This is my second response to Complaint No [redacted] I will refer to work performed by Texas Plumbing Diagnostics, Inc.’s technicians, and recorded on Invoice No***, dated August 13, I am attaching a copy of the above referenced Invoice You will notice that Ms [redacted] ***’s signature is on the line authorizing the work, acknowledging responsibility for the work and stated charges, as well as the line at the bottom, where she signed that she was 100% satisfied with the work, stated charges were satisfactory, and the work area was left in good condition Our technicians arrived on site at 9:a.m Ms [redacted] complains that they arrived late; however, my technician informs me that they were trying to contact her with no result, and later learned that Ms [redacted] had left her phone in her car The technicians were, in fact, eager to get an early start, as they knew they would be performing a water line reroute through the attic They worked on site until 5:p.mon August 13th Our technician, [redacted] ***, related to me that he went over the pricing beforehand He told Ms [redacted] that, if she wanted to save money, they could run the water lines exposed He said that it would be more expensive to run them through the wall She was very clear that she wanted the lines run through the wall to conceal them Ms [redacted] states that [redacted] gave her an illegible description of the job that she could hardly read At this point, if she had questions concerning the description, or the charges, she could have asked him to go over it until she did understand The two technicians who were on this job are the two quietest technicians that I have ***, the Apprentice, states that, even though [redacted] raised his voice to be heard, “that was short of a yell.” He stated that, “the customer was exclaiming loudly most of the time.” His description of the conversation was that it was, “SLIGHTLY (his emphasis) heated,” and that, “both sides were upset.” As for Ms [redacted] ***’s claim, “I thought he was going to hit me,” [redacted] says that neither Ms [redacted] nor [redacted] appeared at any time to be physically aggressive in any way [redacted] states, “Never once was I aggressive.” Ms [redacted] states that [redacted] used White Out on the Invoice after she signed it, but I can not discern any place on Invoice No [redacted] where White Out was used He did rewrite over his writing, which is not unusual, especially if a customer complains that he or she cannot read the technician’s writing You are more than welcome to inspect this Invoice for yourself, to see if you observe any area that may have been altered Generally, when you hold a document up to the light, any area touched by White Out will be obvious Both [redacted] and I have checked the document for any corrections by White Out, and found none The only addition [redacted] made to the Invoice was the words at the top, “Not paid 8/13/14," which Ms [redacted] initialed The charges on this Invoice are standard charges for performing a water line reroute Our technicians are highly skilled plumbing technicians with many years of experience, working under very difficult conditions This particular technician gets very high compliments on a regular basis for his detailed descriptions and clarity concerning the work to be done To call him a liar and a crook is reprehensible He performed plumbing repairs as requested and stole nothing from Ms [redacted] ***; in fact, she is being considered for theft of services for failure to pay when services were delivered Ms [redacted] later called our Office and complained; she said that she was unable to read the Invoice [redacted] listened to her complaints, and asked when she would be able to pay for the work She stated that she would not be able to pay until September 1st, when she was paid Because she had stated that she could not read the Invoice, he had a copy typed for her and mailed it to her There was no mention at this time that she would not pay the full amount [redacted] called her again after September 1st, approximately on or about the 5th of September, and asked about payment At that time, she stated that she had already sent payment In fact, she mailed a check for $ This is unacceptable Ms [redacted] received plumbing services (a foot water line reroute) in the amount of $2, She was able to use a coupon for a $discount We expect payment for the full amount due of $2, Ms [redacted] may “believe” the only amount owed by her to Texas Plumbing Diagnostics is $852, but she signed our Invoice and agreed the charges of $2,were satisfactory We are sorry she now feels she does not understand the value of the work performed at her home If she was unclear about the work, she did not display any concerns before scheduling the water line reroute to be performed Another possible area of concern: Apprentice [redacted] Ross wrote two notes regarding insurance coverage, or lack thereof These notes (a sticky note attached to Invoice No [redacted] and a written note referencing both Invoice Noand ***) are also attached to this correspondence Please note that, on the sticky note, [redacted] wrote that Ms [redacted] “claims her insurance