ComplaintsforWonder Windows

• Initial Complaint

  03/11/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Order Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  On 6/3/23, a Wonder Windows salesman came to my home to demonstrate replacement windows I considered buying. On that day, I agreed to purchase nine triple pane **** windows for $11,904. My daughter took pictures of the window samples that day so that we were certain which windows we were buying. My kitchen window ordered had between the glass blinds. On 7/6/23, another representative came out for a second measurement. I provided a cashier's check for $4,765. On 10/12/23, I was advised of the installation date for my windows on 10/16/23. On 10/13, I had another cashier's check made for the balance of $7,139. On the installation date, the kitchen window installed was incorrect, lacking between the glass blinds. My daughter made several calls to the installers, who insisted on installing the wrong window before Wonder Windows ultimately acknowledged the wrong window was installed. The installers were coy at unpacking all of the window materials in their truck, so there was no packaging visible to the customer. I demanded that they give me at least one of the spec sheets because I wanted to compare it to the sample windows from the initial sales visit. The installer reluctantly did so. When we compared the spec sheets of the windows installed to the sample windows, which we were shown to be the ones we ordered, they were not the same. Wonder Windows refuses to acknowledge an inferior product was installed. My daughter spoke with George, a Sales Rep from ****, the window manufacturer. He confirmed that the air leakage rate is less on the installed windows compared to the window samples provided at the time of the sale. Furthermore, the kitchen window has not been replaced. We have asked Wonder Windows to provide a reasonable concession on cost for the inferior windows. They insist that they delivered the product numbers on the contract. I do not have access to their inventory numbers, but I can document the bait and switch based on the Energy Performance Ratings sheets.

  

