Timeline -08/11/15 Original Job Performed08/12/15 Husband Called to Complain08/13/15 Follow Up Courtesy Visit Performed Original Job -Technician diagnosed that a new strainer was needed in the kitchen sink. Our technician installed the same type of strainer (chrome) that was there...
and the customer requested to keep the old part. As to our technician commenting about a color change, what he said was that over time chrome won’t be as shinny; which is a true statement and explains why their old part may not have been shinny and perhaps the customer was mistaken about the material of their old strainer (and believed it to be stainless steel). Courtesy Visit -On 08/13/15, as per the husband’s request we went back onsite in an effort to satisfy everyone. Upon our arrival the wife provided us with a strainer that the husband [not present] wanted us to install [note the part did not have a UPC (United Plumbing Code) stamp which is required on all plumbing installs]; after notifying the customer of this she still wanted it installed, so our technician removed it from the box and had just begun to start the job when the husband called the wife and within moments she then handed the phone to our employee. During this brief phone conversation the customer’s husband cussed out our employee and used derogatory language including “go fxxx yourself”, “motherxxxxxx”, “piece of sxxx”. Our employee packed his tools and in a very calm manner left the residence before doing the job. After our technician left the husband called our office and used similar language and was literally screaming into the phone. After a few minutes of this our CSR got permission from his boss (who overheard the conversation) to end the call because of the husband’s threatening tone. We have a very clear policy that our employees are not to stay in an abusive or dangerous environment or take verbal abuse at anytime; if they experience this they are to walk out of the customer’s home immediately or end the call to remove themselves from the situation. That is what happened in this instance. Our Efforts -The part that was initially installed was nearly identical to what was there prior to us doing any work on the site, and with the wife’s permission we replaced it. Even knowing this, we have offered to replace the part for the customer with whatever he wants at no additional charge (they just need to provide the strainer they want). As to the husband’s comment about the part we installed, we can’t return a used item; which is why we offered to cover the labor portion of the job to the customer in order for him to be satisfied. Resolution -We would be willing to refund a portion of the job if the customer will provide us with the old strainer to validate his assertion that the strainer is stainless steel.-- Sincerely,[redacted]Discount Plumbing[redacted]O [redacted] * [redacted]MISSION STATEMENT-TO PROVIDE DEPENDABLE, RELIABLE, SOLUTIONS TO OUR CUSTOMERS. PROFESSIONALS YOU CAN COUNT ON, QUALITY YOU CAN TRUST.
Unfortunately in the rare situations like this, what occurred was not through the fault of our employee but rather because of the design of Ms. [redacted]’s plumbing system. We understand how she thinks that our employee is to blame because he was the one doing the work, however this same problem...
would have likely happened to any other company sent out there. It was a fluke and unfortunately sometimes these things just happen and it’s outside the control of anyone. When these situations occur (again rarely) we typically extend a courtesy to the customer and will replace like for like (most of our competitors would not even do this). If a customer has a specific toilet they want then we will cover the labor to install it and give a credit for our standard toilet. As such, our technician installed a comparable standard bowl toilet. Our terms and conditions clearly state that we are not responsible for unforeseen conditions, we only did this in an effort to attempt to keep her as a satisfied customer. Ms. [redacted] did not object or say anything while our technician installed the toilet, nor immediately after the toilet was installed. Rather, she waited to call until the next day. At this point, we are unable to return the toilet we purchased and we cannot sell it to another customer. Had she said something earlier as our tech was putting it in or before he had left, it would have been much easier to resolve. We apologize if Ms. [redacted] feels this is unsatisfactory, but we feel this is the best we can do given that the primary issue is the design of the plumbing system.