is responsible for payment.” [redacted] and [redacted] both attest that [redacted] talked to the insurance adjustor for Ms [redacted] on August 8th, and the agent said that labor charges would not be covered The agent, Dan Smith, whose contact information is on the attached note, stated that the call was being recorded, so you should be able to verify this information with him Agent Smith also spoke with Ms [redacted] ***, so she should have understood that the work was not covered, but she may have been putting us off in hopes that she could get some money from insurance As stated previously, Ms [redacted] received exactly the work described on Invoice No***, with two technicians working all day long to perform a water line reroute for her We expect to be paid in full The amount due is $2, Thank you, [redacted] Texas Plumbing Diagnostics, Inc
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: Texas Plumbing Diagnostics L.L.C failed to respond to the fradulent illegal action on Journeyman plumber *** *** when he erased part of invoice after I signed it on 8/14/In addition to all the unnecessary extra work in search of a leak tha never was found just to charge more money, and his disrespectful, abussive behavior toward a retired senior citizen
I talked to Mr*** on 8/16/and complained about Mr***I never scheduled/requested appointments, and never received a respond concerning my complain
I hope to find a reasonable solution to this problem, if not I will be forced to report TPD to the Office of the Attorney General and seek legal advice
Regards,
*** ** ** ***
This is my second response to Complaint No. [redacted]. I will refer to work performed by Texas Plumbing Diagnostics, Inc.’s technicians, and recorded on Invoice No. [redacted], dated August 13, 2014.
I am attaching a copy of the above referenced Invoice. You will notice that Ms. [redacted]’s signature is on the line authorizing the work, acknowledging responsibility for the work and stated charges, as well as the line at the bottom, where she signed that she was 100% satisfied with the work, stated charges were satisfactory, and the work area was left in good condition.
Our technicians arrived on site at 9:30 a.m. Ms. [redacted] complains that they arrived late; however, my technician informs me that they were trying to contact her with no result, and later learned that Ms. [redacted] had left her phone in her car. The technicians were, in fact, eager to get an early start, as they knew they would be performing a water line reroute through the attic. They worked on site until 5:45 p.m. on August 13th.
Our technician, [redacted], related to me that he went over the pricing beforehand. He told Ms. [redacted] that, if she wanted to save money, they could run the water lines exposed. He said that it would be more expensive to run them through the wall. She was very clear that she wanted the lines run through the wall to conceal them.
Ms. [redacted] states that [redacted] gave her an illegible description of the job that she could hardly read. At this point, if she had questions concerning the description, or the charges, she could have asked him to go over it until she did understand.
The two technicians who were on this job are the two quietest technicians that I have. [redacted], the Apprentice, states that, even though [redacted] raised his voice to be heard, “that was short of a yell.” He stated that, “the customer was exclaiming loudly most of the time.” His description of the conversation was that it was, “SLIGHTLY (his emphasis) heated,” and that, “both sides were upset.”
As for Ms. [redacted]’s claim, “I thought he was going to hit me,” [redacted] says that neither Ms. [redacted] nor [redacted] appeared at any time to be physically aggressive in any way. [redacted] states, “Never once was I aggressive.”
Ms. [redacted] states that [redacted] used White Out on the Invoice after she signed it, but I can not discern any place on Invoice No. [redacted] where White Out was used. He did rewrite over his writing, which is not unusual, especially if a customer complains that he or she cannot read the technician’s writing. You are more than welcome to inspect this Invoice for yourself, to see if you observe any area that may have been altered. Generally, when you hold a document up to the light, any area touched by White Out will be obvious. Both [redacted] and I have checked the document for any corrections by White Out, and found none.
The only addition [redacted] made to the Invoice was the words at the top, “Not paid 8/13/14," which Ms. [redacted] initialed.
The charges on this Invoice are standard charges for performing a water line reroute. Our technicians are highly skilled plumbing technicians with many years of experience, working under very difficult conditions. This particular technician gets very high compliments on a regular basis for his detailed descriptions and clarity concerning the work to be done. To call him a liar and a crook is reprehensible. He performed plumbing repairs as requested and stole nothing from Ms. [redacted]; in fact, she is being considered for theft of services for failure to pay when services were delivered.
