Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below To Whom it May Concern:This letter is in response to Mrs [redacted] ’s letter on behalf of AmeriSpec dated November 19, 2015.I feel that AmeriSpec and [redacted] are continually trying to minimize AmeriSpec’s mistakeIn the documents submitted to Mrs [redacted] and [redacted] it is clearly documented by [redacted] as well as [redacted] ing that the furnace closet and furnace posed significant risk to my family, myself, and my neighbors to include, “LOSS OF LIFE.”Mrs [redacted] closes her response letter by stating, “ do not appreciate being held to an unreasonable standard.” I DID NOT SET THE STANDARD, AmeriSpec DIDI did not say or claim or make the statement that, “All of our certified inspectors are thoroughly trained and stay updated on current building codes.” AmeriSpec made that statement and set that standard on their home webpage, in BIG BOLD LETTERSApparently someone informed AmeriSpec “parent company” because the web page changed and no longer makes the statementGood for them but too lateNo one, not AmeriSpec, or [redacted] , or Great American Insurance has explained in legal terms how you can advertise and make such a claim and then not be held liable for failing to meet that standardGreat, I’ll just advertise that I am thoroughly trained and updated on fixing cars and when someone brings their car to me to fix and I miss identifying safety issues with the vehicle or documenting things which place them at risk for an accident or “loss of life” I can say, “Whoa, you are holding me to an unreasonable standard and I am not liable for missing those items because company “X” built that car and those are their manufacturers standards.” This is the same faulty logic that AmeriSpec is using.Mrs [redacted] makes a blind blanket statement that I have consulted with people who have told me that AmeriSpec is not liableShe did not identify these persons or provide any supporting documentation to this claimAs far as I know Mrs [redacted] could believe that I met with the President of the United States and he is the person who told me AmeriSpec is not liableMrs [redacted] ’s statement is a useless non-contributory statement made with not substantiating materialAs easily as she could believe and claim I met with the President of the United States, I could claim that she has consulted with numerous people to include the President who have told her that SHE IS LIABLEMrs [redacted] is correct in that I have consulted with several people; however, multiple people, including the City of [redacted] inspector and our Real Estate Agent Mr [redacted] of Berkshire Hathaway who recommended AmeriSpec have stated that AmeriSpec is liableEither way, the fact I have consulted other people and what their response is irrelevantAmeriSpec made a statement and set a standard which they failed to meetThey are using loos and manipulative language as well as distraction techniques to draw attention away from the issue in an effort to continue to support their argument that they are not liable.Mrs [redacted] is correct that building codes and building appliance installation specifications/recommendations are differentThe furnace CLOSET in which the furnace is housed is neither a system nor a component of the furnaceThe CLOSET was not up to fire/safety codesThe deficits in the closet are not a manufactures requirements or suggestions but building/fire codes set in place to keep people safe and prevent fire/explosion and/or reduce the speed of spread of fireAmeriSpec set the standard that they are trained and current on building codes they need to meet that standard.The Inspection agreement, Mrs [redacted] refers to in her response states, “We are not required to determine non-compliance with manufacturer’s specifications or applicable regulatory requirements, including but not limited to building code compliance.” As Mrs [redacted] correctly pointed out above, manufactures installation codes and BUILDING/Fire codes are not the sameThe statement in the agreement is referencing MANUFACTURER’S specifications; this is speaking to the installation requirements of an unidentified item per the manufacture’s specifications“X” item is installed and has “Y” requirements to be installed safely (for support or anchoring.) This is NOT speaking to basic fire and safety codes that say furnace closet needs to be properly fireproofed and ventilatedThe AmeriSpec agreement references ASThe ASHI SOP states, “not required to determine compliance of systems and components .” This is the same as the inspection agreementThe issues were with the furnace CLOSET, improperly vented and not to fire/safety code as documented by [redacted] ing and City of [redacted] ***The closet in which the furnace is housed is neither a system nor component of the furnaceThe furnace closet is a part of the house and the building and fire/safety codes apply to which AmeriSpec claimed to be “thoroughly trained and up to date.” AmeriSpec has not addressed how the CLOSET is a system or component of the furnace and therefore exempt from examination.Mrs [redacted] is manipulating