Sign in

Spice Restaurant

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Spice Restaurant? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Spice Restaurant

Spice Restaurant Reviews (230)

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
I couldn't respond to their email So I was given your email to send to you I have complied with what they have requestedI have given them estimates and when I called the contractors after the last emailThey said that their estimates are broke down and if RWS has any questions in regards to what they are charging for that they need to contact them directlyRWS is just giving me the run around and not wanting to payRWS has more excuses,so this issue will never be resolved to satisfactionTell them to send me the original $that they approved me for. ***

The homeowner filed a claim that was initially approved for $1700, subject to final processingDuring the final processing, it was made apparent that there were issues with the sewer noted in the homeowner’s inspection report and, as a result, the homeowner’s claim was ultimately deniedThere was
no denial because of exclusion (m) though the homeowner should be aware that the SewerGard policies were updated in June of and it appears his home inspector provided him with an outdated version - while that doesn’t matter for the situation at hand as his denial had nothing to do with the almost year old update, it appears there was some confusion which we wanted to clarifyHowever, because we here at RWS want to ensure complete customer satisfaction and ensure that we are following the terms of our warranty tenfold, if the homeowner would call the Director of Operations, with whom he has already spoken, his claim has been re-opened and the Director has some follquestions to see if we can’t still get this issue covered under the warranty

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
This case has not been resolved to my satisfaction at this point. We have not received the $that they said they would send us in their response *** ***

Based on the homeowner’s expressed desires, RWS has frozen the pending buyout and is re-opening the claim.However, first, RWS respectfully reminds the homeowner that, per their policy, “Roof repair is for leaks only, to rolled, composition, or asphalt shingle roof only, and is limited to the repair of the leak only” and, for these reasons , the check they will receive from RWS may not match the contractors’ estimates.In order to review the claim, additional information (referenced in RWS's last Revdex.com response) is required - the invoice/estimate must be itemized; it must contain a parts cost and a labor cost for each item listedAlso required is a specific cause for the failure, in writing, from a licensed or properly certified repairperson, per the warrantyAs stated earlier, the home inspector intervened and made the Claims Director aware of some extenuating circumstances, which is why the claim was approved without the above informationHowever, in order to re-evaluate the claim as thoroughly and completely possible, as requested by the homeowner, it is necessary that all required documentation is received so that RWS can ensure that the homeowner receives the proper amountPlease forward this information to the email address listed on your policy and, once received, it will be reviewed immediately

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaintFor your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowThe response of Residential Warranty Service (RWS)’s representative shows that they are ether confused about the facts or willfully trying to mislead the readerIt was RWS’s Contractor who came representing RWS and solicited me into agreementRWS’s Contractor did not fulfill the part of the agreement that required him to install a Primary Sump Pump and baSump Pump both made by the “Zoeller Company” and to give me a copy of the purchasing receipt for the sump pump he just purchasedAlthough caught after paying the Contractor $1000; It was discovered that the contractor actually only installed a BaSump Pump made by the Zoeller Company and he used the same primary sump pump that was installed on the previous day and, which I explained to him earlier that I had some quality concerns aboutI tried to contact the Contractor only a few hours after he had left my house to confront him on what I discoveredAfter at least, emails attempts, telephone attempts, all of which went to voicemail; I left message requested that he come and uninstall the basump pump system and give me a full refundOr, if he sends me a return address I will hire someone to uninstall the equipment and I ship it to himThe contractor finally responded almost two days later and said “I agreed to what was installed and paid for it” and hung up the phoneFrom the start of this discovery, I reported this incident to RWS management about the deceitful practice of one of their representatives/ContractorsRWS’s Management stated that this issue was not covered by the Warranty Contract and therefore an issue solely between me and the contactorI explained to RWS management that the Contractor was avoiding me and basically told me that I wasn’t entitled to a refund because I had agreed and then paid for what was installed; even though I expressed to the Contractor my dissatisfaction of what was installed and offered to pay to have the equipment uninstall and shipped to him all at my costRWS sided with the Contractor and further claim that this issue was not covered by the Warranty Contract, and therefore an issue solely between me and the contactorSince the contractor was not responding to me I asked RWS Management for the Contractor’s place of business or an address to where I can send his equipmentRWS’s Management refused to give me the Contractor’s shipping addressI then suggested that I can ship the equipment to RWS, the manager again say “no, don’t send it here either” I never received the purchase receipt from the Contractor that would show the cost of the sump pump and all of its componentsThrough researching the varies prices of sump pumps, I called several local sump pump distributors of the Zoeller Primary and BaSump pumps systemI found out that the cost of the Zoeller primary and basump pump system together (model 970) cost $According to the distributors I contacted, a Zoeller bapump system average cost is between $-$I also spoke with other Plumbers in the Industry who states that it’s a good chance that the basump pump was not newSince the Contractor came to my location operating as a representative for RWS; RWS is liable for the Contractors conduct and actions Regardless of whether the basump pump was a covered item in the Warranty ContractThe Contractor committed FraudTherefore, both parties can be named in a fraudulent criminal or civil proceeding, either individually or jointlyRegards, *** ***Because of the fraudulent act of one of its representatives, I request RWS refund me $
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. Yes we will go ahead and accept the buyout for $
Regards,
***

