Restoration 1 Mid-Cities

After several conversations with this customer via multiple platforms and websites, I am not sure what more to addOur company has made every effort to satisfy this customer within appropriate measuresNo further discount will be applied to this invoice

This complaint is against the plumber, not against Restoration Mid-CitiesWe request that this complaint is removed from our Revdex.com profile. Thank you, *** Admin

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: My report to Revdex.com was for the fact that because Restoration has been in business so long, I feel they have perfected a way to do unnecessary work and have it covered by insuranceIt was my fault for not having an estimate in front of me before signing any papers, and I’ve learned from thisI was so quick to want to fix my leak that was continuously soaking, that I trusted him when he said he knew the leak was in the wall and all the tear up was neededI expressed my concern about him being wrong or his meter being wrongHe’s correct in stating that he’s not a plumber, but he reassured me that he knew where the leak wasIt wasn’t the walls stinking it was the floorHe gave me a paper to sign with an open endHe knew he wasn’t 100% on the exact location of the leak and he knew what to do to assure a payment.
Regards,
*** ***

Customer was informed during initial inspection that wood floors are difficult to save and that she may be required to replace wood floor should the drying system fail to save them. This is a typical problem with expensive drying systems which can be verified by any insurance adjuster. At a certain...

point, the cost to continue drying will exceed the cost of simply replacing the wood floors.    Customer was informed that she should consider filing an insurance claim, but she refused due to the cost of her deductible (the customer's home value exceeds $1,080,000 according to Realtor.com indicating a $10,000+ deductible). Ceiling damage is also typical for this type of loss and the scope of work usually includes texture/paint. The customer was given a repair estimate by one of our preferred contractors, which she claimed was too expensive.    Our company does not provide "quotes." Instead, we provided an estimate for repairs based on experience. We strive to ensure our customer's pay a fair market price for services. We utilize Xactimate for constructing estimates. This software is an industry standard when submitting estimates because it ensures fair market pricing based on zip code and updated monthly. We provide the scope of work, Xactimate determines the fair market price. In a free-market economy, prices for construction material and labor vary, often significantly among suppliers and contractors within the same city. This creates a strong need in the restoration industry for comprehensive and independently researched and validated pricing information. Xactware's Pricing Data Service Team reports cost information based on actual prices and transactions (completed bids) that have occurred recently in a given area. This information is invaluable to estimators who need to reference current, local prices that are based neither on the highest nor the lowest price in their market. Please see the attached estimate generated for this job. You will notice that the estimate actually exceeds the invoice price. The invoice price was reduced to meet customer expectations.    The customer refused to allow us to run the drain line for the dehumidifier to a drain in her kitchen or bathroom which is the typical process. Instead, she offered to have us use a container. The customer also preferred not be interrupted over the weekend so that is why no technician visited. Since we bill per hour, we are incentivized to work over the weekend so this was arranged as a courtesy for the client. This was also the case as to why the final piece of equipment was not picked up one Wednesday. The customer requested we wait until the next day due to her schedule conflicts in the late afternoon.    Customer contacted the business owner with her insurance agent over the phone. The agent was extremely accusatory to the business owner, but admitted that pricing was in line with Xactimate. Customer claimed she had not discussed her complaints previously with the business owner. Business owner stated that he had discussed each of the issues with the customer (multiple emails attached).    Business owner offered to reduce the invoice even further by 10%. This discount is usually only given to active duty military and Veterans as well as senior citizens. Customer refused and filed a complaint with Angie's List seeking to settle an $1800 invoice for $300. Complaint resolution specialist attempted to find resolution. Business owner offered $500 reduction to invoice price, but offer was denied by homeowner. Customer has still refused to pay.

In response to the customer's complaint regarding the location of the leak, Restoration 1 is a water damage mitigation...

