ComplaintsforCloverleaf Mechanical LLC.

• Initial Complaint

  01/14/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I called Cloverleaf on 12/12/2021 to repair a furnace in a rental property I own. There were stickers all over the furnace that indicated that Cloverleaf had serviced the furnace a couple of years ago. I paid them $1200 to fix the furnace when they got done. They replaced a blower and a circuit board both of which have been removed by a different company and are now in my house. A day after the furnace was supposedly fixed, it caught fire and smoke filled the house. There are 3 children and 2 adults living in that house. One of the children was laying on the floor and the adults could not hardly see her through the smoke. I called Cloverleaf to see If I could get any of my $1200 back so I could put a new furnace in, and they said they would send me something in the mail. Since Cloverleaf was rude to my tenant, I went with another company and had them put in a new furnace. Cloverleaf should refund at least part of the $1200 since the repair only lasted 1 day before the furnace burned up.

  Business response

  02/03/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2022/01/25) */ The original complaint received was originally responded to as follows: Our office reviewed a complaint received from your agency regarding the consumer listed. This person appears to be the tenant, as this is a rental property address as listed. Appears to be the tenant is how it would be described on our company's part, due to her behavior onsite, as well as the complaint reviewed herein. According to our records, our office was told that the tenant's name was ********* ******, but that she goes by '****' and that the landlord's wife is **** **** *******, but she also goes by '****'. Our office spoke with the landlord, ***** '***' ******* originally when he first contacted us for service back on Sunday, December 12, 2021 and our office ultimately sent him a letter after our final jobsite visit was made to the location referenced on Friday, December 17, 2021. This jobsite visit ended with our technician ultimately leaving the jobsite due to the lady's behavior onsite which was supposedly Mrs. **** **** ******* per Mr. *******. However, our office is wondering now if the lady the tech met with was indeed the tenant and also whether or not the tenant is the landlord's daughter or an unrelated party altogether. The following information was included in the letter to the landlord: 'The technician that was dispatched out on Sunday, December 12, 2021 completed his service testing and contacted you while onsite and informed you of the condition of the furnace. He recommended replacement of the furnace instead of proceeding with the repair. He stated that the furnace even though it was less than 10-years old, it had an overall appearance of a 20-year old furnace. Pictures were documented regarding the system. Our office was advised to quote repair versus replacement the following business day initially by the service tech. Our office received a phone call from you on Monday, December 13, 2021 requesting we only proceed with quoting repairing the existing furnace only and it was later approved to complete the repair only. The part was ordered as of that time. On Wednesday, December 15, 2021, the service technician returned to the jobsite. Upon installing the faulty part and attempting to start the furnace up to complete further testing, it was determined that the circuit board was also faulty. The service technician spoke with you again and recommended replacing the furnace again at this time. The office was updated and a furnace quote was being prepared, but was ultimately stopped when the service technician called back in and stated that you decided you just wanted to repair the existing furnace only. The part was acquired and the tech proceeded with the additional repair that afternoon. On Friday, December 17, 2021, our office was contacted by **** **** *******. She stated that there was smoke coming out of the registers and that the furnace was turned off due to this. A technician was dispatched out to check out the furnace and was greeted by **** **** *******. While onsite the technician asked if the last technician had recommended replacing the furnace. She said yes, but that they decided to do the quoted repairs. She was advised that since 2018, the amount of money in repairs alone for her heating system could have paid for a new furnace to be installed. She acknowledged this and said again that they wanted the repairs only. The technician moved downstairs to the furnace location and found that the blower motor had failed. He turned the furnace back off and left his tools at the furnace area and went back outside to his vehicle to make a phone call to the office for further clarification on the jobsite. The office reviewed with the technician the following information: our company did not install the existing furnace at this location. There were two previous times that our company was out prior to 2021 to this location. Our first service call for this property was in 2017 for a maintenance related repair on the existing furnace causing the furnace to not work. In 2018, another service call was initiated, and the heat exchanger was replaced. Safety combustion tests were completed at those times. The technician went back inside and reviewed this information with **** **** *******. She stated in response that we installed the heat exchanger backwards. She continued with that if we didn't fix the furnace today, she would call the Attorney General and sue our company. She became so agitated that the tech decided when he was able to, to get his tools and leave the jobsite. In doing so, **** **** ******* followed him out to his vehicle and wanted to talk further. She was asked by the technician to back away at one point and she then changed her demeanor and started to plead and beg the technician to stay and fix the furnace. The technician declined to go back inside due to **** **** *******'s overall behavior, including lying about the heat exchanger being installed backwards and making threats, leading him to ultimately leave the jobsite. Our office received a phone call on Monday, December 20, 2021 from you requesting a refund for some money back to go towards a new furnace you had installed at this location that same day. You stated the furnace caught on fire and needed to be replaced. In response to your phone call request on Monday, December 20, 2021, the request has been declined due to the above'. Further, the technician that was onsite on Friday, December 17, 2021 called our office while inside the home during which the office representative that took the call could hear the customer losing her temper in the background on the service technician. From the office end, you could hear the lady talking very loudly in an irrational manner, stating that he either fix her furnace or she would contact the Attorney General's office and sue our company. You hear the technician calmly telling her that he was attempting to give her all of the information that our office had record of regarding her furnace. As previously mentioned, our technicians made a recommendation to replace the furnace multiple times, but the landlord wanted to continue to fix the furnace. Our company does not need clients like this and our company refuses to put our team members in situations like the one that one of them found themselves in on Friday, December 17, 2021. This person even attempted to state that we installed the heat exchanger backwards a couple years ago. You cannot install a heat exchanger backwards. She was reaching and making threats regarding anything that she could think of and her temper got the best of her. Our company completed only the repairs quoted and approved by the landlord. The furnace was working at the time of the approved repairs made. The tech onsite on Friday, December 17, 2021 also confirmed the furnace did not catch on fire. He turned the furnace back off after confirming what part had failed at that time. Our company will not be issuing any refund towards the landlord's furnace installation purchase due to all of this. Further, this complaint received from the landlord goes into great detail regarding a fire, heavy smoke filling the home, children laying on the floor unable to be seen, etc. Yet, the phone call to our office on the morning of Friday, December 17, 2021 did not state this. These statements made in this complaint seem like a serious, life-threatening event took place where a fire department should and would be called out. The technician that was dispatched had his morning schedule changed, in order for this jobsite to be the next service call that morning for him after receiving the call. The landlord was called when the technician was heading to the jobsite. Confirmation with the technician made: The furnace did not catch on fire. There was also no heavy smoke in the home or any lingering odors upon the technician entering the home other than cigarette smoke from the person smoking on the couch. The home was clear upon the tech entering the home, with no visibility issues other than the home being a pigsty. All windows and doors were closed as well. There was a picture taken of the filter during the original call out on Sunday, December 12, 2021 documented on the account that depicts a filter that had not been changed in a couple years- quite possibly from the last repair date in early 2018. Again, while onsite, an office team member heard the interaction of the technician and the person portraying themselves as the landlord when the technician called our office on Friday, December 17, 2021. In addition to this, our technician also has an audio recording while onsite with the person. You can hear at one point the technician attempting to leave due to her behavior and this person following him outside to his vehicle. At one point in the audio, the person is also advised to step away from his truck so he can leave. The comment 'Cloverleaf was rude' is a stretch considering all of the above. Consumer Response /* (3000, 7, 2022/01/26) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) No technician ever told me that the furnace should be replaced instead of repaired. **** **** Hower knew that I was handicapped and could not be on site. She told them that she was my wife so they would confide in her and she could relay the information to me. She said she never said her name was ********* ****** and does not know where they came up with that name. The people at this company are far from being professional. They treated my tenant rudely and lied consistently and their response to this complaint is filled with lies. Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2022/02/02) */ The consumer response is acknowledging that they lied to our company and that both the landlord and the tenant took part in this ruse. On December 17, it was documented from a phone call where the person referring to herself as **** **** ******* is explaining that her name is **** ****, but goes by **** and that the tenant is *********, but goes by ****. The tenant's last name being spelled incorrectly in a note is not the issue. Our office as previously noted, has a recording of the person who has been confirmed as the tenant portraying herself as the landlord to the owner of Cloverleaf while he was onsite on December 17. The consumer himself was contacted multiple times, in order for the technician to discuss the condition of the furnace and recommendations. The consumer made it quite clear multiple times that he did not want to replace the furnace. Our company keeps date and time stamped notes regarding all jobsites. Our company response states the facts of the account. Our company has professionally attempted to resolve this issue with the consumer to no avail.

*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. ↩