I am rejecting this response because: this not making me, the consumer whole. You have reference the design of the plumbing was concern which is not the case. As previously mentioned, your technician had full access to the property and should have inspected it before making a decision of how to correct the concern. If I had the expertise and the knowledge you do to run your business, I would not need your services as I would have taken care of the problem myself. You are blaming the consumer for something Discount Plumbing did. You also mentioned that I should have said something the day the toilet was placed as it was too late the next day. I'm not understanding how less than 24 hours notice is making a difference as the toilet had not been used at all. Again, all I want is to be placed in the same position I was in prior to receiving your service as I am left at a huge disadvantage. You did not replace my toilet for one similar in quality/design. It is substandard to the one I had. One of your options was crediting me $150 for my next service. This will not work as I no longer plan on using your company for future services given my past experiences. I would rather have $150 refunded to me NOT a credit. If this is not possible, then I want my toilet replaced with the same make/model as the one I used to have.
I am rejecting this response because: I was never hostile toward anyone. They just kept saying that they needed to do more than replace the heater but that is not true. And they never replaced parts on my heater previously, they replaced the whole heater 8 years ago. I only wish they could get their story straight and do the right thing. They can send me the $100.00 but I will never use them again and I will SHOUT IT FROM THE ROOF TOPS AT WHAT A SCAM THEY ARE.
Consumer states: I told the company we had a leak and they were able to locate it underneath the house which we approved. I wanted the company to explain why they went on the roof and why/what service was performed exactly on the roof.
On the original call (booked and dispatched on October 3) our tech goes over and explains that the issue could be just the pilot assembly or it could also be the gas control valve. But in an effort to save money the customer agreed to have us just replace the pilot first and see if that...
resolved their problem. When our tech left, the pilot was on and working and this was acknowledged by the customer. Thus, everyone thought that the larger repair was not needed and money could be saved. On the follow up call (October 4) the water heater was not staying lit and our tech advised that while we tried to save some money on the initial call (by just doing one task) that now we would have to replace the gas control valve as well. Customer is dissatisfied and wants this new job done for free. Customer calls on October 4 and has a 17 minute phone conversation with our manager in which we offer to give the customer ½ of the credit from the first job toward the second job in an effort to work with them because it sounds like they have a financial hardship. This wasn’t good enough (or maybe they didn’t understand). On October 5, a male (the grandson) called in and demanded to speak to a manager. When he was informed that he’d have to leave a voicemail and that a manager would call him back in a little bit (when the manager was done with his onsite visit) the individual called our dispatcher a bh and became aggressive. Unfortunately, we have a zero-tolerance policy for any type of violence. As a result this customer has been placed on a do not service list. At the root of it, the customer’s argument is that it would’ve been cheaper to have done all the repairs at the same time. However, we charge by the specific job NOT BY THE HOUR and the customer would’ve ended up replacing both components anyway. It would have been no cheaper and not in the customers best financial interest to have replaced both components without first trying the first repair. That would’ve been like replacing the engine if the spark plugs were bad. Further, the customer didn't want us to replace both components on October 3, otherwise we would have!
On the original call (booked and dispatched on October 3) our tech goes over and explains that the issue could be just the pilot assembly or it could also be the gas control valve. But in an effort to save money the customer agreed to have us just replace the pilot first and see if that resolved their problem. When our tech left, the pilot was on and working and this was acknowledged by the customer. Thus, everyone thought that the larger repair was not needed and money could be saved. On the follow up call (October 4) the water heater was not staying lit and our tech advised that while we tried to save some money on the initial call (by just doing one task) that now we would have to replace the gas control valve as well. Customer is dissatisfied and wants this new job done for free. Customer calls on October 4 and has a 17 minute phone conversation with our manager in which we offer to give the customer ½ of the credit from the first job toward the second job in an effort to work with them because it sounds like they have a financial hardship. This wasn’t good enough (or maybe they didn’t understand). On October 5, a male (the grandson) called in and demanded to speak to a manager. When he was informed that he’d have to leave a voicemail and that a manager would call him back in a little bit (when the manager was done with his onsite visit) the individual called our dispatcher a bh and became aggressive. Unfortunately, we have a zero-tolerance policy for any type of violence. As a result this customer has been placed on a do not service list. At the root of it, the customer’s argument is that it would’ve been cheaper to have done all the repairs at the same time. However, we charge by the specific job NOT BY THE HOUR and the customer would’ve ended up replacing both components anyway. It would have been no cheaper and not in the customers best financial interest to have replaced both components without first trying the first repair. That would’ve been like replacing the engine if the spark plugs were bad. Further, the customer didn't want us to replace both components on October 3, otherwise we would have!