company. We are not licensed plumbers nor do we ever portray ourselves to be in any way. In fact, we were referred to the customer by a licensed plumber who had already assessed the project. The licensed plumber indicated that there was a possible slab leak. That is the information we were given by the plumber and by the homeowner when we arrived on site. Using thermal imaging technology, we determined that the water intrusion was most likely coming from an area along the wall behind the master bathroom toilet (the toilet was eventually confirmed as the leak location by the leak detector). As to the scope of mitigation work performed, all actions were taken in accordance with the ANSI/IICRC S500 Water Damage Restoration, Standard and Reference Guide for Professional Water Damage Restoration (2015). Portions of drywall were removed throughout the home due to the severe odor emanating from contaminated material indicating it had been a long term leak. This is a standard practice, and all work was completely covered by the customer's insurance company. If we had failed to act in accordance with the S500, the insurance company would have refused payment since we would not have been following industry standard requirements. Once again, none of the mitigation work we performed was in any way connected to the plumber's false assessment of a slab leak. The same work would have been completed regardless of cause and regardless of mitigation company based on industry standard. All prices were in accordance with Xactimate, which is a software we are required to use by all major insurance carriers that is designed to provide fair market pricing on insurance work. We do not select our own pricing. Finally, repairs to the customer's home should also be covered by her insurance company as with our mitigation invoice which was approved. The customer is welcome to choose any contractor to conduct those repairs. She indicated to us in writing on February 8, 2018, that she had chosen a different contractor for repairs. We can not speak to the quality of that contractor and thus questions regarding the ability to match existing material should be referred to that contractor. Prior to this complaint with the Revdex.com, our company was never aware of any concerns by the customer as to the work performed. There was never any indication of concern with our scope by the customer or her insurance company who is tasked with ensuring all work was done in accordance with the S500. As payment has already been issued to the customer specifically for our invoice, and a homeowner is legally restricted from profiting on an insurance claim, we do ask that payment be turned over to our company for the mitigation work that was approved and performed in accordance with the signed work authorization. We pride ourselves on the reputation that we have earned as a high quality mitigation company, and I deeply regret that we were not able to work through these very basic questions directly with the customer prior to this escalation. Thank you, and I look forward to assisting this customer with any further items in dispute.Restoration 1 Mid-Cities

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:We were under distress since this was our 3rd pipe leaks, and we desperately wanted to save our new wood floor.  We advised Restoration 1 owner and staff from the very beginning that we will not be filing a claim because we were concerned about insurance cancellation due to excessive claims.  During the last leak, we used Service Master.  The scope of work was roughly 4X of Restoration 1 since 4 walls/ceilings were affected and drywalls/insulation had to be removed and micro-bacterial treatments were performed.  We had 2-3 technicians came by 2-3 times daily for about 1 week.  They charged us less than Restoration 1.   Our insurance agent looked over Restoration 1’s bill, and she advised that they grossly overcharged us.  They used the Xactimate unit charge which is standard, but they padded the invoice by charging extra units and entering multiple line items for the same service, and overinflating the time spent.   They responded to the call at 4:00 PM, yet they charged us an after hour service charge.  We were never informed of this until we were invoiced.  I am not sure why this business owner chose to include my home value in his response.  Just because I live in a nice house, it does not give him or his contractor the right to overcharge me.  Is it fair to charge $1,800 to set up 1 floor drying mat ($180 per day for a total of $720), 2 small fans, and 1 humidifier for 4 days with 2 service calls?  On top of that, they did not even save my wood floor.  The owner did not check to make sure everything was dry at his last visit. I had to ask him to check the moisture content of the wood floor, and he did not check my ceiling which I found out later was still damp from my painter.   When I informed him that my wood floor is damaged, he did not respond and later took no responsibility for the negligence.   He even made claims that can be disproven:  1. Regarding the equipment pick-up,  I made arrangements with the technician [redacted] to pick up the fan and check moisture content on Wednesday, and have text messages on record.   [redacted] was delayed at a job, and [redacted] called to see if they can pick it up on Thursday.  Then, he proceeded to invoice me for the extra day; 2. The business owner also claimed that he called me to discussed the invoice, but that never happened.  I have phone records to back it up.  Also, it is ridiculous to state that I “refuse” to allow them to run the drain line to the kitchen or bathroom.  I advised them that I prefer to have it run to the bathroom since the line to the kitchen is in the middle of high traffic area and I have dogs running around.  And wow, thanks for courtesy of not showing up on the weekend for the service call.   Not only did they fail to save my wood floor which was why I hired them to begin with, they overcharged me, took no responsibility, and then provided a dishonest response.   I will never use them again.I reviewed the copy of the contract that the business owner attached.   There was no amount indicated when I signed the contract.  The $1,800 was written in by the business owner, therefore the contract was tampered with.  
Regards,
[redacted]

After several conversations with this customer via multiple platforms and websites, I am not sure what more to add. Our company has made every effort to satisfy this customer within appropriate measures. No further discount will be applied to this invoice.