Taylored Restoration

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:I requested and adjustment to their invoice and to stop billing me for work that they did not finishedAnd for them to pay for the door knob, mattress and what I received was violent threats from a man Grey M [redacted] to a woman for exercising my legal rights requesting a detail invoice.His manager and him are involved in the most deceptive business practices using intimidation just to get pay for a job they did not finished and refusing to cover The cost or reduce the invoice for the damages they didThis is the worse case I seenNo integrity from that company not willing to resolve the issue as a professionals using intimidation Sincerely, [redacted]

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

T During the entire process of drying out the *** home, our office never received a call from the ***’ in regards to any requests or complaints whatsoever The ***’ were charged for lead and asbestos testing (a standard industry practice due to the age of the home)
because their insurance policy doesn’t cover those items. Our Authorization to Repair signed by Mr*** outlines this, and also states that any charges the insurance company does not cover the homeowner is responsible for. A copy is attached. The ***’ were informed that repairs could not be completed in the week time frame they requested Due to testing positive for lead and asbestos, this requires abatement services, which would need to be scheduled with a licensed abatement company. The homeowner chose not to have abatement services performed and has signed documents stating such. Copies of those documents are attached. No one in our office has ever received a call from the ***’ requesting pricing. Pricing is determined by the independent third party that performs the testing. The ***’ portion owed is $+ finance charges. The check from Umialik for $that has been received by the ***’ made out to Taylored Restoration Services and the ***’ is NOT for testing, but for mitigation services that were performed. Per the ***’ adjuster, this is clearly written on the check they are holding for services that have already been rendered. Being that their insurance policy does not cover lead or asbestos abatement, no such check would be written for those. Several attempts have been made via email and phone to obtain payment to no avail. A payment plan agreement was offered to the ***’, but they declined. The ***’ were turned over to collections on 11/28/due to non-payment. ell us why here

On August 22, we had a fire in our condo buildingAfter months, all familys are still out of our homes
A repair contract was not signed by the Condo Association on this project until the end of December, I believe that Mr*** was one of the signers of the contract
Taylored
Restoration has been paid and they seem to have extended the schedule excessively, as last week they only had two people working on the building, and one day last week only had one person working
Taylored has met preliminary schedule with the addition of days due to delays outside of our scope (Municipality and Insurance negotiation)Substantially less than what would have been customary given the expansion of scope. We were paid in partial amounts beginning in August and are currently about 75% collected on a project that is over 90% complete
Our additional living expense insurance is only for a yearThey have extended the schedule to the point that even if they make the scheduled timeline, we have very little time to move in and make sure all our belongings are smoke free and everything is the way it should beThere is a lot of stress and worry and they do not seem interested in working faster than the schedule they created as proven by the lack of man power they have assigned through out the entire project
Taylored works off an independent third party pricing database approved by the insurance industry. There is no allowance for overtime or additional staffing. If the Condo Association would be willing to cover the additional cost of overtime staffing Taylored can extend working hours

This complaint was filed on 2/11/and this is the first notice I have received (2/22/9:29pm). Please research your records and methods of contact and verify that you are sending to the correct contact address(es)
I will confer with our staff for summary of this project and respond
with findings
Thank you,
Douglas L***
General Manager - Taylored Restoration

Taylored has had multiple contact points with Ms. [redacted], the tenant at the subject property (this is a rental property) and the insurance company.  The tenant insisted on being present whenever we were on site, his schedule did not allow us consistent access.
Our records show that the toilet tank crack was discovered by the tenant on August 4th at 7am.  The equipment referenced on August 6th was there to dry the bathroom because of the cracked tank by August 11th (date referenced in the complaint) the tank had been damaged for a week. Even with discrepancy in dates, there is no feasible explanation as to how the mitigation equipment could have caused the porcelain tank to crack. 
USAA approved a second claim in this instance subject to a second deductible.  This billing addresses that additional ensuing damage and said repairs were completed.  Taylored staff has been in communication with Ms. [redacted] consistently via multiple texts, emails, letters and personal visits to our office.
Taylored ceased invoicing after turning the file over to Cornerstone Collections, of which she was notified was occurring by letter(s). We ask that she settle her billing with Cornerstone at her earliest possible convenience.

Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
First of all:  I want to make it very clear that I never requested to be on site when the workers needed to do their work at my home. I worked an 8-5 pm job and therefore; I never could be there to see what or if they were doing their job as they indicated. I do know the mitigating crew under Juan’s Supervision never phoned when they were running late nor even bothered to call when they did not show up at  the house to do the clean up work. This caused a lot of delays and non- communication of what to expect.
 
2nd Fact:  The dry out  equipment was not there to dry out the cracked toilet that was on August 4, 2015. It was there due to the shower faucet leak and dry out the bathroom walls but the mitigating crew under Juan; Supervisor never returned to monitor or give clear instructions to us but just left it unsupervised from Friday morning until Monday August 2nd, 2015 morning. This is poor management of their mitigating crew. Their also is a break down communication between the mitigation Supervisor to the worker back to the overall Manager assigned to the project. Like I indicated above that they left the electric fans running for 4 days straight with not information of when they were returning.
 
Taylored Restoration received more than $6000 on this project that went beyond the estimated due completion repair date. They need to look at their communication patterns and follow up with your clients more thoroughly.
 
 
Sincerely,[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The response provided is false information and defamation of character what they will be liable for. My tenant, his wife, and the handyman that replaced the door knob are witness of the damage on the door knob  caused by Taylor restoration. They never did work on my property before this problem. I will never used that company again. All the information they provided is wrong. I got statements from 3 people to prove the false accusations. They are refusing to pay a door knob for $16 dollars and damages they caused to the tenants mattress. I am very surprises this company still on business.  They reacted very violent after I questioned why they charged me for work that was never completed  leaving all the trash on my driveway and charging me for that as if they removed, I was just requesting a detail invoice and they answered with threats and laud voice, I  explained the damage to the door knob and they refused to pay for the $16 cost of the door knob and other damaged they caused for not following the proper manage of sewage waters.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I requested and adjustment to their invoice and to stop billing me for work that they did not finished. And for them to pay for the door knob, mattress and what I received was violent threats from a man Grey M[redacted] to a woman for exercising my legal rights requesting a detail invoice.His manager and him are involved in the most deceptive business practices using intimidation just to get pay for a job they did not finished and refusing to cover The cost or reduce  the invoice for the damages they did. This is the worse case I seen. No integrity from that  company not willing to resolve the issue as a professionals using intimidation. 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Taylored handled this Category 3 water loss per the S500 standards under the IICRC. The pricing is from an independent third party pricelist and the mitigation scope was approved and paid by the insurance company. Credit for the debris removal has been posted against her account. The affected areas were sanitized with Microban before any drying equipment was put in place. This project was also delayed by Ms [redacted] not allowing access to site for 2 days which is a much greater health hazard than any standard mitigation practice had used. Regarding Ms [redacted] interaction at Taylored's office, the nature of the implied threat was a lien to her property if she was not going pay her bill (she has been paid by the insurance company). After she raised her voice she was asked to leave the premises by Karen H[redacted], Office Manager.Property owner had called us direct on this loss as we had responded to her on previous work for her.  The lock box did not damage the door in question and the property owner appears to be trying to advantage of a situation for which she was already reimbursed for.  If there was a health concern at this property more urgency should have been taken initially by allowing access to the site.

Taylored handled this Category 3 water loss per the S500 standards under the IICRC. The pricing is from an independent third party pricelist and the mitigation scope was approved and paid by the insurance company. Credit for the debris removal has been posted against her account. The affected areas...

were sanitized with Microban before any drying equipment was put in place. This project was also delayed by Ms [redacted] not allowing access to site for 2 days which is a much greater health hazard than any standard mitigation practice had used. Regarding Ms [redacted] interaction at Taylored's office, the nature of the implied threat was a lien to her property if she was not going pay her bill (she has been paid by the insurance company). After she raised her voice she was asked to leave the premises by Karen H[redacted], Office Manager.Property owner had called us direct on this loss as we had responded to her on previous work for her.  The lock box did not damage the door in question and the property owner appears to be trying to advantage of a situation for which she was already reimbursed for.  If there was a health concern at this property more urgency should have been taken initially by allowing access to the site.