I am rejecting this response because: as I previously had mentioned, the replacement toilet was NOT compatible to the one that I had, other than it being a white toilet. As I indicated, all I want to be in the same position I was prior to your service. You are asking that I pay for part of the toilet for a mistake that I did not make. I did call the next day and did NOT receive a response from you FOR A WEEK. At the time that I had called, the toilet had not been used at all, therefore being able to be returned. Again, I'm asking for the toilet to be replaced to the same one that I had (not a much cheaper one) at the company's cost. In your response, you indicated that this incident happed due to plumbing layout. Actually, your technician did find the cleanout (after breaking the toilet) from which he was able to fix the plumbing concern. If he would have done the inspection prior to running the equipment through the toilet, this whole situation would have been prevented. I'm not the expert in this situation but my assumption is that technicians explore all options/explore premises prior to making a decision for service, correct? In doing so, it would definitely prevent these situations and avoid blaming the consumer/plumbing. So again, what I'm asking is for is the following:-to have my toilet replaced with the same one I had.I am not asking for anything better, which I find to be reasonable. Again, the replacement toilet is not compatible. Replacement toilet is a [redacted] and the one that I had is [redacted], which you can definitely notice the difference in quality. In looking up the information between these 2 toilets, you can also read the differences.
Hope all is well. I spoke to my boss and we're willing to send her a refund check of $100 in an effort to just move on. Let me know if that'll work. Thanks again!
Timeline -08/11/15 Original Job Performed08/12/15 Husband Called to Complain08/13/15 Follow Up Courtesy Visit Performed Original Job -Technician diagnosed that a new strainer was needed in the kitchen sink. Our technician installed the same type of strainer (chrome) that was there...
and the customer requested to keep the old part. As to our technician commenting about a color change, what he said was that over time chrome won’t be as shinny; which is a true statement and explains why their old part may not have been shinny and perhaps the customer was mistaken about the material of their old strainer (and believed it to be stainless steel). Courtesy Visit -On 08/13/15, as per the husband’s request we went back onsite in an effort to satisfy everyone. Upon our arrival the wife provided us with a strainer that the husband [not present] wanted us to install [note the part did not have a UPC (United Plumbing Code) stamp which is required on all plumbing installs]; after notifying the customer of this she still wanted it installed, so our technician removed it from the box and had just begun to start the job when the husband called the wife and within moments she then handed the phone to our employee. During this brief phone conversation the customer’s husband cussed out our employee and used derogatory language including “go fxxx yourself”, “motherxxxxxx”, “piece of sxxx”. Our employee packed his tools and in a very calm manner left the residence before doing the job. After our technician left the husband called our office and used similar language and was literally screaming into the phone. After a few minutes of this our CSR got permission from his boss (who overheard the conversation) to end the call because of the husband’s threatening tone. We have a very clear policy that our employees are not to stay in an abusive or dangerous environment or take verbal abuse at anytime; if they experience this they are to walk out of the customer’s home immediately or end the call to remove themselves from the situation. That is what happened in this instance. Our Efforts -The part that was initially installed was nearly identical to what was there prior to us doing any work on the site, and with the wife’s permission we replaced it. Even knowing this, we have offered to replace the part for the customer with whatever he wants at no additional charge (they just need to provide the strainer they want). As to the husband’s comment about the part we installed, we can’t return a used item; which is why we offered to cover the labor portion of the job to the customer in order for him to be satisfied. Resolution -We would be willing to refund a portion of the job if the customer will provide us with the old strainer to validate his assertion that the strainer is stainless steel.-- Sincerely,[redacted]Discount Plumbing[redacted]O [redacted] * [redacted]MISSION STATEMENT-TO PROVIDE DEPENDABLE, RELIABLE, SOLUTIONS TO OUR CUSTOMERS. PROFESSIONALS YOU CAN COUNT ON, QUALITY YOU CAN TRUST.
