The Shutter Guy LLC

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 7, 2015/12/21) */ Contact Name and Title: [redacted] ceo Contact Phone: XXXXXXXXX Contact Email: ***@stlshutterguy.com The customers complaint about product being delayed is accurate99% of our product is American made1% of our product (real wood) is foreign basedOur supplier for our Real wood product is in ChinaSupplier changed their product line around and this particular clients job was effected by itWe never took the deposit for the jobWe never ran the customers credit card for any amounts for this jobThe client had called us several times for an update to which we did not have answers for themChina was being very discreet about the changes to their program and we only found out about them from another independent dealer like myself When I spoke to [redacted] on 12/1/I did say that I wanted to come out to show him a new color deckI had found a supplier in the U.Sthat was going to produce the job quickly but we needed to see if the new suppliers deck was a match to the China's vendor deckWe didn't want to have any issues going forward The clients comment about going to [redacted] to complain is what I have an issue withThe [redacted] have been a direct client of mine for previous ordersBoth of which were installed without any concernsThe first install was in December and the second install was in June both of which they were satisfied with

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2015/12/21) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted] ceo
Contact Phone: XXXXXXXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@stlshutterguy.com
The customers complaint about product being delayed is accurate. 99% of our product is American made. 1% of our product (real wood) is...

foreign based. Our supplier for our Real wood product is in China. Supplier changed their product line around and this particular clients job was effected by it. We never took the deposit for the job. We never ran the customers credit card for any amounts for this job. The client had called us several times for an update to which we did not have answers for them. China was being very discreet about the changes to their program and we only found out about them from another independent dealer like myself.
When I spoke to [redacted] on 12/1/15 I did say that I wanted to come out to show him a new color deck. I had found a supplier in the U.S. that was going to produce the job quickly but we needed to see if the new suppliers deck was a match to the China's vendor deck. We didn't want to have any issues going forward.
The clients comment about going to [redacted] to complain is what I have an issue with. The [redacted] have been a direct client of mine for 2 previous orders. Both of which were installed without any concerns. The first install was in December 2011 and the second install was in June 2012 both of which they were satisfied with.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/10/15) */
We have reviewed our records on this matter and the following is our response.
Client's original order was measured on 8/21/13, purchased on 8/29/13 and installed on 9/26/13.Per clients admission,she has no problem with first order. Window...

openings ordered were for a front window(aprox 40x74) and a back window (aprox 75x43). First order was measured by Tech KB.
Client second order was measured on 2/18/15, purchased on 3/9/15 and installed on 4/13/15. Window openings ordered were an up front window (aprox 39x74) a back window (aprox 75x43, this is the one in question per client) a landing window (aprox 46x53)and a kitchen window (aprox 36x35). Second order was measured by tech NF.
The clients noted issue (which we've been aware of since their original call to us on 4/14/15 at 1:05pm, the day after the install) is that the swing of the panels for the second order in the "back" window is not the same as the swing of the panels from her first order for a similar window placed 1.5 years earlier.
The reason for the swing difference is that the client had a t.v. on a dresser in the back window on the second order which would interfere with the traditional swing of the panels which was chosen for a different window on the first order. In order for the panels to swing clear the t.v, our technician discussed a "bifold option" with the client and it was agreed that the a "bifold" swing application would be a better application instead of a traditional swing application.
Per our records, this was discussed with the client on the phone call from 4/14/15 when they called us to address this issue. Our notes from the call indicate that the client may have forgotten why this option was chosen, but reminded during this call. Per our call log, this call lasted 3:55 min. Matter was closed.
The next call from your client occurred on 6/1/15 at 10:56am which they left us a voice mail to state that the unit is difficult to operate due to the bifold nature. A copy of the signed contracts was mailed to your client at [redacted] Dr, [redacted] MO XXXXX on 6/2/15 along with a new quote to purchase traditional panels at a discounted price to replace her bifold panels. Never heard back from client and assumed matter to be closed.
I do show that a letter was sent to us from the client in July (date not specified) to address this again. This info was given to the original sales person whom, per notes on file, contacted the client at XXX-XXX-XXXX and left a msg.
Matter was closed.
We have both contracts for both orders on file and signed by the client accepting both order along with all of the choices and terms. Each order specifically indicates the "swing" application for every opening.
We have no problem honoring the quote in which we provided to the client on 6/2/15 to replace the panels for them.