the language in an effort to continue to support AmeriSpec’s claim that they are not liable[redacted] , in their report regarding this claim, on behalf of AmeriSpec, referenced CREIA SOPCREIA states that an inspector is to inspect: Copied from [redacted] Heating and CoolingAItems to be inspected: Heating equipment Central cooling equipment Energy source and connections Combustion air and exhaust vent systems Condensate drainage Conditioned air distribution systemsAs documented by ***, [redacted] , and the City of [redacted] Inspector AmeriSpec missed several items as required to be addressed by CREIA:Return air section under the furnace is inadequate and not sealedReturn air section is not isolated from the furnace closet that will cause air to be drawn from the furnace burner compartment area possibly causing flame roll outFurnace closet does not have upper and lower combustion air ventsCurrent exhaust system is transite asbestos and is incorrect for current efficiency standardsAmeriSpec missed the above items which directly relate to the combustion air and exhaust vent system, #of the heating and cooling “items to be inspected” under CREIA SOP Either AmeriSpec missed items from the CREIA standards, which were referenced by [redacted] and/or AmeriSpec missed the “Furnance closet is not fire proofed with drywall” as documented by [redacted] The missed items,1-4, as documented by [redacted] and the City of [redacted] inspector collectively pose huge fire and safety hazards to which CREIA speaks at length about documenting safety hazards The home inspection report which was generated simply stated that the combustion There were additional issues with the furnace which were not identified until the removal of the furnace during the remodel of the closetI understand that the inspector is not required to inspect items that require removal of parts; however, had the issues with the furnace closet been identified, a remodel of the closet to bring it up to fire safety code could have been addressed with the seller and upon removal of the furnace during the furnace closet renovation, these issues could have been identified, just as it happened with us, prior to our purchasing of the homeIE the inspecting agents failure to identify the significant visible fire and safety violations lead to the inability to negotiate in the sellers contract fixing of these problems and prevented identification of the further issues resulting in placing myself and my family in significant danger as well as incurring significant out of pocket expensesAmeriSpec advertised a service and standard that they set themselves which they failed to meetTheir failure placed my family and me at significant risk to include, “loss of life,” as documented by ***The cost to fix these issues was an unexpected out of pocket expense which could have been avoided had AmeriSpec conduct an inspection and completed a report in accordance with their own standardHad AmeriSpec done their job as advertised and correctly, this would not be an issueAmeriSpec needs to admit its mistake and fix itV.R[redacted] *** Regards, [redacted] ***
Dear Ms***, In the last few days my insurance company has reached a settlement with [redacted] regarding his complaint # [redacted] As soon as we receive final confirmation of resolution of this matter I will send you copies for your files.Regards [redacted] AmeriSpec Inspection service760-585-
Dear Ms***,Being a company that has built its reputation on professionalism and customer service, we do not like to have our clients not be satisfied with our serviceOn the other hand, I don't appreciate being held to standards that are above reason or having our reputation tainted.As a means of putting this matter to rest, I am willing to send a check for $to Ms [redacted] to help defray the cost of repairs to her homeI have attached a General Release form which needs to be signed by Mr& Mrs [redacted] and returned to my officeI will issue a check to them by return mail Sincerely [redacted] AmeriSpec Inspection Service [redacted]
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below To Whom it May Concern: AmeriSpec cannot speak to its own defense? AmeriSpec continues to use stonewalling tactics I find the response from AmeriSpec offensive in that they do not seem to care or understand the degree of danger that their inspector's negligence placed me and my familyAdditionally, their response in no way addresses the persistent concerns that I have tried to have addressed via both AmeriSpec and [redacted] I have met the same persistent resistance in addressing my concerns and answering my questions from [redacted] that we are receiving from AmeriSpec AmeriSpec’s inspector failed to identify significant fire / safety violations within the furnace closet placing my family at significant unnecessary risk and costing us significant out of pocket expenseThis claim is substantiated by documents from ***, [redacted] , and the City of [redacted] ***’s inspector, preventing us from negotiating for correction of the problem prior to purchase of our home AmeriSpec’s home webpage USED to advertise, “All