Ms. [redacted] later called our Office and complained; she said that she was unable to read the Invoice. [redacted] listened to her complaints, and asked when she would be able to pay for the work. She stated that she would not be able to pay until September 1st, when she was paid. Because she had stated that she could not read the Invoice, he had a copy typed for her and mailed it to her. There was no mention at this time that she would not pay the full amount.
[redacted] called her again after September 1st, approximately on or about the 5th of September, and asked about payment. At that time, she stated that she had already sent payment. In fact, she mailed a check for $852. This is unacceptable. Ms. [redacted] received plumbing services (a 40 foot water line reroute) in the amount of $2,377. She was able to use a coupon for a $25 discount. We expect payment for the full amount due of $2,352.
Ms. [redacted] may “believe” the only amount owed by her to Texas Plumbing Diagnostics is $852, but she signed our Invoice and agreed the charges of $2,352 were satisfactory. We are sorry she now feels she does not understand the value of the work performed at her home. If she was unclear about the work, she did not display any concerns before scheduling the water line reroute to be performed.
Another possible area of concern: Apprentice [redacted] Ross wrote two notes regarding insurance coverage, or lack thereof. These notes (a sticky note attached to Invoice No. [redacted] and a written note referencing both Invoice No. 5859 and [redacted]) are also attached to this correspondence. Please note that, on the sticky note, [redacted] wrote that Ms. [redacted] “claims her insurance is responsible for payment.” [redacted] and [redacted] both attest that [redacted] talked to the insurance adjustor for Ms. [redacted] on August 8th, and the agent said that labor charges would not be covered. The agent, Dan Smith, whose contact information is on the attached note, stated that the call was being recorded, so you should be able to verify this information with him. Agent Smith also spoke with Ms. [redacted], so she should have understood that the work was not covered, but she may have been putting us off in hopes that she could get some money from insurance.
As stated previously, Ms. [redacted] received exactly the work described on Invoice No. [redacted], with two technicians working all day long to perform a water line reroute for her. We expect to be paid in full. The amount due is $2,352.
Regarding the
above complaint, this customer was told that we would perform further hydrostatic pinpointing for free after we repaired the first break. Ms. [redacted] hired someone else to perform
the repairs; therefore, it would be unreasonable to expect us to perform
further hydrostatic pinpointing...
for free, so that she, presumably, could hire
someone else to perform repairs for her again.As you can see by the attached Invoices, our technician was at [redacted] for over three hours (arrived at 9:00, left at 12:15) on the first
visit (Inv. 8114). Our usual charge for Hydrostatic Pinpointing is $249 per
hour, so she clearly already received a discount for services. I'm not certain
why she feels that we should do further work for free. We visited the site
again to confirm our pinpointing, and our technician reiterated our agreement
to perform hydrostatic testing without additional charges was based on us performing
the repair work.Please note that
Ms. [redacted] signed both Invoices, so she understood that additional pinpointing
would not be provided for free, since she did not use us to perform the work.
She also signed to indicate that she was "100% satisified" with the
work - on both invoices.I am attaching
copies of both Invoices, along with our technician's write-up on the job.Please contact
our Office if you wish to discuss this further, or require any further
information.
We are within our rights to file a Theft of Service report with the Police, and have been considering this since the job was performed and Ms. [redacted] refused to pay; we do not wish to file charges, but we feel that Ms. [redacted] is not holding to her agreement to pay for services...
rendered.
Two of our technicians worked on this job. A Journeyman plumber, [redacted], was accompanied by an Apprentice, [redacted]. They arrived at 9:15 a.m. on the 8th, and were there on site till 5:00 p.m.
I am attaching a copy of Invoice No. [redacted], which shows the work performed on August 8th. Please note that Ms. [redacted] signed both an authorization for the work and acknowledged responsibility for the work and stated charges.
When customers have a water line leak, we typically find the manifold (where the water enters the house, then is split to several fixtures) by cutting a hole in the wall. We know where manifolds should be located, but they are not always where we expect them to be, and there are times when we do have to cut more than one access hole to find the manifold. After locating the manifold, we then perform diagnostics on the manifold to locate the leaking line. At that point, we cap off the leaking line. Apparently, Ms. [redacted] thought that this "fixed the problem." However, when a line is capped off, the fixture/s it formerly served is/are no longer receiving water. A water line reroute is required to restore service to the affected fixture/s.
Ms. [redacted] is disturbed that holes were cut in her wall. Please notice that "cut access hole, no repair included," is written on the Invoice. Also, please note that, on page 2 of the Invoice (also attached herewith), it is clearly stated, "TPD assumes no liability for walls, cabinets, countertops or flooring damaged during removal, repair, or installation of plumbing fixtures." Ms. [redacted] signed her acceptance of all terms. Beside the signature line is the statement, "Please see reverse side for additional terms." So, the fact that we do not repair access holes was stated both on the front and back of this Invoice. Ms. [redacted] was also given a copy of Invoice No. [redacted], which she was free to read at her leisure, and before she held the second appointment to have the reroute performed. She never called our Office with any questions or comments after having leak detection and diagnostics performed on August 8th and receiving a copy of the Invoice. She did call and speak with [redacted] to schedule a second appointment for repairs. She had no complaints or questions, and expressed no problem with our work or the explanation on Invoice No. [redacted]. She seemed to understand everything, and wanted to schedule the reroute. Our schedule book shows she requested a 40 ft reroute at that time.
The technician also discounted the charge for both the manifold diagnostics and the second access hole.
Our technicians are not authorized to tell customers that they will work for $75 an hour. We could not stay in business charging this rate, and our technicians are all well aware of this. They have all been given a base rate that we must receive for any hourly work. In fact, the charges on Invoice No. [redacted] clearly show a $700 charge for leak detection.
Further details will follow.
Thank you,
This is my second response to Complaint No [redacted] I will refer to work performed by Texas Plumbing Diagnostics, Inc.’s technicians, and recorded on Invoice No***, dated August 13, I am attaching a copy of the above referenced Invoice You will notice that Ms [redacted] ***’s signature is on the line authorizing the work, acknowledging responsibility for the work and stated charges, as well as the line at the bottom, where she signed that she was 100% satisfied with the work, stated charges were satisfactory, and the work area was left in good condition Our technicians arrived on site at 9:a.m Ms [redacted] complains that they arrived late; however, my technician informs me that they were trying to contact her with no result, and later learned that Ms [redacted] had left her phone in her car The technicians were, in fact, eager to get an early start, as they knew they would be performing a water line reroute through the attic They worked on site until 5:p.mon August 13th Our technician, [redacted] ***, related to me that he went over the pricing beforehand He told Ms [redacted] that, if she wanted to save money, they could run the water lines exposed He said that it would be more expensive to run them through the wall She was very clear that she wanted the lines run through the wall to conceal them Ms [redacted] states that [redacted] gave her an illegible description of the job that she could hardly read At this point, if she had questions concerning the description, or the charges, she could have asked him to go over it until she did understand The two technicians who were on this job are the two quietest technicians that I have ***, the Apprentice, states that, even though [redacted] raised his voice to be heard, “that was short of a yell.” He stated that, “the customer was exclaiming loudly most of the time.” His description of the conversation was that it was, “SLIGHTLY (his emphasis) heated,” and that, “both sides were upset.” As for Ms [redacted] ***’s claim, “I thought he was going to hit me,” [redacted] says that neither Ms [redacted] nor [redacted] appeared at any time to be physically aggressive in any way [redacted] states, “Never once was I aggressive.” Ms [redacted] states that [redacted] used White Out on the Invoice after she signed it, but I can not discern any place on Invoice No [redacted] where White Out was used He did rewrite over his writing, which is not unusual, especially if a customer complains that he or she cannot read the technician’s writing You are more than welcome to inspect this Invoice for yourself, to see if you observe any area