Unfortunately in the rare situations like this, what occurred was not through the fault of our employee but rather because of the design of Ms. [redacted]’s plumbing system. We understand how she thinks that our employee is to blame because he was the one doing the work, however this same problem...
would have likely happened to any other company sent out there. It was a fluke and unfortunately sometimes these things just happen and it’s outside the control of anyone. When these situations occur (again rarely) we typically extend a courtesy to the customer and will replace like for like (most of our competitors would not even do this). If a customer has a specific toilet they want then we will cover the labor to install it and give a credit for our standard toilet. As such, our technician installed a comparable standard bowl toilet. Our terms and conditions clearly state that we are not responsible for unforeseen conditions, we only did this in an effort to attempt to keep her as a satisfied customer. Ms. [redacted] did not object or say anything while our technician installed the toilet, nor immediately after the toilet was installed. Rather, she waited to call until the next day. At this point, we are unable to return the toilet we purchased and we cannot sell it to another customer. Had she said something earlier as our tech was putting it in or before he had left, it would have been much easier to resolve. We apologize if Ms. [redacted] feels this is unsatisfactory, but we feel this is the best we can do given that the primary issue is the design of the plumbing system.
I am rejecting this response because: this not making me, the consumer whole. You have reference the design of the plumbing was concern which is not the case. As previously mentioned, your technician had full access to the property and should have inspected it before making a decision of how to correct the concern. If I had the expertise and the knowledge you do to run your business, I would not need your services as I would have taken care of the problem myself. You are blaming the consumer for something Discount Plumbing did. You also mentioned that I should have said something the day the toilet was placed as it was too late the next day. I'm not understanding how less than 24 hours notice is making a difference as the toilet had not been used at all. Again, all I want is to be placed in the same position I was in prior to receiving your service as I am left at a huge disadvantage. You did not replace my toilet for one similar in quality/design. It is substandard to the one I had. One of your options was crediting me $150 for my next service. This will not work as I no longer plan on using your company for future services given my past experiences. I would rather have $150 refunded to me NOT a credit. If this is not possible, then I want my toilet replaced with the same make/model as the one I used to have.
I am rejecting this response because: I was never hostile toward anyone. They just kept saying that they needed to do more than replace the heater but that is not true. And they never replaced parts on my heater previously, they replaced the whole heater 8 years ago. I only wish they could get their story straight and do the right thing. They can send me the $100.00 but I will never use them again and I will SHOUT IT FROM THE ROOF TOPS AT WHAT A SCAM THEY ARE.
Consumer states: I told the company we had a leak and they were able to locate it underneath the house which we approved. I wanted the company to explain why they went on the roof and why/what service was performed exactly on the roof.
On the original call (booked and dispatched on October 3) our tech goes over and explains that the issue could be just the pilot assembly or it could also be the gas control valve. But in an effort to save money the customer agreed to have us just replace the pilot first and see if that...
h and became aggressive. Unfortunately, we have a zero-tolerance policy for any type of violence. As a result this customer has been placed on a do not service list. At the root of it, the customer’s argument is that it would’ve been cheaper to have done all the repairs at the same time. However, we charge by the specific job NOT BY THE HOUR and the customer would’ve ended up replacing both components anyway. It would have been no cheaper and not in the customers best financial interest to have replaced both components without first trying the first repair. That would’ve been like replacing the engine if the spark plugs were bad. Further, the customer didn't want us to replace both components on October 3, otherwise we would have!