of our certified home inspectors are thoroughly trained and stay updated on current building codes.” I use the term USED TO because since engaging AmeriSpec about these missed items their webpage has been modifiedI can provide time / date stamped screen shots of their home webpage prior to its changesAmeriSpec and [redacted] have in no way addressed how AmeriSpec can legally make such a statement and not be held to this standardAmeriSpec nor [redacted] have both failed to address how legally this is not advertising for which AmeriSpec should be held liableAmeriSpec made a statement, set the standard, and should be held to itAny deviation from these standards needs to clearly be explained as to how / why this is legal and precludes AmeriSpec from any liability Fundamentally, AmeriSpec advertised a standard which they did not meet placing me and my family at significant risk and costing us significant avoidable out of pocket expenses AmeriSpec and [redacted] continue to dance around my concerns which I have attempted to have addressed and answered multiple times by AmeriSpec and [redacted] Mrs [redacted] ’s response does nothing to move this discussion forward in that I have already attempted to have this discussion with [redacted] Mrs [redacted] ’s response is consistent with the stonewalling, “wait them out” tactics that I am encountering with [redacted] V.R [redacted] Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com: I have review [redacted] the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determin [redacted] that this propos [redacted] action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I review [redacted] appear below I have not received a fair settlement offer -- not even close There is no amount of money that could compensate me for all of the expense and trouble this incompetent business has caused me and my family My intention now is simply to get a judgement entered into the public record against this defendant To that end, a Small Claims Lawsuit and Form SC-will be filed against defendant, [redacted] , on Monday, January 12, at the [redacted] Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.There is not much to sayMrs [redacted] didn't attempt to answer my questions or address my concerns and appears to be ending the discussion Mrs [redacted] , AmeriSpec, [redacted] , Mr [redacted] have continually flat out refused to engage in a meaningful discussion or even attempt or address my concernsMrs [redacted] and Mr [redacted] of [redacted] are stonewallingI have attempted to address these issues with Mr [redacted] directly as well as through the Revdex.com and the CA Department of InsuranceI will be continuing my dialogue with the CA-DOI and Revdex.com regarding [redacted] and seeking further methods of engaging AmeriSpec in this discussion as well as [redacted] No one, not AmeriSpec and Mrs [redacted] or Mr [redacted] and [redacted] , has made even the slightest attempt to answer my questionsI believe that if AmeriSpec is truly not liable then my questions should have simple straight forward fact based answers and my concerns should be able to be addressed in a straightforward professional mannerThis continual stonewalling by Mrs [redacted] , AmeriSpec, Mr [redacted] of [redacted] suggests of policy of denying a claim until the claimant fatigues or runs out of options It boggles my mind that a company can make such an advertisement as AmeriSpec, make such a mistake, and claim no responsibilityIt further boggles my mind that AmeriSpec would continue to stand behind the illogical non-fact based report (with documented evidence directly to the contrary of the reports unsubstantiated statements) that was issued by Mr [redacted] and [redacted] The documented evidence I have stands alone and speaks for itselfAmeriSpec nor [redacted] has provided any new evidence, any evidence to substantiate the claims made in the report, or any evidence to contradict me AmeriSpec's mistake placed my family and me, as well as our neighbors, at significant risk of injury and even deathThat is simply unacceptable in any professionRegards, [redacted] ***
HelDecember 16, AmeriSpec agreed to send me a refund of $250, which I still have not receivedWhat is the status of the refund? My mailing address is- [redacted] ***Thank you for your assistance [redacted]
Dear Ms***, AmeriSpec was contacted by Mr [redacted] regarding this matterI forwarded his complaint to my insurance carrier for review and responseMy claims adviser has communicated with Mr [redacted] by email and they have had a continuing dialogueThere are certain specifics involved in this matter that I have been instructed not to discussPlease feel free to contact my insurance claims adviser for further clarification, his contact information is [redacted] [redacted] AmeriSpec Inspection Service [redacted]