The homeowner’s 90-day warranty (the “Warranty”) covers “only those items specifically listed and excludes all others” along with covering only “those items confirmed to be in good working order at time of inspection and excludes all others”There were numerous issues with this homeowner’s claim
that resulted in an irrefutable denial, many of which are described below:Firstly, the homeowner failed to submit proper documentation, as required under the policyThe Warranty clearly states that “an itemized repair estimate must be submitted for every approved claim, including the breakdown of parts & labor, as well as a specific cause for the failure in writing from a licensed or properly certified repairperson”The invoices submitted had no breakdown and no cause for the failure.Secondly, the inspection report states “most of this home had no grounding system installed” yet the homeowner submitted an invoice for the installation of “ground rods with ground wire to panel”, made more concerning by the statement on the invoice itself that states “there is currently no ground wire or rods”The homeowner ought to be aware that the Warranty does not cover the installation of new items not previously contained within the home.Thirdly, as per the first paragraph above, only items confirmed to be in good working order at the time of inspection are coveredThe homeowner’s inspection report identifies the issues with the main electrical service cable and states “the main electrical service cable, along the side exterior wall, is damaged (frayed) and should be repaired or replaced by a qualified electricianIf left uncorrected, this condition may lead to the accumulation of moisture and corrosion within the main electrical panel.” As the issue described is a “hole in the bottom of the meter box”, it is clear that the home inspector was correct.Fourthly, the homeowner alleges, in his Revdex.com complaint, that the issue was not spotted by the home inspector, while this accusation is (see above), if true it would immediately preclude coverage of the claim under the Warranty as it was not confirmed to be in good working order.Fifthly, while the electrical coverage of the warranty does cover the main service panel, secondary service panel, and wiring, it does not cover those items that were specifically mentioned in the home inspection report as flawed, nor does it cover those items when the home inspector recommends their replacement or repair (see above paragraph)As a result of the above circumstances surrounding this claim, it was appropriately deniedIf the homeowner has any additional information that would negate the majority of the above observations, please feel free to submit them and we will review the claim at any point until your Warranty term expires

Thank you for your response - your check was mailed out last Friday (June 2016) - please contact RWS if you have any additional questions