that may have been altered Generally, when you hold a document up to the light, any area touched by White Out will be obvious Both [redacted] and I have checked the document for any corrections by White Out, and found none The only addition [redacted] made to the Invoice was the words at the top, “Not paid 8/13/14," which Ms [redacted] initialed The charges on this Invoice are standard charges for performing a water line reroute Our technicians are highly skilled plumbing technicians with many years of experience, working under very difficult conditions This particular technician gets very high compliments on a regular basis for his detailed descriptions and clarity concerning the work to be done To call him a liar and a crook is reprehensible He performed plumbing repairs as requested and stole nothing from Ms [redacted] ***; in fact, she is being considered for theft of services for failure to pay when services were delivered Ms [redacted] later called our Office and complained; she said that she was unable to read the Invoice [redacted] listened to her complaints, and asked when she would be able to pay for the work She stated that she would not be able to pay until September 1st, when she was paid Because she had stated that she could not read the Invoice, he had a copy typed for her and mailed it to her There was no mention at this time that she would not pay the full amount [redacted] called her again after September 1st, approximately on or about the 5th of September, and asked about payment At that time, she stated that she had already sent payment In fact, she mailed a check for $ This is unacceptable Ms [redacted] received plumbing services (a foot water line reroute) in the amount of $2, She was able to use a coupon for a $discount We expect payment for the full amount due of $2, Ms [redacted] may “believe” the only amount owed by her to Texas Plumbing Diagnostics is $852, but she signed our Invoice and agreed the charges of $2,were satisfactory We are sorry she now feels she does not understand the value of the work performed at her home If she was unclear about the work, she did not display any concerns before scheduling the water line reroute to be performed Another possible area of concern: Apprentice [redacted] Ross wrote two notes regarding insurance coverage, or lack thereof These notes (a sticky note attached to Invoice No [redacted] and a written note referencing both Invoice Noand ***) are also attached to this correspondence Please note that, on the sticky note, [redacted] wrote that Ms [redacted] “claims her insurance is responsible for payment.” [redacted] and [redacted] both attest that [redacted] talked to the insurance adjustor for Ms [redacted] on August 8th, and the agent said that labor charges would not be covered The agent, Dan Smith, whose contact information is on the attached note, stated that the call was being recorded, so you should be able to verify this information with him Agent Smith also spoke with Ms [redacted] ***, so she should have understood that the work was not covered, but she may have been putting us off in hopes that she could get some money from insurance As stated previously, Ms [redacted] received exactly the work described on Invoice No***, with two technicians working all day long to perform a water line reroute for her We expect to be paid in full The amount due is $2, Thank you, [redacted] Texas Plumbing Diagnostics, Inc
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: Texas Plumbing Diagnostics L.L.C failed to respond to the fradulent illegal action on Journeyman plumber *** *** when he erased part of invoice after I signed it on 8/14/In addition to all the unnecessary extra work in search of a leak tha never was found just to charge more money, and his disrespectful, abussive behavior toward a retired senior citizen
I talked to Mr*** on 8/16/and complained about Mr***I never scheduled/requested appointments, and never received a respond concerning my complain
I hope to find a reasonable solution to this problem, if not I will be forced to report TPD to the Office of the Attorney General and seek legal advice
Regards,
*** ** ** ***
This is my second response to Complaint No. [redacted]. I will refer to work performed by Texas Plumbing Diagnostics, Inc.’s technicians, and recorded on Invoice No. [redacted], dated August 13, 2014.
I am attaching a copy of the above referenced Invoice. You will notice that Ms. [redacted]’s signature is on the line authorizing the work, acknowledging responsibility for the work and stated charges, as well as the line at the bottom, where she signed that she was 100% satisfied with the work, stated charges were satisfactory, and the work area was left in good condition.
Our technicians arrived on site at 9:30 a.m. Ms. [redacted] complains that they arrived late; however, my technician informs me that they were trying to contact her with no result, and later learned that Ms. [redacted] had left her phone in her car. The technicians were, in fact, eager to get an early start, as they knew they would be performing a water line reroute through the attic. They worked on site until 5:45 p.m. on August 13th.
