Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. As I have explained it in my previous response, Mr. [redacted] did not give any evidence that $539 of items he returned to the store was from the purchase he made for other projects. I do have the written proof that $539 of items he returned was from the purchase I paid for, and I never got the money from him after he returned the items. Please see my previous email for details. Thank you.
Regards,
[redacted]
In response to the allegation of Ms [redacted] that $539 is owed her from a roofing job that my company performed in August of 2014 at [redacted], WI, I will attempt to explain the circumstances surrounding her confusion in this matter. Because she did not have the cash to cover the cost of the materials prior to the start of the job, the roofing materials were purchased at Menards on her credit card. In order for my company to participate in the Contractor Rebate Program, $1 was charged to the Company credit card. It has been customary for the contractor to receive credit for purchases, even if the customer pays for the material. We picked up and delivered the material from Menards to the worksite free of charge to Ms **.
I believe one source of Ms. [redacted] confusion is that on that day, I purchased materials for another job on my company card. She may have considered that all materials purchased that day related to her project. I tried to explain this to her, but perhaps due to language difficulties, she did not appear to comprehend what I was saying. She assumed that all my transactions that day were related to her roofing project and that $539 was owed her, when, in reality, it was not.The fact that she was not overcharged for materials is verifiable. One need only measure the dimensions of the roof, calculate the amount of roofing and supply needed for the job, and compare that to what she paid for materials. Also, with the records from Menards, and my review of the expenses for this job with the Menards representative, we can confirm that the money which Ms ** spent matched what was used. I specifically mentioned this to her, but to no avail.It was not my intention to conc**de a phone conversation with Ms. ** rudely, however, we were making no progress in gaining the least bit of understanding that she was not owed any money. Also of note is her fai**re to take into account the numerous va**e added services which were inc**ded in this job such as completion of the job without a down payment on labor, quality workmanship, a one year warranty, and the return of the leftover material with full credit being given her. Furthermore, her apparent lack of communication with the renter about the roofing job led to a great deal of harassment and aggravation for my team by that renter when we were at the worksite.
It is regrettable when a customer is dissatisfied with any aspect of a project, but despite my best efforts to assure her that all transactions were fully disclosed and she was not overcharged, I have been unsuccessful in reaching any understanding.It is my intention to continue to provide quality services to my customers and to treat everyone honestly and fairly.Sincerely,[redacted]Trash Out Pros, LLC
It appears that Ms. ** continues to maintain that money is owed her from a roofing job that my team performed on August 9, 2014. This is the same complaint that I responded to on August 8, 2015. My actions to address the customer's complaints have inc**ded a review of my labor, materials and expenditures on this project, inc**ding a consultation with the Menards representative, and a comparison to what was billed to the client. This was explained to Ms ** on numerous occasions, but to no avail. It appears that the confusion rests with the fact that the receipt for materials inc**des my purchase of materials for other projects, none of which were charged to this client. My position is supported both by the receipt of purchase and by a physical comparison of the dimensions of the roof compared to what she was charged for materials. Despite numerous attempts to explain the situation, the client remains convinced that she was overcharged. Evidently my explanations were not satisfactory and any language barrier rests with my inability to explain things any more clearly, not anything related to the client as she implies. No discrimination was ever stated or implied. Also, it is not customary for workers to contact a tenant. This was needed in order for us to have access to an urban property with limited parking. We regret any inconvenience to the tenant, but any contractor would expect that notification of the tenant was handled by the property owner.
As before, this client has been treated with the utmost respect on all occasions and has received numerous explanations of the bill. All of this has not been successful in resolving her complaint. Because she did not receive satisfaction from Revdex.com, she has contacted another agency. This leaves me with no choice but to obtain legal representation which will cost us both significantly more than the disputed $539.