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Firstly, the documentation I submitted was never mentioned to be insufficientI never received a complaint regarding my submitted paperwork"Proper" paperwork was available when Katie contacted the man who did the workShe could have gotten any paperwork she desired. Secondly, I am not concerned with being reimbursed for the ground rods Thirdly, the inspector noticed the decaying of wires above the box but never mentioned anything about the hole in the bottom of the box because he didn't catch itHe noted that if left uncorrected, it could cause a problemLittle did he know, there already was a problemThese things don't happen over nightIt was like that for YEARSAny other inspector would have caught something like this and I know that because the first inspector caught it and the sale fell through because of itThe inspectors exact wording is "cable" he never mentioned anything about a problem with the "box"The only word he used was "cable"Fourthly, the inspector did not spot the hole in the bottom of the meter box, as stated aboveFifthly, the main service panel and secondary service panel were replaced and never mentioned in the reportThe wiring was the only thing mentioned so I assume responsibility for the wiringThe inspector missed the hole in the meter box so he should be paying for itSince you represent him, you should be responsible for it.Lastly, I understand that you people will do anything you can to deny a claimThis isn't going to go awayIt's time to accept your responsibilities and pay out what is supposed to be paid out and what you said you were going to pay outAlso, train your employees correctly so they don't promise people things that aren't going to happenThis will not be the last time you hear from me if we cannot settle thisThe company that you represent screwed up and it's time for you to cover their backWhy even offer a warranty if all you're going to do is fight it? You're giving your company a bad name, if you can't tell from your reviews.
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
This is so unfortunate that this business can work like this while what they are saying almost feels like a scam to meThe following is a line by line what they have done: I called them regarding my AC unit not functioning properlyThey said they will assign someone to come to my homeThey have chosen someone from Columbus (almost hours away from where I live at Mason, OH) on a SaturdayThe service folks came and it was pouring rain outsideThey spent may be about an hourThe service folks informed that I have options: I can replace the unit Add FreonThey also strongly advised that adding Freon is worthless as the unit is leaking and adding Freon is expensive (old Freon type I guess)They have also told me that warranty company would not provide much for the FreonSo, I wanted to talk to warranty company on replacing the unitsAs a matter of fact, service company has indicated in the invoice that Unit be replacedAlso, to note, the invoice only has amount for deductible and not any charges for adding Freon Now, let’s talks about the items one by one: 1. Overtime Fees: This service company was chosen by the warranty company and the warranty company told me that when the service company would arriveThere was no request from me to do an emergency callNote that, the warranty company chose a service company from Columbus while I live in MasonSounds like a shady deal going onThere are plenty of service company in the Cincinnati areaThere is no insistence from me that the service has to be immediate and it’s an emergencyThis is a complete Lie from the warranty company2. Service call fees: While talking to April from RWS, I have asked for where does it say that having units equates to two service callsAlso, service fees should be associated with fixing somethingThey have not fixed anything or promised to fix anythingThe service company told me that the RWS will not pay anything for repairing for my unitI’d be more than happy to pay the service fees if April from RWS would have told me that the units will be fixed per the recommendation of the service companyTalking to her sounded like, the warranty company running a scam and would make money out of me rather than paying for coverage3. Repair over replacement: This is an absolute lie to suggest that I have suggested not to replace my unitAbsolutely the opposite, what I have asked is to agree that a replacement will happenThe service company actually warned me that the RWS will not replace the unitIs RWS saying now that they would replace the unit? If they are, I have no problem of paying the service feeIf they fix the issue, they will definitely deserve the service feeAlso note that, the service company worked in my home for about an hour or so and nothing was fixed, replaced or addedAlso note that, there is no signature, written approval from meI did not have sign the service sheet because it is a complete lie 4. Freon fees: This is another lieAs a matter of fact, I have told them not to put Freon and if they did, without my approvalHere are few other things to consider: aThe invoice does not have any price for adding Freon, invoice only has the deductibleYou would think, if freon was added, the prcie would be reflected in the service sheet bThe service guy would not add Freon without getting his money or approval from me as the warranty company only pays like $per pound and I’d have to pay the remainderThere is no approval from mecThe service guy suggested and I listened that Old Freon is not an option for now d, I actually have a written proof (a text from him) that the service guys did not add lbs of FreonEIf they did, my unit would be functioning properly which still does not Bottom-line: 1. The warranty company chose this service company located hours away 2. The warranty company and service company decided when to come to my home 3. There was no adding of lbsof FreonI have written proof that this was not done. Other Issues: 1. April form warranty company told me that she has video proof inside my homeDid someone videotaped inside my property without my approval The warranty company must fix the issue per service company’s suggestion which is to replace the unit.
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
[The business did not reply to my previous responseThey are ignoring the subjectThe contractor offered to take their call if they have inquiries and they rejected thatThe insurance contract DOES NOT mention the requirement for itemized invoice and the contractor does not provide oneThey cannot just make rules as they go that suites their needs]
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
No, the second issue is not a scheduling problem. After waiting more than hours each of days that I had been told that the repairman would return, he finally did come back. But, he determined that the original diagnosis was incorrect. In fact, he told us that now the problem is a new motherboard is needed. He told us Sunday that he would call the warranty company on Monday and determine how they wanted this resolved. He told me Monday afternoon on the phone then that he never got through because no one would answer your contractors line and the voice mail was full and so he was unable to leave a message. It is Wednesday and I cannot reach the repairman. So, I called you back and you told me that he had not contacted you about the new diagnosis and that you tried, while I was on the line, and could not contact him. This is supposedly now being passed to a supervisor and I was now told that I would have an answer as to how this would be resolved within hours. I will call back tomorrow and see what the resolution is, though I would hope you would contact me earlier than that.
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Their response does not at all respond to my complaint; I am not arguing whether or not my claim should have been approved and I am not disputing their policyI am complaining because two (2) different employees told me that my claim had been approvedAs a result of my follquestions, they both instructed me to have the work done, which I did; I spent $dollars based on the word of these employees, only to be told later that my claim was not approved.So, I am complaining because this company has no integrity, and does not stand by their wordFrom my perspective, it seems that this company lied to me - a lie that resulted in $This is an unacceptable way to treat a client; it is an unacceptable way to treat any person.All the information I provided them was true; on that morning, my hot water was not working - the reason is still unknownWhen the plumber came, it was workingThe plumber's note had all the facts, and they had all of this information when they told me that my claim had been approvedThey had the exact same information when they approved my claim as they did when they rejected it.
Regards,
*** ***

