ComplaintsforMt. Juliet Plumbing And Leak Detection, LLC

• Initial Complaint

  10/06/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Date of Service: 9/19/2022 Date of Payment: Paid $4,300 on 9/26/2022 - Invoice INV2847 Nature of Dispute: Excessive $3,800 charge for access/egress to cut four hours in drywall to determine location of leak and piping reroute. Price also raised $500 from initial invoice without explanation at completion of the job. Damaged flooring. Resolution by Business: Business refused to provide breakdown of $3,800 access/egress charge and stated they will take no further action. They stated they deny any wrongdoing and reserve the right for a defamation lawsuit if I write reviews of my negative experience online. Request of Customer: 1. Business to provide an equitable refund of $3,000 for access/egress charges. Per a ****** Review from two months ago, another customer was charged $199 by this Business for cutting holes in drywall to find a leak. Four holes were cut in my drywall so $800 is fair price based on other pricing from this Business. 2. Provide a breakdown of the "access/egress" charge. Attachments: Email Correspondence, Insurance Documents, Invoices, Photos of Floor Damage Summary: Unfortunately, my service with this business has been inadequate because I was refused explanation of excessive access/egress charges and received threat of lawsuit on multiple occasions instead of an explanation. I am disappointed because: 1. my hardwood flooring was damaged by their employees; 2. my request for additional information about the access/egress invoice charges were responded to with threat of late fees and lawyers instead of an explanation; 3. in the opinion of my insurance company, information provided by the Business about my damage was misrepresented to my insurance company in an attempt to get the loss covered by insurance; 4. my request for a breakdown of the "$3,500.00 - $5,000.00 Access/Egress" charge was ignored and; 5. no explanation was provided upon discovery of another one of Business's customers being charged $199 to cut a hole in their drywall to find a leak.

  

  Business response

  10/12/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2022/10/06) */ We have already gone back and forth with this customer about his job and the only thing that will make him happy is if he gets his way and gets his job cist reduced by a large amount of money that he committed to pay. When we do jobs like his, we always give an estimated rage of the total job cost. In this particular situation a range of total cost was specified and the amount that he keyed into the total amount on our electronic invoice he received was $4,000, but he was aware that it could be more because it was written on the same electronic invoice and the original invoice from the first day we went to his home to detect his water leak. We informed the customer that in many cases the insurance company would pay for a claim such as this because water damage is being created even if it can't be seen. We informed him that his out of pocket would be $1500 if his insurance were to cover his claim. His insurance did not cover his claim and so he was responsible for the entire amount even if it were at the very top of our original estimate. Access and egress is an insurance terminology and is irrelevant since his insurance denied his claim. The customer complained about floor damage, but has refused to allow anyone from our company to come over and assess the claim he is making. We decided to reduce his total bill by $200.00 & he said that was good. We also offered to have someone come clean the floor he is claiming got damaged but he has refused that offer. His flooring of course is not new and it is a builder's grade laminate that isn't very durable in the Plumbers opinion, but se still wanted to try and make it right so we discounted the customers bill. He started changing his behavior after his insurance company refused to accept his claim after going back and forth with them. His insurance company presented extremely low ball numbers on the documents the customer has presented. We performed a similar job the same week and those customers claims were covered by their insurance. Their bill was a similar total and they are extremely happy with our work. We had to inform the customer about the terms of our contact due to his delayed payment because payment is due upon completion of the job and the customer mysteriously disappeared when he knew our Plumbers were wrapping up. The customer keeps claiming that we charged him $3,800.00 to cut sheet rock. This isn't true or accurate. There are several aspects of the job that fall under access and egress. The customer has demanded an itemized bill. We don't provide a tone with an itemized bill because we provide flat rate pricing. We don't charge by the hour. We charge by the job so the price would have been the same no matter how long it took to perform the work specified in our contract with the customer. The customer has gone on and on about how he was over charged and has threatened to do serious damage to our companies great reputation if we don't see things his way and give him an estimated total of 2/3 of the jobs total cost. We can't do that just because he's creating a problem unrelated to the plumbing problem we resolved for him. We have informed the customer of the potential legal liability he may face if he makes false claims about our company. These aren't threats. We just want him to know that we care greatly about the great reputation we've worked really hard to build, but aren't going to pay him for working on his house by reducing his job total after the fact. If the customer was unhappy with the price, he should have said something sooner and we wouldn't have performed the work for the amount of money he wants to spend. He's even trying to get his bill under the total we informed him it would cost if his insurance company paid his claim. We aren't really sure how we can accommodate him without revoking the contract that he agreed to and cutting our own legs of on the money side. It is our opinion that the customer isn't being rational in this situation and that he's basing some of his complaint on a 3rd party that isn't accurately assessing his claim or what it should cost because we do these jobs regularly and the I stance usually pays them with no questions asked. So we question ******* ******* assessment of the situation. We wish we could make the customer happy, but it's not possible to make every customer happy. We have many satisfied customers, bust most unsatisfied customers in our experience is money related. They want a different deal after the original deal was made and satisfied and that's not how we run our business. We provide great and fast service with up front take it or leave it flat rate pricing. This is exactly what this customer received. Consumer Response /* (3000, 8, 2022/10/10) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The business's response is not satisfactory. I still respectfully request BBB for conciliation so that the Business: 1. provide an equitable refund for access/egress charges. Per a******* Review from two months ago, another customer was charged $199 by this Business for cutting holes in drywall to find a leak. Four holes were cut in my drywall so $800 is fair price based on other pricing from this Business. I will offer to amend my initial request of a refund from $3,000 to a refund of $2,800. 2. Provide a breakdown of the "access/egress" charge. Please address the following from my initial complaint: "3. in the opinion of my insurance company, information provided by the Business about my damage was misrepresented to my insurance company in an attempt to get the loss covered by insurance". From ******* ******: "The concerns I have with the estimate provided is that it was listed in the inspection notes indicates that the "home is currently flooding when the hot water valve is open and is causing detrimental damage to the structure". Based on the discussion that we have and the inspection that was done by out water mitigation company this information is not correct as there was no damage seen to the home. This information would make me question whether the plumbing company worded it this way to attempt to get the loss covered by insurance which is why they suggested having the repairs completed immediately as they would be covered by insurance. If the damage had happened as described in the inspection notes there likely would be coverage for this loss but because there was no resulting damage to the home there is unfortunately no coverage for the access and egress." Do you have a response to this? As a plumbing company, you are a trusted advisor for your customers. Your employee advised me to be "vague with my insurance claim" & that his write-up would be written such that the work would be covered. I did not take this advice & provided all of the necessary information to my insurance company. Your employee led me to believe that my insurance would cover my claim & advised me to go with the more expensive reroute option. In the opinion of my insurance company, your employee misrepresented my case & my insurance company called out this potentially fraudulent water damage claim. My insurance company questioned whether your company's write-up was worded in an attempt to get the loss covered by insurance. My insurance company reviewed my invoice & assessed the cost to be about $1,300. When I questioned your access/egress charge, your response was a threat of lates fees & lawyers. Your invoice was due immediately before I could even get an assessment from my insurance company. I have never had an issue like this before & as a first-time customer, I looked to your company as a trusted advisor. In regards to the cost for access/egress, I feel taken advantage of instead of taken care of. Please address the following from the Business's response: 1. Flooring: "His flooring of course is not new and it is a builder's grade laminate that isn't very durable in the Plumbers opinion" If your employee knew my floor was not very durable, why were there no precautions taken to try & protect it? The quality of my flooring doesn't matter. Your employee does not have liberty to do as they please. Your initial response was that the damage was existing & your company claimed no wrongdoing. This is not the case but if you indeed want to make this right I will let you come try to clean/repair the scuffs & scratches. 2. "His insurance company presented extremely low ball numbers on the documents the customer has presented." As seen in the documents provided, my insurance company's estimate for access/egress was around $800. This is corroborated by pricing provided by your company to another customer. Per a******* Review from two months ago, another one of your customer's was charged $199 for cutting holes in drywall to find a leak. Four holes were cut in my drywall so $800 does not seem to be a "low ball" number for this work based on your own pricing to another customer. 3. "customer mysteriously disappeared when he knew our Plumbers were wrapping up": It is unnecessary & unprofessional to say that I left "mysteriously" & imply there was some nefarious reason for me not being home at the end of the job. I told your plumbers that I had to pick up my son from school & would be back. I do not recall them telling me they were almost done but they were gone when I returned. 4. "There are several aspects of the job that fall under access and egress." Your company has claimed to be up front with me but has refused to provide a breakdown of the access/egress charge. What are the several aspects of the job that fall under access and egress? 5. "Their bill was a similar total and they are extremely happy with our work." To reference a customer whose bill was covered by insurance is not an equivalent example. As I have said from the beginning, I am happy with your plumbing work. I am not happy with your lack of transparency about a $4,000 access/egress charge with no detail provided. I was told by your admin on the phone that access/egress is for exploration of the leak. Your employees discovered the leak & diagnosed the issue within the first hour or two of the work. To discover the extent of the leak & reroute, they cut four holes in my drywall. Am I truly paying $4,000 to cut four holes in my drywall & two hours of exploratory work? This cannot be a fair, equitable price. 6. "We don't provide a tone with an itemized bill because we provide flat rate pricing. We don't charge by the hour. We charge by the job so the price would have been the same no matter how long it took to perform the work specified in our contract with the customer." If you provide flat rate pricing, why was another customer only charged $200 to cut dry wall to find a leak? Why did my final bill increase from the initial $4,000 to $4,500 without explanation? 7. "Access and egress is an insurance terminology and is irrelevant since his insurance denied his claim." Access/egress is relevant because it is a line item on my invoice. 8. "So we question ******* ******* assessment of the situation." Your company talked to ******* ****** on my behalf. You previously stated via email on 9/29/2022, 4:09 PM, that my insurance company didn't appear to have a justifiable reason to deny my claim. What are these reasons? Did you discuss these reasons with them? 9. "If the customer was unhappy with the price, he should have said something sooner and we wouldn't have performed the work for the amount of money he wants to spend." When my insurance company reviewed my claim & questioned the access/egress charge, I notified your company as soon as possible. Your company advised me to move forward quickly with a more expensive option. In good faith, I moved forward with your company but your company attempted to word my write-up to get it covered by insurance & my case was misrepresented. Yes I am unhappy with the price because I am seemingly being taken advantage of in an insurance $ game. I have respectfully asked for a breakdown of the access/egress charge which is not unreasonable. 10. "We have informed the customer of the potential legal liability he may face if he makes false claims about our company." I have not made & will not make any false claims about your company. If there is no resolution, I will be providing reviews of my experience online. I would encourage customers to use your company for plumbing services as I do not have issue with the plumbing work. However, I would encourage customers to not rush into the work as I did without full understanding of pricing & coverage by their insurance. It is better to go without water & wait until after their insurance company has reviewed any claims & invoices from your company. 11. "He's even trying to get his bill under the total we informed him it would cost if his insurance company paid his claim. We aren't really sure how we can accommodate him without revoking the contract that he agreed to and cutting our own legs of on the money side." I offer to amend my refund request to $2,800 so my total payment is $1,500 as I was led to believe by your employee. Reconsider access/egress cost. 12. "It is our opinion that the customer isn't being rational...basing some of his complaint on a 3rd party that isn't accurately assessing his claim or what it should cost because we do these jobs regularly and the I stance usually pays them with no questions asked." It is rational to ask for a breakdown in cost that appears to be excessive & when recommended by my insurance company. Please provide explanation how ******* ****** did not accurately assess my claim & the cost for access/egress. The accusation that ******* ****** has a stance that "usually pays them with no questions asked" is not relevant to my case & unsubstantiated. This should Business Response /* (4000, 10, 2022/10/11) */ Again, we have had several back and forth conversations with the customer and he refuses to be rational. He is making claims about our business that would be classified as hearsay and borderline defamatory. He has no legal basis and is using words like equity as if we are an item in a family court instead of a customer/contractor relationship. We deny the accuracy of the customer's claims about what he claims that we promised to him what his 3rd party insurance company would or wouldn't do and we never authorized him or his insurance company to determine what the job would cost that we performed after a price was already agreed to by the two parties involved - home owner/Mt. Juliet Plumbing before the work was performed. We had an agreement with the customer and have no legal liability or ethical responsibility to reduce his job total in any way. The customer has exhausted his chances of a real resolution because when we offered to reduce his price by $200.00, he agreed that was a fair amount so we reduced his cost and this was supposed to close the matter. Now after the fact, the customer wants to build a new argument against Mt. Juliet Plumbing in an effort to scam the business out of a good sum of money. We have shown good faith in resolving this issue by reducing the customers price by about 5% & didn't make the customer pay the credit card transaction fees that our contract requires for jobs his size. The customer has claimed his flooring is damaged, but agreed that the discount was fair to cover this claim of his and the written disclaimers in the contract did not require us to offer any type of discount but we did it to resolve the customers complaint and believd this would resolve matters, but then the customer found a new matter. He didn't like the price because his insurance company didn't cover his claim. If the customer would have followed basic instructions by the plumber his claim may have been accepted because detrimental damage was occurring to his property even though it wasn't visible. Also moisture detectors used by water restoration companies don't always work and the moisture could have dried up between the time the water restoration company came out. We turned the water off and then immediately repaired the leak. The customer didn't share the details about a water restoration company until later on which makes us believe that they didn't come out until after repairs were made.The customer is just fishing for a way to get his price significantly reduced and we are not inclined to fulfill his desire to scam us for his own gain. His accusations don't make since because if we wanted to charge the customer more money, we could have charged him more. He wants his job total reduced by about 2/3 of the amount we agreed to. This is highway robbery and blackmailing. "If you don't give me what I want, I'll ruin your reputation." We earned the money he was charged and fulfilled every aspect of our contract with the customer. He abusing the system to blackmail his way into a better deal. As the flooring goes, the customer refused to let us in after the day we performed the job and several days have lapsed where other damage could have been done to the floor from normal wear and tear, another contractor or even by personal vandalism by the customer. We have no way now of validating the customers claim about his floor which is the customer's only true complaint. This of course should have already been resolved because of our initial job cost reduction. We did this even though the disclaimer in our contract indemnifies us if damage were to occur in a situation like this. We wish we could resolve this with the customer but his complaint in its own right doesn't make it possible to resolve it without giving him things we are not required to do under our contract or in an ethical aspect. If you'd like to view the invoice or the terms of our contact, you can reach out to our office and request it separately. We can also be reached by phone to discuss the matter further.

*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. ↩