ComplaintsforArctic Home Living

• Initial Complaint

  01/17/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Order Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I engaged Richards **************** and my financial institution in a Loan agreement and promissory note, which included a Contractors Agreement with specific conditions. These included proving inventory, permits, and providing a detailed project breakdown. Upon funds disbursement, Richards **************** was authorized to start installation. If conditions were met, we owed the financial institution as per the contract.However, four months later, the contractor claimed non-payment, shifting blame. Investigation revealed Richards **************** breached the agreement by starting without proper documentation, nullifying the bank contract. They now threaten a lien, hindering financial assistance. Lack of a project cost breakdown and unauthorized loan extension attempts complicate matters.With the breach of contract, the project became unauthorized as soon as they began the work. Moreover, the contractor illegally attempted to reapply for a loan extension seven days after the installation, a move denied by the bank due to the contractor breaking the agreement. Furthermore, five months post-installation, the contractor tried to reapply resulting in another rejection from the bank, again without my knowledge or consent. In a December meeting, the contractor blamed me for a possible credit drop, no proof, stating sometimes people ruin their credit. Contrary to claims, my credit improved since the initial loan. Despite efforts, the contractor pressured a new contract, dismissing legal counsel's importance.During the meeting, the contractor falsely claimed authorization for a loan extension without consulting us. Bank clarification revealed no such authorization, emphasizing, due to unauthorized work, extension was no longer viable.In conclusion, Richards ****************'s actions led to a challenging situation, facing a property lien. Our entry into the agreement expected transparency, but the contractor's unauthorized actions created an unwarranted predicament.

  

  Business response

  01/26/2024

  All products and services have been rendered and awaiting payment.

  Customer response

  02/16/2024

  I am grateful for the chance to address the concerns raised and provide additional context regarding the breach of contract and improper installation of services at my residence, as outlined in the Contractor Agreement dated 10/07/2022. I wish to clarify that my wife did not sign any contract; this matter solely involves myself and Richards Distributing. I can present documents to substantiate this fact.

   

  In their recent response, Richards Distributing acknowledges, "On 4/1/2023 RES submitted to Sunlight for approval to install." This acknowledgment suggests a deliberate and predatory action, contradicting the terms outlined in our contract. Specifically, on page 5, paragraph 1, sentence 1 of the Contractor Agreement, it explicitly states: "You have entered into an agreement with the contractor (the 'Contractor Agreement') for Contractor to sell to you and install the system at your address as set forth on page 1 of this note (the 'Residence'), subject to your receipt of all necessary financing." A significant concern arises from information provided by ******************* indicating that proper authorization for installation is mandatory before the actual installation occurs. I possess substantial evidence, including written documentation, photographs, and witness accounts, confirming that the installation took place on March 25th, over a week before the alleged request for approval on April 1st. This discrepancy raises questions about the adherence to the terms of our contractual agreement and the integrity of the installation process. According to the contract, Richards Distributing is obligated to obtain approval for installation before setting foot on the property. The apparent disparity between the installation date and the date of the approval request is troubling and suggests a clear breach of our contractual agreement.

   

  Furthermore, Richards Distributing's statement, "In March of 2023, they made a deposit of $2,893.00 towards the purchase of a solar system for their home," refers to a payment for a transfer switch and electrical parts and installation that was a separate purchase, not covered in the solar panel project. This payment was made independently and is not addressed in the contract.

   

  Moreover, there is no provision in the contract allowing for an extension of the agreement beyond six months without my explicit written consent, which was never obtained. Richards Distributing's response to my complaint not only confirms a breach of contract but also raises concerns about potential defamatory practices against their clients. Additionally, I want to bring to your attention that someone claiming to be me requested the loan be canceled on January 25th, 2024. I did not make such a request, and ****************** informed me that they received the request electronically.

   

  In accordance with the terms of the signed contract, my obligation is exclusively to my lender. Therefore, I am formally requesting a cease and desist from Richards Distributing. If a satisfactory resolution is not achieved, I reserve the right to explore legal avenues to protect my rights and pursue appropriate remedies.

   

  Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to your assistance in achieving a fair resolution.

   

  Sincerely,

   

  *****************************

  

  Business response

  02/27/2024

  Richards **************** (RDI) simply wants to get paid for the system that ****************** purchased that is installed at his property and has been working providing electricity to his home sense ***** last year. 

  He claims he only owes "his financial institution" He lost his ability to get financed and now says he doesn't have to pay for the purchase. 

  His originally payment of $2,893 had nothing to do with other work as he claims. It was a 10% deposit on the system which was purchased for $28,932. 

  He continues to make ridiculous claims when he simply is trying not to pay. His statement that his obligation is only with His financial institution. Simply not true. He owes them nothing as the financing was cancelled. RDI has no control over that. 

  To finalize ****************** owes $26,039 for the balance of the system cost. He has refused after many efforts by RDI to find a solution with him including offering for him to make payments to RDI after the financing was cancelled. He has failed to pay anyone for the balance. 

  RDI has started to prepare litigation to collect on the balance, Interest and attorney fees. We have no other options at this point. 

   

• Initial Complaint

  11/25/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  On 10/4/22 I bought a hot tub in person at Arctic Home Living *********. I paid a total $12,748 for the tub and delivery/installation. I understood I bought Jacuzzi brand. The salesperson who entered the order actually ordered a Sundance brand. She maintains that we discussed this because Sundance is "essentially the same tub" and would be available earlier than a Jacuzzi. Neither my husband nor I remember this conversation nor did we look at any Sundance tubs (which we would have if we were considering getting this tub for quicker delivery). Unfortunately our sales slip only has a serial and spa number and does not indicate the brand. When our hot tub was delivered on 11/21/22, it was a Sundance tub. I signed a slip saying a received the Sundance tub (not realizing that is what the slip said) prior to the tub being put in our yard. After the tub was "installed," it has never heated up. Initially the filter was sitting on top of the tub not installed and the tub did not heat up. This is when we noticed we had a Sundance tub when we knew we ordered ******* brand. Since that time, I have called the service department every day. They come and do something to the tub, but every day the tub continues to not work. I do not know what has been done because no one has follows up with me. Every time I call, the service manager asks me what the problem is, and obviously I do not know. I also requested a phone call from the ** to discuss the bait and switch that occurred and lack of adequate service/installation/maintenance despite employees coming to my house 4 different times. I was told he would call Tuesday or Friday. No call on Tuesday. I phoned again Friday to remind them I am expecting a phone call from him and still have not heard from him at the close of the business day. I am seeking EITHER a refund for bait and switch and delivery/installation fee and complete resolution of the maintenance issue OR return of the Sundance with delivery of Jacuzzi at no cost

  

  Business response

  01/27/2023

  We have since made several service calls to the customer's house to correct issues with the tub. The customer also received credit for future service and supplies. Message from the customer in the last 2 weeks is that they are satisfied with the outcome.

  It appears this complaint was generated during the holidays when our store was closed and service techs were granted time off. The following business day we were at the customer's house remedying this.

  We were under the impression that this complaint had been redacted, but we are glad that all parties are happy in the end.

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