Our technician, [redacted], related to me that he went over the pricing beforehand. He told Ms. [redacted] that, if she wanted to save money, they could run the water lines exposed. He said that it would be more expensive to run them through the wall. She was very clear that she wanted the lines run through the wall to conceal them.
Ms. [redacted] states that [redacted] gave her an illegible description of the job that she could hardly read. At this point, if she had questions concerning the description, or the charges, she could have asked him to go over it until she did understand.
The two technicians who were on this job are the two quietest technicians that I have. [redacted], the Apprentice, states that, even though [redacted] raised his voice to be heard, “that was short of a yell.” He stated that, “the customer was exclaiming loudly most of the time.” His description of the conversation was that it was, “SLIGHTLY (his emphasis) heated,” and that, “both sides were upset.”
As for Ms. [redacted]’s claim, “I thought he was going to hit me,” [redacted] says that neither Ms. [redacted] nor [redacted] appeared at any time to be physically aggressive in any way. [redacted] states, “Never once was I aggressive.”
Ms. [redacted] states that [redacted] used White Out on the Invoice after she signed it, but I can not discern any place on Invoice No. [redacted] where White Out was used. He did rewrite over his writing, which is not unusual, especially if a customer complains that he or she cannot read the technician’s writing. You are more than welcome to inspect this Invoice for yourself, to see if you observe any area that may have been altered. Generally, when you hold a document up to the light, any area touched by White Out will be obvious. Both [redacted] and I have checked the document for any corrections by White Out, and found none.
The only addition [redacted] made to the Invoice was the words at the top, “Not paid 8/13/14," which Ms. [redacted] initialed.
The charges on this Invoice are standard charges for performing a water line reroute. Our technicians are highly skilled plumbing technicians with many years of experience, working under very difficult conditions. This particular technician gets very high compliments on a regular basis for his detailed descriptions and clarity concerning the work to be done. To call him a liar and a crook is reprehensible. He performed plumbing repairs as requested and stole nothing from Ms. [redacted]; in fact, she is being considered for theft of services for failure to pay when services were delivered.
Ms. [redacted] later called our Office and complained; she said that she was unable to read the Invoice. [redacted] listened to her complaints, and asked when she would be able to pay for the work. She stated that she would not be able to pay until September 1st, when she was paid. Because she had stated that she could not read the Invoice, he had a copy typed for her and mailed it to her. There was no mention at this time that she would not pay the full amount.
[redacted] called her again after September 1st, approximately on or about the 5th of September, and asked about payment. At that time, she stated that she had already sent payment. In fact, she mailed a check for $852. This is unacceptable. Ms. [redacted] received plumbing services (a 40 foot water line reroute) in the amount of $2,377. She was able to use a coupon for a $25 discount. We expect payment for the full amount due of $2,352.
Ms. [redacted] may “believe” the only amount owed by her to Texas Plumbing Diagnostics is $852, but she signed our Invoice and agreed the charges of $2,352 were satisfactory. We are sorry she now feels she does not understand the value of the work performed at her home. If she was unclear about the work, she did not display any concerns before scheduling the water line reroute to be performed.
Another possible area of concern: Apprentice [redacted] Ross wrote two notes regarding insurance coverage, or lack thereof. These notes (a sticky note attached to Invoice No. [redacted] and a written note referencing both Invoice No. 5859 and [redacted]) are also attached to this correspondence. Please note that, on the sticky note, [redacted] wrote that Ms. [redacted] “claims her insurance is responsible for payment.” [redacted] and [redacted] both attest that [redacted] talked to the insurance adjustor for Ms. [redacted] on August 8th, and the agent said that labor charges would not be covered. The agent, Dan Smith, whose contact information is on the attached note, stated that the call was being recorded, so you should be able to verify this information with him. Agent Smith also spoke with Ms. [redacted], so she should have understood that the work was not covered, but she may have been putting us off in hopes that she could get some money from insurance.