Thank you for your August letterPlease note that the documents submitted to RWS did not conform with the policy requirements (delineated on page 10), of documents needed prior to any claim being processedIn an attempt to take care of you and expedite your claim, RWS representatives,
instead of requesting the proper documentation, issued a buyout based on a national standard, which would require no additional documentation and which would expedite the claim processThis was wholly incorrect of them and these representatives have all been disciplined accordingly and/or let goWe apologize sincerely for the confusion they may have caused by misstating our policy and procedures and would like to offer you a service call fee credit of $150, which will be applied to this claim once processedPlease note that the policy states that the following is required: “a detailed estimate including: itemized parts list and corresponding prices, the total number of hours the job will take and the hourly rate being charged”The invoice submitted for this claim states, with regards to the repair, solely that “A/C Unit has bad capacitor and start kitNeed to replace both capacitor and hard start kit and recheck the system” with a total of $The second invoice states “Install new run capacitor in [illegible] unit” with a subtotal of $listedNeither of these provide the documentation necessary to finish processing your claim per the policyPlease submit the necessary documentation at your earliest convenience and it will be expedited and the credit applied

This homeowner filed this claim on June 2016, and provided us with an invoice on the 17th - we are not even a week past the date we received the estimate and the homeowner is filing a Revdex.com complaint.The homeowner needs to be aware of the terms of her warranty, which states “RWS will not be liable
for any costs associated with a contractor ... without prior authorization”Your contractor will need to get approval from RWS before any repairs are made or costs are incurred, as you were told previously and as you are aware of, per your initial Revdex.com submissionIf you move forward with this repair without authorization, RWS will not be liable for any costs associated thereto.However, based on the circumstances, and our desire to garner complete customer satisfaction from this homeowner, this claim is now being personally handled by the Warranty Director, and she will be receiving a call today to get her claim moved forward

Thank you for bringing this to our attentionIt appears the claim was filed January due to your water heater only heating for short periods of timeThe homeowner chose to have the unit replacedWhile replacing a 27-year-old water heater presumably makes the most fiscal sense to the
homeowner, this does not make the costs of the replacement covered under the policyFurthermore, your invoice does not give a specific cause of failure; instead it lists a few proposed causes and, despite this lack of information, your customer service reps still allowed coverage for the same; therefore, per the invoice, the dip tube and the labor to install were coveredAs the buyout amount would be less than the cost of the homeowner’s service call fee, no additional money could be paidDuring your February conversation with RWS, you were told the above, and you indicated you had additional paperwork which, upon being described, led your customer service representative to believing you were eligible for additional monies under the policyHe told you the same, and requested you submit it to us, in order to ensure you’re receiving all you are eligible for under the policyTo date, no additional documentation has been received, instead this Revdex.com complaint has been filedPlease submit the additional documentation referenced, and we are more than happy to review to ensure you’re receiving everything you’re eligible for under the policyOtherwise, based on the documentation received, this claim will remain closed

Thank you to the homeowner for his response - RWS's original response still stands as the homeowner has offered no additional informationPlease see our previous response for more information

The homeowner needs to read his 9o day policy, which clearly states that there is a mechanical aggregate maximum of $and a structural aggregate maximum of $2,The SewerGard policy has an aggregate maximum of $2,per occurrenceThat being said, the invoice turned in for
$6,and $16,were never going to be covered in full, nor will the $16,he is attempting to recoup via Revdex.com.However, regarding the issue at hand: the homeowner states he did “not make a claim for a clog” but his email to our representative clearly states, “While running water in the kitchen sink, the sink became clogged and then started spitting out from the other side of the sinkWhile snaking the drain line from the kitchen sink, there was a large amount of mud coming into the kitchen from the drain.” The homeowner's own contractor's diagnosis states “the sewer line is holding water and solids and debris”Therefore, as the 90-day policy states “This contract does not cover plumbing stoppages, regardless of reason" and the SewerGard policy states “This is not a policy to cover clogs”, the homeowner's claim would be prima facie deniedHowever, because the homeowner had erroneously included other found plumbing issues in this claim description, and, after speaking with the homeowner, the plumber, and the home inspector, and hearing of the extenuating circumstances, RWS was able to go above and beyond our policy by partially approving the plumbing issues and the sewer issue, with no obligation to do so, simply because we value customer service so much.Furthermore, the homeowner’s claims that RWS has failed to return his phone calls is patently falseRWS has returned every phone call and had multiple instances where RWS representatives went above and beyond their duty by contacting the homeowner’s contractor themselves to get the information necessary to continue processing his claimWhat the homeowner has failed to mention was that RWS representatives returned his phone calls consistently, despite the repeated verbal abuse he felt entitled to dole upon them each and every timeAt this point, the checks were mailed almost two weeks ago, and the homeowner has likely already received themThere is nothing further to be done regarding this issue