Thank you for your attention to this ongoing complaint. As before, it is the goal of my company to deliver quality services, to be ethical in all our business dealings, and treat all customers honestly, respectfully, and fairly.[redacted] - Owner
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. As I have explained it in my previous response, Mr. [redacted] did not give any evidence that $539 of items he returned to the store was from the purchase he made for other projects. I do have the written proof that $539 of items he returned was from the purchase I paid for, and I never got the money from him after he returned the items. Please see my previous email for details. Thank you.
Regards,
[redacted]
In response to the allegation of Ms [redacted] that $539 is owed her from a roofing job that my company performed in August of 2014 at [redacted], WI, I will attempt to explain the circumstances surrounding her confusion in this matter. Because she did not have the cash to cover the cost of the materials prior to the start of the job, the roofing materials were purchased at Menards on her credit card. In order for my company to participate in the Contractor Rebate Program, $1 was charged to the Company credit card. It has been customary for the contractor to receive credit for purchases, even if the customer pays for the material. We picked up and delivered the material from Menards to the worksite free of charge to Ms **.
I believe one source of Ms. [redacted] confusion is that on that day, I purchased materials for another job on my company card. She may have considered that all materials purchased that day related to her project. I tried to explain this to her, but perhaps due to language difficulties, she did not appear to comprehend what I was saying. She assumed that all my transactions that day were related to her roofing project and that $539 was owed her, when, in reality, it was not.The fact that she was not overcharged for materials is verifiable. One need only measure the dimensions of the roof, calculate the amount of roofing and supply needed for the job, and compare that to what she paid for materials. Also, with the records from Menards, and my review of the expenses for this job with the Menards representative, we can confirm that the money which Ms ** spent matched what was used. I specifically mentioned this to her, but to no avail.It was not my intention to conc**de a phone conversation with Ms. ** rudely, however, we were making no progress in gaining the least bit of understanding that she was not owed any money. Also of note is her fai**re to take into account the numerous va**e added services which were inc**ded in this job such as completion of the job without a down payment on labor, quality workmanship, a one year warranty, and the return of the leftover material with full credit being given her. Furthermore, her apparent lack of communication with the renter about the roofing job led to a great deal of harassment and aggravation for my team by that renter when we were at the worksite.
It is regrettable when a customer is dissatisfied with any aspect of a project, but despite my best efforts to assure her that all transactions were fully disclosed and she was not overcharged, I have been unsuccessful in reaching any understanding.It is my intention to continue to provide quality services to my customers and to treat everyone honestly and fairly.Sincerely,[redacted]Trash Out Pros, LLC
It appears that Ms. ** continues to maintain that money is owed her from a roofing job that my team performed on August 9, 2014. This is the same complaint that I responded to on August 8, 2015. My actions to address the customer's complaints have inc**ded a review of my labor, materials and expenditures on this project, inc**ding a consultation with the Menards representative, and a comparison to what was billed to the client. This was explained to Ms ** on numerous occasions, but to no avail. It appears that the confusion rests with the fact that the receipt for materials inc**des my purchase of materials for other projects, none of which were charged to this client. My position is supported both by the receipt of purchase and by a physical comparison of the dimensions of the roof compared to what she was charged for materials. Despite numerous attempts to explain the situation, the client remains convinced that she was overcharged. Evidently my explanations were not satisfactory and any language barrier rests with my inability to explain things any more clearly, not anything related to the client as she implies. No discrimination was ever stated or implied. Also, it is not customary for workers to contact a tenant. This was needed in order for us to have access to an urban property with limited parking. We regret any inconvenience to the tenant, but any contractor would expect that notification of the tenant was handled by the property owner.
As before, this client has been treated with the utmost respect on all occasions and has received numerous explanations of the bill. All of this has not been successful in resolving her complaint. Because she did not receive satisfaction from Revdex.com, she has contacted another agency. This leaves me with no choice but to obtain legal representation which will cost us both significantly more than the disputed $539.
Thank you for your attention to this ongoing complaint. As before, it is the goal of my company to deliver quality services, to be ethical in all our business dealings, and treat all customers honestly, respectfully, and fairly.[redacted] - Owner