As stated previously, Ms. [redacted] received exactly the work described on Invoice No. [redacted], with two technicians working all day long to perform a water line reroute for her. We expect to be paid in full. The amount due is $2,352.
Thank you,
[redacted]
Texas Plumbing Diagnostics, Inc.
Regarding the
above complaint, this customer was told that we would perform further hydrostatic pinpointing for free after we repaired the first break. Ms. [redacted] hired someone else to perform
the repairs; therefore, it would be unreasonable to expect us to perform
further hydrostatic pinpointing...
for free, so that she, presumably, could hire
someone else to perform repairs for her again.As you can see by the attached Invoices, our technician was at [redacted] for over three hours (arrived at 9:00, left at 12:15) on the first
visit (Inv. 8114). Our usual charge for Hydrostatic Pinpointing is $249 per
hour, so she clearly already received a discount for services. I'm not certain
why she feels that we should do further work for free. We visited the site
again to confirm our pinpointing, and our technician reiterated our agreement
to perform hydrostatic testing without additional charges was based on us performing
the repair work.Please note that
Ms. [redacted] signed both Invoices, so she understood that additional pinpointing
would not be provided for free, since she did not use us to perform the work.
She also signed to indicate that she was "100% satisified" with the
work - on both invoices.I am attaching
copies of both Invoices, along with our technician's write-up on the job.Please contact
our Office if you wish to discuss this further, or require any further
information.
We are within our rights to file a Theft of Service report with the Police, and have been considering this since the job was performed and Ms. [redacted] refused to pay; we do not wish to file charges, but we feel that Ms. [redacted] is not holding to her agreement to pay for services...
rendered.
Two of our technicians worked on this job. A Journeyman plumber, [redacted], was accompanied by an Apprentice, [redacted]. They arrived at 9:15 a.m. on the 8th, and were there on site till 5:00 p.m.
I am attaching a copy of Invoice No. [redacted], which shows the work performed on August 8th. Please note that Ms. [redacted] signed both an authorization for the work and acknowledged responsibility for the work and stated charges.
When customers have a water line leak, we typically find the manifold (where the water enters the house, then is split to several fixtures) by cutting a hole in the wall. We know where manifolds should be located, but they are not always where we expect them to be, and there are times when we do have to cut more than one access hole to find the manifold. After locating the manifold, we then perform diagnostics on the manifold to locate the leaking line. At that point, we cap off the leaking line. Apparently, Ms. [redacted] thought that this "fixed the problem." However, when a line is capped off, the fixture/s it formerly served is/are no longer receiving water. A water line reroute is required to restore service to the affected fixture/s.
Ms. [redacted] is disturbed that holes were cut in her wall. Please notice that "cut access hole, no repair included," is written on the Invoice. Also, please note that, on page 2 of the Invoice (also attached herewith), it is clearly stated, "TPD assumes no liability for walls, cabinets, countertops or flooring damaged during removal, repair, or installation of plumbing fixtures." Ms. [redacted] signed her acceptance of all terms. Beside the signature line is the statement, "Please see reverse side for additional terms." So, the fact that we do not repair access holes was stated both on the front and back of this Invoice. Ms. [redacted] was also given a copy of Invoice No. [redacted], which she was free to read at her leisure, and before she held the second appointment to have the reroute performed. She never called our Office with any questions or comments after having leak detection and diagnostics performed on August 8th and receiving a copy of the Invoice. She did call and speak with [redacted] to schedule a second appointment for repairs. She had no complaints or questions, and expressed no problem with our work or the explanation on Invoice No. [redacted]. She seemed to understand everything, and wanted to schedule the reroute. Our schedule book shows she requested a 40 ft reroute at that time.
The technician also discounted the charge for both the manifold diagnostics and the second access hole.
Our technicians are not authorized to tell customers that they will work for $75 an hour. We could not stay in business charging this rate, and our technicians are all well aware of this. They have all been given a base rate that we must receive for any hourly work. In fact, the charges on Invoice No. [redacted] clearly show a $700 charge for leak detection.
Further details will follow.
Thank you,