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I am appalled that my claims are being questionedI have now provided my phone records from my statements for August, September and October to prove, once again that there was no communication to me from RWS even though RWS is falsely claiming they have " multiple records of conversations with the homeowner regarding her buyout" I will give RWS that benefit of the doubt that they perhaps have my account confused with anotherIf not, the allegations that I received multiple (or any) communications is false, and can be proved in the attachment.Although this continues to go in circles, please see the phone records that correspond exactly with my account of what happenedThe green stars indicate my calls to RWS and the yellow stars indicate incoming calls from RWS The call records show me calling twice on 8/to try to get a hold of someone about my claimThe records also shows my call on the morning of Monday, 8/to inquire about my claimI was told I would receive a call back, and as you can see from the records, I did not receive one The records also show me calling on the morning of Tuesday, 8/to say I still need a call back, and now the issue is more urgent because my a/c unit has completely failedThis would all be in the RWS recorded call logs which prove I stated that there was a new issue of the failed unitIf the RWS agent on the phone did not record the additional claim in my account, which I suspect because I never received follow up, then that is beyond my control and does not mean I did not issue a claim.Due to my frustration with RWS that no one would respond to me to service my claim, I decided I could not wait any longer with a feline cancer patient in my house which was exceptionally warm, so I decided on my own to replace my unitAs expected, RWS still never responded to me in the days to come, and the next recorded communication is when I called again on Tuesday, 8/to express my extreme displeasure that days had gone by since I was told a second time I would receive a call, and still nothing happenedMy claim was completely ignoredAt that point, the agent told me that there was a note in my account that I would receive a $buyoutThat was the one and only time that I heard about the buyout, and it was due to a call that I made I thought the $was a fair compromise for the complete disregard for my claim, and therefore there was no further communication on the issue between me and RWS.Fast forward to 10/when I received the check in the mail for a fraction of what I was told I would receiveI immediately contacted RWS which is shown in my call recordsThe person I spoke with was sympathetic and said unfortunately there had been some bad business practices and people had been removed from the companyHe said he would see what he could do about my situationHe called to follow up on 10/and said he was still waiting on an answerHe then called again on 10/and said there was nothing he could doBoth calls are in my statement, and are the only incoming calls I received from RWSThe statement below is disturbing, and hopefully it was written by someone confused at RWS and not one of the "bad apples" that should have been removed from the companyFurthermore, I never received any approval for my claim"With regards to the accusations regarding her claim buyout check, RWS has multiple records of conversations with the homeowner regarding her buyout, which the homeowner has mistakenly misreported in her Revdex.com response by stating “no one at RWS bothered to call and say they decided to offer a buyout”This is simply untrue as the homeowner was notified multiple times (including the first business day after she filed her claim when her claim was initially approved, along with each time she called in thereafter) that she would be issued a buyout check, which was currently being processed.Regarding the last paragraph, I am not claiming I am owed money for the repairs or my new unit or went outside the warranty process and am still requesting paymentI am simply claiming that I called to complain that no one ever responded to me, and the man on the other line said I was receiving a $buyoutThis was the first I heard of itRWS saying they went above and beyond is a joke since my phone records prove I received no communications from themI had accepted the buyout as a remedy for the situation where RWS completely ignored my claim, never sent me an approval or denial, and did not help when I called back and said my A/C had failedThey forced me to act on my own, and the buyout was a fair remedy to the failed service from RWS. Finally, I have attached the check I received from RWSIn the call on 8/when I found out about the buyout, I was told that per RWS's day check policy, the check would be cut by 10/When I received the check on 10/17, I saw it had been cut on 10/13, which was a week lateThat is when the agent told me there was a note in my account dated 10/explaining the decreased amount on the checkDecreasing the amount on 10/is passed the due date to cut my check, so changes should not have been allowed at that time
Regards,
*** *** ***

Check fields!

Write a review of Spice Restaurant

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Spice Restaurant Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Address: 5494 Salt Lane, Langley, British Columbia, Canada, V3A 5C7

Phone:

Show more...

Web:

This website was reported to be associated with Spice Restaurant.



Add contact information for Spice Restaurant

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated