The Fire Place Store & More LLC

The initial contact was made by the tenant (not the claimant) requesting gas logs.At the time of my scheduled appointment, no one except contractors were there The landlord/owner or tenant was not available I looked at the fireplace and noticed that gas logs cannot be put in a fireplace with closed doors I also checked the interior to see if an insert would fit and it would not I noticed what appeared to be water damage to drywall around the wood fireplace The wood framing was exposed enough to notice the wood framing was not to code I proceeded to research what is called a zero clearance wood fireplace, which would require new framing in the area where the unit would be installed.In my opinion, it was not just the water damage that effected the fireplace, but from a safety and code perspective the unit needed to be replaced The interior of the fireplace had been used to the extreme At no time did I tell or advise the tenant to tear out the unit It was very premature to rip it out before clarification was made by insurance company.The claimant states the insurance representative and myself ambushed her, when in fact, I was the one ambushedThe representative called me and then very quickly asked if I mind if she was brought into the conversation.The claimant has slandered me and created a defamation of character of me and my company We will not take these accusations lightly I have not met or spoke to the owner/landlord, I know his name, but I have had no contact with him I will agree to work with the property owner/landlord to relieve this situation only if said claimant retracts and apologizes to me for accusations about me and my company

The initial contact was made by the tenant (not the claimant) requesting gas logs.At the time of my scheduled appointment, no one except contractors were there. The landlord/owner or tenant was not available. I looked at the fireplace and noticed that gas logs cannot be put in a
fireplace with closed doors. I also checked the interior to see if an insert would fit and it would not. I noticed what appeared to be water damage to drywall around the wood fireplace. The wood framing was exposed enough to notice the wood framing was not to code. I proceeded to research what is called a zero clearance wood fireplace, which would require new framing in the area where the unit would be installed.In my opinion, it was not just the water damage that effected the fireplace, but from a safety and code perspective the unit needed to be replaced. The interior of the fireplace had been used to the extreme. At no time did I tell or advise the tenant to tear out the unit. It was very premature to rip it out before clarification was made by insurance company.The claimant states the insurance representative and myself ambushed her, when in fact, I was the one ambushedThe representative called me and then very quickly asked if I mind if she was brought into the conversation.The claimant has slandered me and created a defamation of character of me and my company. We will not take these accusations lightly. I have not met or spoke to the owner/landlord, I know his name, but I have had no contact with him. I will agree to work with the property owner/landlord to relieve this situation only if said claimant retracts and apologizes to me for accusations about me and my company

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
Mr*** is NOT telling the truth.I was hire by the owner to oversee the repairs of this homeThe tenant, who is purchasing this home CFD was instructed by me to contact The Fireplace Store for an evaluation of any water damage AND was VERY present when Mr*** came to the appointment.as the first document shows there was no mention of "gas logs" as the tenant burns WOOD, regardless of it's dual purposeHad 'gas logs' been discussed wouldn't this document quote include it? The 2nd document is his statement which clearly states Water Damage - no mention of pre-existing issues or 'gas logs'.Mr*** is on record with the insurance stating there was no water damage And yet he states in his response to the Revdex.com that "it was not just the "WATER DAMAGE"...The policy covers pre-existing issues after the fire but Mr***'s statement of no water damage has put the fireplace replacement in questionit is not right or good business practice to write one statement and tell and insurance something opposite!It is not slander or defamation of character when it is in FACT the TRUTH and the documentation supports it.Mr*** needs to set this right with the insurance so a fireplace may be installed
Sincerely,
*** ***