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.Thank youWe signed what was attachedit didn't look like a general release form, but it was the only attachmentThe property address is NOT our mailing addressPlease mail the check to- PO Box [redacted] Rancho Santa Fe, CA [redacted] Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below To Whom it May Concern:This letter is in response to Mrs [redacted] ’s letter on behalf of AmeriSpec dated November 19, 2015.I feel that AmeriSpec and [redacted] are continually trying to minimize AmeriSpec’s mistakeIn the documents submitted to Mrs [redacted] and [redacted] it is clearly documented by [redacted] as well as [redacted] ing that the furnace closet and furnace posed significant risk to my family, myself, and my neighbors to include, “LOSS OF LIFE.”Mrs [redacted] closes her response letter by stating, “ do not appreciate being held to an unreasonable standard.” I DID NOT SET THE STANDARD, AmeriSpec DIDI did not say or claim or make the statement that, “All of our certified inspectors are thoroughly trained and stay updated on current building codes.” AmeriSpec made that statement and set that standard on their home webpage, in BIG BOLD LETTERSApparently someone informed AmeriSpec “parent company” because the web page changed and no longer makes the statementGood for them but too lateNo one, not AmeriSpec, or [redacted] , or Great American Insurance has explained in legal terms how you can advertise and make such a claim and then not be held liable for failing to meet that standardGreat, I’ll just advertise that I am thoroughly trained and updated on fixing cars and when someone brings their car to me to fix and I miss identifying safety issues with the vehicle or documenting things which place them at risk for an accident or “loss of life” I can say, “Whoa, you are holding me to an unreasonable standard and I am not liable for missing those items because company “X” built that car and those are their manufacturers standards.” This is the same faulty logic that AmeriSpec is using.Mrs [redacted] makes a blind blanket statement that I have consulted with people who have told me that AmeriSpec is not liableShe did not identify these persons or provide any supporting documentation to this claimAs far as I know Mrs [redacted] could believe that I met with the President of the United States and he is the person who told me AmeriSpec is not liableMrs [redacted] ’s statement is a useless non-contributory statement made with not substantiating materialAs easily as she could believe and claim I met with the President of the United States, I could claim that she has consulted with numerous people to include the President who have told her that SHE IS LIABLEMrs [redacted] is correct in that I have consulted with several people; however, multiple people, including the City of [redacted] inspector and our Real Estate Agent Mr [redacted] of Berkshire Hathaway who recommended AmeriSpec have stated that AmeriSpec is liableEither way, the fact I have consulted other people and what their response is irrelevantAmeriSpec made a statement and set a standard which they failed to meetThey are using loos and manipulative language as well as distraction techniques to draw attention away from the issue in an effort to continue to support their argument that they are not liable.Mrs [redacted] is correct that building codes and building appliance installation specifications/recommendations are differentThe furnace CLOSET in which the furnace is housed is neither a system nor a component of the furnaceThe CLOSET was not up to fire/safety codesThe deficits in the closet are not a manufactures requirements or suggestions but building/fire codes set in place to keep people safe and prevent fire/explosion and/or reduce the speed of spread of fireAmeriSpec set the standard that they are trained and current on building codes they need to meet that standard.The Inspection agreement, Mrs [redacted] refers to in her response states, “We are not required to determine non-compliance with manufacturer’s specifications or applicable regulatory requirements, including but not limited to building code compliance.” As Mrs [redacted] correctly pointed out above, manufactures installation codes and BUILDING/Fire codes are not the sameThe statement in the agreement is referencing MANUFACTURER’S specifications; this is speaking to the installation requirements of an unidentified item per the manufacture’s specifications“X” item is installed and has “Y” requirements to be installed safely (for support or anchoring.) This is NOT speaking to basic fire and safety codes that say furnace closet needs to be properly fireproofed and ventilatedThe AmeriSpec agreement references AS
The ASHI SOP states, “not required to determine compliance of systems and components .” This is the same as the inspection agreementThe issues were with the furnace CLOSET, improperly vented and not to fire/safety code as documented by [redacted] ing and City of [redacted] ***The closet in which the furnace is housed is neither a system nor component of the furnaceThe furnace closet is a part of the house and the building and fire/safety codes apply to which AmeriSpec claimed to be “thoroughly trained and up to date.” AmeriSpec has not addressed how the CLOSET is a system or component of the furnace and therefore exempt from examination.Mrs [redacted] is manipulating the language in an effort to continue to support AmeriSpec’s claim that they are not liable[redacted] , in their report regarding this claim, on behalf of AmeriSpec, referenced CREIA SOPCREIA states that an inspector is to inspect: Copied from [redacted] Heating and CoolingAItems to be inspected: Heating equipment Central cooling equipment Energy source and connections Combustion air and exhaust vent systems Condensate drainage Conditioned air distribution systemsAs documented by ***, [redacted] , and the City of [redacted] Inspector AmeriSpec missed several items as required to be addressed by CREIA:Return air section under the furnace is inadequate and not sealedReturn air section is not isolated from the furnace closet that will cause air to be drawn from the furnace burner compartment area possibly causing flame roll outFurnace closet does not have upper and lower combustion air ventsCurrent exhaust system is transite asbestos and is incorrect for current efficiency standardsAmeriSpec missed the above items which directly relate to the combustion air and exhaust vent system, #of the heating and cooling “items to be inspected” under CREIA SOP Either AmeriSpec missed items from the CREIA standards, which were referenced by [redacted] and/or AmeriSpec missed the “Furnance closet is not fire proofed with drywall” as documented by [redacted] The missed items,1-4, as documented by [redacted] and the City of [redacted] inspector collectively pose huge fire and safety hazards to which CREIA speaks at length about documenting safety hazards The home inspection report which was generated simply stated that the combustion There were additional issues with the furnace which were not identified until the removal of the furnace during the remodel of the closetI understand that the inspector is not required to inspect items that require removal of parts; however, had the issues with the furnace closet been identified, a remodel of the closet to bring it up to fire safety code could have been addressed with the seller and upon removal of the furnace during the furnace closet renovation, these issues could have been identified, just as it happened with us, prior to our purchasing of the homeIE the inspecting agents failure to identify the significant visible fire and safety violations lead to the inability to negotiate in the sellers contract fixing of these problems and prevented identification of the further issues resulting in placing myself and my family in significant danger as well as incurring significant out of pocket expensesAmeriSpec advertised a service and standard that they set themselves which they failed to meetTheir failure placed my family and me at significant risk to include, “loss of life,” as documented by ***The cost to fix these issues was an unexpected out of pocket expense which could have been avoided had AmeriSpec conduct an inspection and completed a report in accordance with their own standardHad AmeriSpec done their job as advertised and correctly, this would not be an issueAmeriSpec needs to admit its mistake and fix itV.R[redacted] *** Regards, [redacted] ***
Dear Ms***, In the last few days my insurance company has reached a settlement with [redacted] regarding his complaint # [redacted] As soon as we receive final confirmation of resolution of this matter I will send you copies for your files.Regards [redacted] AmeriSpec Inspection service760-585-
Dear Ms***,Being a company that has built its reputation on professionalism and customer service, we do not like to have our clients not be satisfied with our serviceOn the other hand, I don't appreciate being held to standards that are above reason or having our reputation tainted.As a means of putting this matter to rest, I am willing to send a check for $to Ms [redacted] to help defray the cost of repairs to her homeI have attached a General Release form which needs to be signed by Mr& Mrs [redacted] and returned to my officeI will issue a check to them by return mail Sincerely [redacted] AmeriSpec Inspection Service [redacted]
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below To Whom it May Concern: AmeriSpec cannot speak to its own defense? AmeriSpec continues to use stonewalling tactics I find the response from AmeriSpec offensive in that they do not seem to care or understand the degree of danger that their inspector's negligence placed me and my familyAdditionally, their response in no way addresses the persistent concerns that I have tried to have addressed via both AmeriSpec and [redacted] I have met the same persistent resistance in addressing my concerns and answering my questions from [redacted] that we are receiving from AmeriSpec AmeriSpec’s inspector failed to identify significant fire / safety violations within the furnace closet placing my family at significant unnecessary risk and costing us significant out of pocket expenseThis claim is substantiated by documents from ***, [redacted] , and the City of [redacted] ***’s inspector, preventing us from negotiating for correction of the problem prior to purchase of our home AmeriSpec’s home webpage USED to advertise, “All of our