  Business response

  03/20/2024

  On 6/3/23, Wonder Windows did come to ****’s home and demonstrated to **** and her daughter the **** ******** Series window as shown in ****’s images provided with the performance ratings as listed on the window sticker.  It was determined at the time that **** was more interested in a lower cost solution and opted for the **** *********** Series with triple pane windows.  This lower cost solution with triple pane windows is actually a better performing window as demonstrated in the pictures **** provided of the sticker from the installed windows and as stated by the conversation **** had directly with the manufacturer’s representative George (the air leakage rating is less on the windows installed versus the window samples provided at the sales demo).  A contract was signed by **** (for the **** *********** Series with Triple pane windows) on that same day and a deposit was collected 7/7/23 to initiate the full commitment to move forward with the contract. On 10/16/23, the installation commenced.  All of the windows were installed; however, it was discovered after all of the windows were installed, including a new kitchen window, that the kitchen window required internal blinds, which was outlined in the contract.  **** does not make a window with internal blinds, nor does any company offer an internal blind window in triple pane glass.  This window was to be a ******* window (as stated in the Special Instructions of the contract) which is another manufacturer that offers this type of window. The error was a purchasing mistake on Wonder’s part and the proper window was ordered and received, and Wonder reached out to **** to schedule the installation of the correct window, with internal blinds, in the kitchen.  **** and her daughter refused to allow Wonder to install the window because she claimed that Wonder “bait and switched” her during the initial sales call.  The feeling was that Wonder showed **** and her daughter a less expensive window and drew up a contract for a more expensive window with lower performance.  **** stated that she does not want the window in the kitchen replaced until they clear up the misunderstanding on the performance of the windows. On January 11, 2024, we had a telephone conversation surrounding all of these concerns on the windows that were purchased by **** and installed by Wonder.  At that time, we agreed to have our Director of Sales come out and bring all of the supporting materials to walk her through the performance numbers of the windows and clear up any confusion she may have had with regards to what was sold and what was received.   Our Director of Sales was prepared to show her that the windows installed exceed the performance of what is stated in the contract and what you saw during the initial home sales call.  The uploaded pictures provided by **** also support this same claim.  There was also a concern that triple pane windows were ordered but not actually installed. January 15, 2024, at 3:30pm was the time we all agreed upon to have our Director of Sales come out and meet **** and her daughter at ****’s house.   Unfortunately, due to a snowstorm that day in Buffalo forced us to reschedule.  Another mutual time was agreed upon on January 31, 2024.  When our Director of Sales arrived with window samples and factory performance rating sheets at the home, **** was not there (due to an apparent tenant issue) and her daughter had something at work that kept her from being able to come.  While our Director of Sales was waiting outside of ****’s home on the 31st, he was able to confirm that the windows installed are the windows stated in the contract and that they are truly triple pane windows as also stated in the contract.  A simple test of shining a light in front of the window and counting the number of reflections confirmed that the windows were truly triple pane. Since that day, our Director of Sales has been trying to coordinate a time to reconnect and walk **** and her daughter through all of this information and has been unsuccessful.  Our Director of Sales had some text communications with ****’s daughter to reschedule and then was told that there would be no further communications between her and Wonder and that all communications would be through their attorney and via US Mail.  Our CEO then made multiple attempts, through phone calls, voice messages, text messages and emails to reach **** and her daughter to have a conversation to discuss the apparent confusion and move the project forward. Due to no response by **** to any of Wonder’s attempts to have a conversation and to complete the project, Wonder was forced to send a certified letter dated 2/26/24 to **** stating that per the terms outlined in her signed contract (which we provided with the letter), specifically in the Payment Terms section under Item “b.,” that the balance is due upon substantial completion. We consider this job to be substantially complete (since all windows were installed, including a kitchen window).  Any outstanding minor punch list items (replacement of the kitchen window in this case) or delays in completion may result in the immediate due date for the outstanding balance, as outlined in the contract.  The letter stated that should she choose not to proceed with the replacement window that we have (with the internal blinds), the job will be considered complete and payment of the $7,139.00 is due and payable immediately.  We also stated that we are willing to leave **** with the replacement window for the kitchen that has the internal blinds, if she chooses to forgo the replacement installation. **** was urged to review the contract terms carefully prior to making this decision. Wonder also stated in the letter that in order to expedite the resolution of this matter, we kindly requested a final decision by 3/15/24, which we still have not officially received. ****’s timely response was crucial, as failure to reply by this date may compel us to explore legal avenues to resolve the outstanding issues. It also stated that we sincerely hope to avoid such measures and would appreciate the opportunity to complete the agreed-upon work. The fact of the matter is, **** purchased windows that were less expensive than what was demonstrated in the home and the windows have a better performance rating with regards to U-Factor and air infiltration.  As stated in our attachment included from the U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy – Guide to Energy Efficient Windows in the ‘Factors to Consider’ section, it states “The lower the U-Factor, the better the window insulates.”  The U-Factor on the **** ******** ****** window that was demonstrated (and is in ****’s pictures provided) has a U-Factor of .25.  The U-Factor of the **** *********** as was installed was .19 as shown in the included Certificate of Compliance supplied by **** for *. ************.  This demonstrates that the windows installed are better performing windows than what was demonstrated during the initial sales call. The other performance measure to observe is the Air Leakage (Air Infiltration) value. The **** ******** window that was demonstrated for the ****** (and is in ****’s pictures provided) has an Air Leakage (Air Infiltration) minimum value of <= 0.1.  The actual rated performance is 0.03 as shown on Page 2 of the **** ******** EVO specification sheet provided under ‘Double Hung (******) Structural Performance’ for the Double Glazed.   The **** ***********, as was installed (and is in ****’s pictures provided) has a minimum value of <= 0.3.  The actual rated performance is 0.01 as shown on Page 2 of the *********** specification sheet provided under ‘Structural Performance’ of the **** *****.  This also demonstrates that the windows installed are better performing from an air leakage (air infiltration) standpoint as well.  The lower the number, the better the performance as outlined in *************************. In summary, the cost of the **** ***********, triple pane window is less than the cost of the **** ******** window as demonstrated, and the performance on the windows are better on the **** ***********, triple pane than the **** ******** window.   How can there be a “bait and switch” for a lower cost solution that has a higher performance rating?  We wish to have the opportunity to explain all of this data so that we can complete this project.

  Customer response

  03/24/2024

  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. There is no attempt to by the contractor to resolve the inferior product installed. What was sampled does not match what was sold to us.  To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.  Regards,  **** ** **********  

  

