Drain returned to the customer's house on May 8, 2015 (the day after the work was completed) to receive payment since the original check written was illegible and the bank refused to accept the check. At this time, the customer verbalized pleasure with the work completed and the service Rattle Snake Drain had provided.
2. Complaint that Rattle Snake Drain did not have the customer sign the Acknowledgement of Satisfactory work
-As stated in the complaint, Rattle Snake Drain did not have the customer sign the invoice however; he paid the invoice in full without hesitation( after all items installed tested good, as indicated on the invoice the customer received.) which indicated to Rattle Snake Drain acceptance of the services that were provided.
3. Complaint Rattle Snake Drain made untrue claim about the hydrant's performance
Rattle Snake Drain was contacted three months after the work had been completed If in fact, the items installed had not proved to be beneficial and significantly dropped the water pressure in the house, this would have occurred much sooner than three months after installation. See explanation in #1 regarding the process Rattle Snake Drain completed with the customer prior to the completion of the work.
4. Complaint that Rattle Snake Drain did not offer a refund to the customer
The customer contacted Rattle Snake Drain on August 19, 2015 and expressed dissatisfaction with the work Rattle Snake Drain had completed over three months prior. At the end of this conversation, the customer was upset that Rattle Snake Drain would no longer service his house. He refused all of the resolutions that were provided and stated he would call again the next day to settle the situation. At this time, the customer was told that the decision not to service his house would not change. The customer called again the next day, even though he had been told the stance of Rattle Snake Drain would not change regarding servicing his property. At no time during these conversations did Rattle Snake drain say they would not warranty the work that they had previously completed.
Here are the steps that Rattle Snake Drain has taken in an attempt to resolve this situation.
On August 19, 2015 the following resolutions were presented to the customer during his initial phone call. This was the first time Rattle Snake Drain became aware of the customer's dissatisfaction with the work completed at his home more than three months earlier- All resolutions were rejected at that time.
1. Remove items installed free of charge and refund $1,000.
2. Return $500 and allow the customer to keep all items installed.
On August 20, 2015 the customer called Rattle Snake Drain to continue the conversation from August 19, 2015. At that time, he was and it appears still is, requesting receive a full refund of $1,000 and to keep hydrant and stop box that according to him had not resolved his irrigation/water pressure issues. We offered to remove these items free of charge and again he refused.
On August 21, 2015 Rattle Snake Drain sent the attached certified letter to the customer with another offer to resolve this situation. The customer signed for receipt of the letter on August 24, 2015. The customer did not respond to the offer to resolve the situation in this letter.
In closing, prior to the completion of the work on May 7, 2015, Rattle Snake Drain provided education to the customer, explaining the work as a possible solution, the reason for the installation of the stop box and gave the customer the choice to have the work completed. This process demonstrates excellent and ethical sales practice.
After three months of the installation of the items, the customer contacted Rattle Snake Drain to voice dissatisfaction with the work completed. As this letter and the attached documentation shows, Rattle Snake Drain immediately responded to the customer's concerns and has offered several resolutions to this situation. Contrary to the customer's claim in his complaint, all resolutions provided by Rattle Snake Drain included options that included full ( with items installed being removed by Rattle Snake Drain at no charge and returned to Rattle Snake Drain) or partial refund of the money to the customer. All resolutions offered have been met with rejection by the customer. By promptly responding to the customer's concerns and offering numerous fair resolutions for the all parties involved Rattle Snake Drain demonstrated fair and ethical business practice
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2015/11/09) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The response provided by Rattlesnake Drain is based on incorrect facts. Due to this, the overall veracity of this response is poor.
To reiterate the facts:
1. Rattlesnake did not install a stop box device to cover the event that Rattlesnake's commitment regarding the yard hydrant functionality did not work. This is a falsehood.
2. Rattlesnake absolutely made a commitment that the yard hydrant would solve my pressure issues. This commitment was delivered to two people verbally.
3. When the yard hydrant did not solve the water pressure issue as stated, Rattlesnake admitted that they were wrong to make this claim.
4. Rattlesnake absolutely stated that if any monies were refunded at all, for any reason, the policy of Rattlesnake was not to provide any service for the customer at all in the future.
5. No 'education' was received by the customer. Rattlesnake installed all items with the understanding that that the objective was to not degrade the internal residential water pressure.
6. Rattlesnake did not test the system to prove that the internal residential water pressure was not negatively impacted.
7. The customer would not have spent $1,000 on the system without having assurance from Rattlesnake that the yard hydrant would work as claimed.
8. Rattlesnake admitted fault after taking full payment for the yard hydrant installation.
Rattlesnake's response is insufficient to settle this matter, based on the commitment made by Rattlesnake as well as the fact that Rattlesnake admitted that they were wrong to make the commitment that the yard hydrant would not negatively impact internal residential water pressure.
Rattlesnake's sales commitments were not met, based on the commitment received.
Rattlesnake admitted that they were wrong.
Rattlesnake must refund all monies.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 42, 2015/12/10) */
The materials used for this job were materials that we had in stock. We did not go and buy the materials for this specific job. The attached invoice now includes ALL of the materials used for the job. (As you will notice, our first offer did not include ALL of the materials used in hopes of coming to a faster resolution to this process) You will see that at this time, we included ALL materials used for this job hence the increase in the invoice price. This invoice is from the store where we purchase our materials. Their computer system does not let them return to the prices at the time this job was completed. So our offer is as you requested- $1,000 minus the wholesale price of ALL of the materials used.
That would indicate a refund of $576.18 to the customer.
The customer would still have to sign the attached letter prior to Rattle Snake Drain refunding the $576.18.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 44, 2015/12/11) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I proposed that this issue could be resolved if Rattlesnake Drain provided a wholesale receipt reflecting the purchase cost of materials used for my project.
This wholesale receipt has not been provided, and it appears that Rattlesnake Drain does not have this wholesale receipt, which would demonstrate that new, unused materials were used to complete my project.
Due to this, I am willing to settle this matter by setting the estimated wholesale cost to $321.43, established by the dollar figure documented within the vendor's quote: XXXXXXX.
It should be made clear that Rattlesnake Drain cannot seem to provide evidence that new, and not used, materials were sold to me as new parts.
My original proposal to settle this issue stands, and would be $1,000 - $321.43, netting to me a refund of $678.57. Due to the absence of purchase proof, I cannot agree to any other conditions, and will still hold Rattlesnake Drain liable for providing warranty coverage as needed.
Rattlesnake Drain did not fulfill it's sales claims to me, did not ensure that their solution worked, and now cannot provide proof that new materials were used in my project. This is quite concerning.