certified home inspectors are thoroughly trained and stay updated on current building codes.” I use the term USED TO because since engaging AmeriSpec about these missed items their webpage has been modifiedI can provide time / date stamped screen shots of their home webpage prior to its changesAmeriSpec and [redacted] have in no way addressed how AmeriSpec can legally make such a statement and not be held to this standardAmeriSpec nor [redacted] have both failed to address how legally this is not advertising for which AmeriSpec should be held liableAmeriSpec made a statement, set the standard, and should be held to itAny deviation from these standards needs to clearly be explained as to how / why this is legal and precludes AmeriSpec from any liability Fundamentally, AmeriSpec advertised a standard which they did not meet placing me and my family at significant risk and costing us significant avoidable out of pocket expenses AmeriSpec and [redacted] continue to dance around my concerns which I have attempted to have addressed and answered multiple times by AmeriSpec and [redacted] Mrs [redacted] ’s response does nothing to move this discussion forward in that I have already attempted to have this discussion with [redacted] Mrs [redacted] ’s response is consistent with the stonewalling, “wait them out” tactics that I am encountering with [redacted] V.R [redacted] Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com: I have review [redacted] the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determin [redacted] that this propos [redacted] action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I review [redacted] appear below I have not received a fair settlement offer -- not even close There is no amount of money that could compensate me for all of the expense and trouble this incompetent business has caused me and my family My intention now is simply to get a judgement entered into the public record against this defendant To that end, a Small Claims Lawsuit and Form SC-will be filed against defendant, [redacted] , on Monday, January 12, at the [redacted] Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.There is not much to sayMrs [redacted] didn't attempt to answer my questions or address my concerns and appears to be ending the discussion Mrs [redacted] , AmeriSpec, [redacted] , Mr [redacted] have continually flat out refused to engage in a meaningful discussion or even attempt or address my concernsMrs [redacted] and Mr [redacted] of [redacted] are stonewallingI have attempted to address these issues with Mr [redacted] directly as well as through the Revdex.com and the CA Department of InsuranceI will be continuing my dialogue with the CA-DOI and Revdex.com regarding [redacted] and seeking further methods of engaging AmeriSpec in this discussion as well as [redacted] No one, not AmeriSpec and Mrs [redacted] or Mr [redacted] and [redacted] , has made even the slightest attempt to answer my questionsI believe that if AmeriSpec is truly not liable then my questions should have simple straight forward fact based answers and my concerns should be able to be addressed in a straightforward professional mannerThis continual stonewalling by Mrs [redacted] , AmeriSpec, Mr [redacted] of [redacted] suggests of policy of denying a claim until the claimant fatigues or runs out of options It boggles my mind that a company can make such an advertisement as AmeriSpec, make such a mistake, and claim no responsibilityIt further boggles my mind that AmeriSpec would continue to stand behind the illogical non-fact based report (with documented evidence directly to the contrary of the reports unsubstantiated statements) that was issued by Mr [redacted] and [redacted] The documented evidence I have stands alone and speaks for itselfAmeriSpec nor [redacted] has provided any new evidence, any evidence to substantiate the claims made in the report, or any evidence to contradict me AmeriSpec's mistake placed my family and me, as well as our neighbors, at significant risk of injury and even deathThat is simply unacceptable in any professionRegards, [redacted] ***
HelDecember 16, AmeriSpec agreed to send me a refund of $250, which I still have not receivedWhat is the status of the refund? My mailing address is- [redacted] ***Thank you for your assistance [redacted]
Dear Ms***, AmeriSpec was contacted by Mr [redacted] regarding this matterI forwarded his complaint to my insurance carrier for review and responseMy claims adviser has communicated with Mr [redacted] by email and they have had a continuing dialogueThere are certain specifics involved in this matter that I have been instructed not to discussPlease feel free to contact my insurance claims adviser for further clarification, his contact information is [redacted] [redacted] AmeriSpec Inspection Service [redacted]
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.Thank youWe signed what was attachedit didn't look like a general release form, but it was the only attachmentThe property address is NOT our mailing addressPlease mail the check to- PO Box [redacted] Rancho Santa Fe, CA [redacted] Regards, [redacted]