ComplaintsforKitchen Tune Up

• Initial Complaint

  02/17/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  In Fall 2023 we worked with Kitchen Tune-Up Cleveland West (KTU) to perform a cabinet reface that included: • Refacing of cabinet boxes • New wood doors for all cabinets • New drawer fronts for all drawers • New crown • Eight plant-on-doors for cabinet box ends • Installation The following outlines a still incomplete KTU installation: • November 2023: Agreed to reface at approved $14,934. Initial payment of $7467. Agreed job start in late January. • January 19, 2024: Materials (except 2 doors) delivered • January 22: KTU install began • January 26: $5974 payment leaving $1493 balance from approved invoice. • January 30: Install nearly complete, we request to change crown choice. KTU advised this adds $964 as the delivered crown is non-returnable. Negative turn: KTU now claims the job was not quoted properly at the start, 2+ months after agreement • At the time of the crown change, we were informed that cost was NOT INCLUDED in approved invoice. We requested a revised invoice to reflect the change. • February 1: Revised invoice includes new crown cost AND another $2550 for plant-on-doors ordered at the start and already installed. KTU claimed they had NOT INCLUDED them in our approved invoice. • Trying to resolve the issue with KTU was disappointing. KTU claimed multiple times “we meant to send a revised invoice” weeks earlier. Approved invoice never indicated that any agreed to material had not been paid for. • Final KTU offer was to finish the job by installing the crown we didn’t want at a new job cost of $18,448 (23% above approved amount). • February 2: We now wanted our KTU business relationship to end. So we paid a final $4043 installment for a total of $17,493 (final $1493 of the approved invoice +$2550 “missing charge” for plant-on-doors). We were not charged for the delivered crown KTU admitting that error. • We are now working with another vendor to complete the work at additional cost.

  

  Business response

  02/22/2024

  We regret any inconvenience caused during the completion of your project. Here's a summarized timeline of events:

  Original proposal accepted on November 18, 2023, for $14,934.12, covering doors, drawer fronts, crown, toe kick, side panels, veneer, drill and mount customer supplied hardware, specialty glass in two doors, shipping & handling, and a November special discount. Measuring appointment held on November 20, 2023, with a 50% downpayment of $7,467.06 collected.

  On November 21, 2023, homeowner requested additional plant-on doors, with an agreed approximate cost of $2,550, resulting in a change order.
  

  Crown moulding style finalized on November 27, 2023, and all products were ordered.

  Work commenced on January 22, 2024, with two doors needing glass inserts, installed on January 25, 2024.
  

  Second installment of $5,973.65 collected on January 22, 2024. Due to an oversight, the additional cost for plant-on doors wasn't included in this installment but added to the final invoice.
  

  On January 25, 2024, homeowner expressed second thoughts on their crown moulding choice. Revised crown moulding decision made on February 4, 2024, incurring an added cost of $963.85, initially accepted by the homeowner on February 5, 2024.

  Final invoice, including initial scope, added plant-on doors actual cost, and new crown choice cost, communicated on February 5, 2024. Following a phone conversation also on February 5, 2024, homeowner agreed to pay the final invoice for initial scope and plant-on doors, opting to cancel the new crown, which was mutually agreed to be complete once final payment was received. Our offer to install the original crown choice was declined.

  Payment of $4,043.25 received on February 7, 2024, marking the invoice as paid in full.

  Customer response

  02/22/2024

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  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 and in the attached Word document (which includes invoices, texts and emails.
  