resolved their problem. When our tech left, the pilot was on and working and this was acknowledged by the customer. Thus, everyone thought that the larger repair was not needed and money could be saved. On the follow up call (October 4) the water heater was not staying lit and our tech advised that while we tried to save some money on the initial call (by just doing one task) that now we would have to replace the gas control valve as well. Customer is dissatisfied and wants this new job done for free. Customer calls on October 4 and has a 17 minute phone conversation with our manager in which we offer to give the customer ½ of the credit from the first job toward the second job in an effort to work with them because it sounds like they have a financial hardship. This wasn’t good enough (or maybe they didn’t understand). On October 5, a male (the grandson) called in and demanded to speak to a manager. When he was informed that he’d have to leave a voicemail and that a manager would call him back in a little bit (when the manager was done with his onsite visit) the individual called our dispatcher a b
On the original call (booked and dispatched on October 3) our tech goes over and explains that the issue could be just the pilot assembly or it could also be the gas control valve. But in an effort to save money the customer agreed to have us just replace the pilot first and see if that resolved their problem. When our tech left, the pilot was on and working and this was acknowledged by the customer. Thus, everyone thought that the larger repair was not needed and money could be saved. On the follow up call (October 4) the water heater was not staying lit and our tech advised that while we tried to save some money on the initial call (by just doing one task) that now we would have to replace the gas control valve as well. Customer is dissatisfied and wants this new job done for free. Customer calls on October 4 and has a 17 minute phone conversation with our manager in which we offer to give the customer ½ of the credit from the first job toward the second job in an effort to work with them because it sounds like they have a financial hardship. This wasn’t good enough (or maybe they didn’t understand). On October 5, a male (the grandson) called in and demanded to speak to a manager. When he was informed that he’d have to leave a voicemail and that a manager would call him back in a little bit (when the manager was done with his onsite visit) the individual called our dispatcher a b
h and became aggressive. Unfortunately, we have a zero-tolerance policy for any type of violence. As a result this customer has been placed on a do not service list. At the root of it, the customer’s argument is that it would’ve been cheaper to have done all the repairs at the same time. However, we charge by the specific job NOT BY THE HOUR and the customer would’ve ended up replacing both components anyway. It would have been no cheaper and not in the customers best financial interest to have replaced both components without first trying the first repair. That would’ve been like replacing the engine if the spark plugs were bad. Further, the customer didn't want us to replace both components on October 3, otherwise we would have!
WE HAVE DECIDED TO JUST DROP THIS. WE ARE GOING ON VACATION AND DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH IT ANYMORE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
I am rejecting this response because: as I previously had mentioned, the replacement toilet was NOT compatible to the one that I had, other than it being a white toilet. As I indicated, all I want to be in the same position I was prior to your service. You are asking that I pay for part of the toilet for a mistake that I did not make. I did call the next day and did NOT receive a response from you FOR A WEEK. At the time that I had called, the toilet had not been used at all, therefore being able to be returned. Again, I'm asking for the toilet to be replaced to the same one that I had (not a much cheaper one) at the company's cost. In your response, you indicated that this incident happed due to plumbing layout. Actually, your technician did find the cleanout (after breaking the toilet) from which he was able to fix the plumbing concern. If he would have done the inspection prior to running the equipment through the toilet, this whole situation would have been prevented. I'm not the expert in this situation but my assumption is that technicians explore all options/explore premises prior to making a decision for service, correct? In doing so, it would definitely prevent these situations and avoid blaming the consumer/plumbing. So again, what I'm asking is for is the following:-to have my toilet replaced with the same one I had.I am not asking for anything better, which I find to be reasonable. Again, the replacement toilet is not compatible. Replacement toilet is a [redacted] and the one that I had is [redacted], which you can definitely notice the difference in quality. In looking up the information between these 2 toilets, you can also read the differences.
Consumer states: The company set an appointment with me on Saturday and did not show nor have they contacted me about it.
Hope all is well. I spoke to my boss and we're willing to send her a refund check of $100 in an effort to just move on. Let me know if that'll work. Thanks again!