  Business response

  04/11/2024

  Please find attached the contract which shows she signed for the windows we installed and are describing. The product we provided is not an inferior window, as stated in our original response, it is a higher quality product as explained below. **** purchased windows that were less expensive than what was demonstrated in the home and the windows have a better performance rating with regards to U-Factor and air infiltration.  As stated in our attachment included from the U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy – Guide to Energy Efficient Windows in the ‘Factors to Consider’ section, it states “The lower the U-Factor, the better the window insulates.”  The U-Factor on the **** ******** ****** window that was demonstrated (and is in ****’s pictures provided) has a U-Factor of .25.  The U-Factor of the **** *********** as was installed was .19 as shown in the included Certificate of Compliance supplied by **** for R. ************.  This demonstrates that the windows installed are better performing windows than what was demonstrated during the initial sales call.The other performance measure to observe is the Air Leakage (Air Infiltration) value. The **** ******** window that was demonstrated for the ****** (and is in ****’s pictures provided) has an Air Leakage (Air Infiltration) minimum value of <= 0.1.  The actual rated performance is 0.03 as shown on Page 2 of the **** ******** EVO specification sheet provided under ‘Double Hung (******) Structural Performance’ for the Double Glazed.   The **** ***********, as was installed (and is in ****’s pictures provided) has a minimum value of <= 0.3.  The actual rated performance is 0.01 as shown on Page 2 of the *********** specification sheet provided under ‘Structural Performance’ of the **** *****.  This also demonstrates that the windows installed are better performing from an air leakage (air infiltration) standpoint as well.  The lower the number, the better the performance as outlined in ******************************************.In summary, the cost of the **** ***********, triple pane window is less than the cost of the **** ******** window as demonstrated, and the performance on the windows are better on the **** ***********, triple pane than the **** ******** window.   How can there be a “bait and switch” for a lower cost solution that has a higher performance rating?  We wish to have the opportunity to explain all of this data so that we can complete this project. Additionally, BBB spoke to Mark at the business and the following information was provided:The customer has received what she ordered, we have been attempting to schedule a time to meet and show them this and install the final window. The customer wanted a triple pane window which is what was installed and is the best performing vinyl window. The windows they received are better performing windows than the double hung example. It is less expensive due to the style and composition of the frame only, not the performance of the actual window which is better. We are requesting that the customer make a time to meet with us and discuss the contract and installed windows and allow us to install the final window which we have ready to install.

  Customer response

  04/17/2024

  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. I came to the BBB for assistance in resolving a dispute, which clearly is not being resolved with absolutely no concession made by Wonder Windows despite clear evidence showing that the installed windows ARE NOT the same as those demonstrated in the sales pitch. As such, we will allow Wonder Windows to replace the window, which was ordered incorrectly and pay the remainder of the contract. However, I will make it clear via all social media outlets my displeasure with Wonder Windows and their bait and switch tactics to advise others to take their business elsewhere. There are several negative reviews and past problems brought up against Wonder Windows and I will be another victim of their disingenuous business practices. Congratulations, Wonder Windows. You have taken advantage of another consumer.  Regards, **** ** **********

• Initial Complaint

  05/23/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  Wonder Windows installed new windows at my townhome on 4/28/2023. The exterior trim on my property (front 2 windows and garage window) have been damaged. I have withheld final payment pending repairs. Wonder Windows has been notified and pictures submitted by my HOA Management. I have spoke to a rep (Mary) and received some assurance this matter would be resolved. Unfortunately, I have not heard back.

  

  Business response

  06/12/2023

  BBB spoke to Quinn at the business and the following was relayed: We have been working with the customer and we were out there this morning. We made the repairs and are providing the customer a discount. This has been resolved. 

  Customer response

  06/13/2023

  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.   Regards,  ********* *********

• Initial Complaint

  07/07/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I had several windows installed the week of May 16, 2022, including a 12-foot bow and six double-hung windows. A few years back I also had seven double-hung installed. Out of the 13 double-hung, three of the current windows have at least 1/4 inch movement when locked, the remaining 10 have zero movement. I pointed this out to the installers and they told me air could come in and they need to replace it. When the job was finished I called and Chuck came out to investigate and was told he would speak with the manufacturer. After hearing nothing for a month I called again, on 6/17/2022 and spoke with business manager Lisa S****** who calls herself "big mama". Ms. S****** did have Chuck call me that day. His response was that the manufacturer felt it was fine to have some play but Chuck felt that it was too much and that he would work on it. Three weeks since contact has gone by and for the second time I got no response, I feel they expect me to just go away. This is not the service and support they so highly speak of.

  

  Business response

  07/27/2022

  Mr. ****'s issue was taken to the original manufacturer of the windows.  The manufacturer claims that this situation is normal performance for the window.  Because Wonder Windows guarantees our windows for life, we have ordered 3 new replacement windows for Mr. **** which we will be installing free of charge when the product arrives. 

• Initial Complaint

  04/18/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Delivery Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  On May 26 2021 I order 2 Doors and Jamb or Thresholds for my house 1 Entry Dood 2 Storm Door in brown (Im sending you a copy of the agreement. I call them 2 or 3 times in August-Sept-Oct & Nov 2021 ang got the same answer (because of covid material is hard to get) I waited the winter month Dec Jan Feb & part of March 2022 Before calling again on March 15 I call & got no answer. Called 3/4 times a week after that and (anna) the girl that answers the phone said she was away from her desk Leave a message (so I did) But No one call back. I then called Nidk P the saleman He said he was let go in Nov 2021 to call the Better Business Bureau (so I did) as of today 4/11/2022 no answer from the company.

  

  Business response

  06/03/2022

  BBB received the following response from the business:

  We have spoken to the customer and have significant records of reaching out to her. We have proof that the door came in damaged and we expedited the reordering. The door will be installed as soon as possible once received.

*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. ↩