  The response from Kitchen Tune-up is not factual. Below and attached is our rebuttal given the billing and communication timing leading us to not accept this response. We have included ample documentation showing how throughout the process the disputed doors were never included in our invoices/emails/texts through early February. Our written summary follows:
  1) We ordered a full reface at the very beginning of the process. That included the plant-on doors which we didn't consider a change order, it was a confirmation of our original order from the beginning.
  2) The initial invoice on November 18 was not itemized and did not include a listing of the elements in Kitchen Tune-ups response. The service was described as "Residential Refacing Services" (total $15,434, less the $500 discount = $14934 we were quoted).
  3) Multiple communications from Nov - Jan continued to quote the $14,934 total we approved. I have limited the documentation to the following KTU communications (invoices, emails and texts):
  * Nov-18 invoice: we agreed to the total of $14934 for full reface which we understood INCLUDED plant-on doors. This
  * Jan-21 invoice: Documents 1st payment, total remaining ($7467) and total project cost of $14934
  * Jan-23 Text: Kitchen Tune-up texted us confirming remaining amount of $1493, the remainder on the $14934 approved invoice
  *Jan-26 invoice: Confirms via invoice second payment ($5974) and remaining balance of $1493, all based on approved total of $14934.
  * January 30, we asked for the crown change (and quoted the additional cost of $964 change order). At this point we were told of we DID NOT PAY for the original crown ordered. There was no mention made of the earlier change order for $2550 as documented by KTU earlier invoices.
  * On February 5th, over two months AFTER our approval of a KTU job for $14934, we received the first KTU document including the $2550 disputed charge. The shared invoice was back-dated to show the plant-on doors quoted on Nov-21st (not documented in November, or December, or January invoices or communications).
  Simply put, KTU had very poor communication and billing practices. They claim they communicated the plant-on door charge in November, that was not our experience. While we did not keep all the records, I have included screen shots of multiple communications that document the above experience.
  We look forward to KTU owning up to their mistakes, and offering a resolution that will satisfy our needs. In our opinion it should be a refund of the contested $2550 that was only properly communicated in early February.
  
  Regards,
  
  ***** *** **** ******
  
  
  
  
   

  

  Business response

  02/28/2024

  We are being and have always been 100% factual and fully candid.
  
  It appears by the response from the customer that the topic at issue is the plant on doors which are an upchargeable option for our refacing service.  We do not push these as they can be expensive.  Therefore, we would only include them if there was discussion, typically sparked by the customer having an interest in this upchargeable option.  As it turned out, that is exactly what happened in this case.
  
  The proposal that was accepted on November 18, 2023, for $14,934.12 included standard end panels.  These are plain end panels for the end of a cabinet run where the side of a cabinet will be exposed.  Our standard refacing service that we perform routinely includes standard end panels.  The vast majority of homeowners that desire a reface do not want the expense of plant on doors on the ends of their cabinet runs.  Therefore, only standard end panels are included in this service.
  
  At the measuring appointment on November 20, 2023, there was no discussion of plant on doors in lieu of end panels.
  
  On the morning of November 21, 2023, the homeowner sent a text at 9:26am requested a call.  They wanted to ask about adding decorative doors on all cabinet run ends, which we call plant on doors, to the order.  We asked them to send a picture of one of the areas to assure there was enough countertop overhang for a plant on door (as we didn't have a picture of that area).  A verbal quote was provided and readily approved by the homeowner, Dawn, to proceed in adding them to the order during the call.  If plant on doors were already included as the homeowner professes there would have been no reason for the homeowner to request this call and engage us in conversation about adding plant-on doors.  The fact is plant on doors were not included nor discussed heretofore.  This is evidenced in that the homeowner made a choice to add them which resulted in a call on November 21, 2023.
  
  Regarding collecting for the additional cost, as we have already stated we had already collected the downpayment on November 20, 2023.  It was our intent to therefore add the additional cost for the plant on doors to the second of three installments.  Also, as we already stated, we overlooked adding the cost to the second installment and therefore chose to add the cost to the third and final installment.
  
  If anything, this minor oversight on our part benefited the homeowner by delaying their need to pay the additional charge sooner.
  
  We regret the homeowner feels the way they do however all product that was requested was accurately delivered, invoiced, and paid.  What the homeowner may be referring to as a mistake was at worst our oversight in adding the additional agreed to charge into the second invoice instead of the third installment.

*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. ↩