Complaints

• Initial Complaint

  05/12/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  Had a water leak in basement on Nov 24, 2022. Tech came and snaked laundry line and charged $560+tax and said leak was fixed. One week later same place leaked again. Different tech came, used camera to find root cause which was apparently in the main line and cleared blockage, quoted $660+tax. Called main office (their number on ******) for a resolution on the invoice amount because if the second tech came the first time, we would not have had to call them again to fix the issue. Main office refused to budge and started mansplaining to spouse. After half an hour main office refused to resolve issue and told us to resolve it with tech, refused to escalate to a manager or owner. Another half hour later settled for half of invoice with tech out of goodwill. We have no issue with the second tech but have an issue with the first tech not doing their job and the company providing terrible customer service. Their argument was that the first tech snaked the laundry line which is a different issue than the main line. But the issue we originally called them for was to resolve the water leak, we are not plumbers we have no way of knowing where the leak is. The first tech did not do a proper diagnosis leading us to having to call them again a week later to fix the same issue. I am now asking for a refund on both invoices which I paid a combined $890+tax for stress caused and time wasted.

  

  Business response

  10/12/2022

  Dear customer,
  
       We understand that effectiveness, due diligence, and honesty/respect is important to all of our clients. Our response to your complaint will be how we displayed those values during our humble visit to your home. 
       During both of our visit we were effective in assessing, and solving the problem, and during the process both the first tech, Tenzin, and 2nd tech Suraj were thorough in explaining the work, and updating any price changes as the issue became dynamic. Both Technicians did a expert job in detecting and resolving the issue, on November 23, 2022, Tenzin found that the floor drain underneath the kitchen sink was overflowing, so he snaked the kitchen line in witness to you and the landlord, and after snaking Tenzin ran all fixtures for testing the leak (washroom, kitchen, and the laundry) to see if the floor drain was overflowing and it did not, which was witnessed both by you and the landlord, displaying our due diligence. After that Tenzin notified the landlord that any drain services performed by Everest drain & Plumbing does not have warranty. At the end Tenzin the first tech said both the tenant and the landlord were happy, and also the toilet gasket was, an additional job asked by you, replaced during the first week because of a leak there. 
  
       On December 3, 2022, the complainant stated there was a leak in the same spot again, referring to the floor drain underneath the kitchen sink. So far for 10 days there was no issue regarding a leak. The reason for a floor drain overflow again was due to an obstruction in the main drain line which was found by the second tech, Suraj, who came on December 3rd, while using a video camera inspection device. The issue was immediately reported to the complainant. As the blockage was discovered and snaking was recommended Suraj increased the total price now including the charge for video camera inspection and then snaking the main drain line, which the customer happily agreed. The reason the main drain line was not considered a aggravating factor was because after snaking the kitchen line in the first week by Tenzin the problem was solved, but most importantly, over the ten days either a previous blockage was beginning to accumulate or a new blockage was accumulating over the ten days in the main drain line. We are expert plumbers we try to assume all the scenarios, but cannot check for all of the possibilities because that would take us days and  we would lose many of our clients business, and for a simple clog only a couple hours to resolve is sufficient as demonstrated by both Tenzin and Suraj. Suraj also tested his work by running the fixtures, resulting in resolution of the deficiency, again demonstrating our plumbing firm’s firm commitment to due diligence in our work to all of our clients.
  
       At the end we displayed effectiveness in our work, honestly, respectfully and clearly communicated to our clients and persons of interest, and tested our work after resolving the issue. In both cases of Tenzin and Suraj no fault can be beared as the issue was resolved in both cases but most critically, aggravating conditions were created in the main drain line over the ten days gap between Tenzin’s visit and Suraj’s visit. The complainant also states that there was time wasted and stress caused, we apologize for those things, but right after Suraj completed his work on December the 3rd, the complainant withheld payment from him for about 4 hours even agreeing with the total cost beforehand and even started threatening our plumbing tech, Suraj, by calling the police, which we find this behaviour as unacceptable, and contemptible. After holding Suraj for four hours, our plumbing firm could not deliver to other clients in need resulting in profit loss for our small plumbing business. At the end Suraj lowered the total price of $680( includes 1st hour, 2nd hour, video camera inspection, and snaking )to $330, and eventually the complainant agreed, and our Everest technician Suraj promptly departed. To say that the only one with stress caused and time wasted is the complainant is untrue, our technician to our business as a whole was given a headache only because of a ********* client who could not honour his payment. In the end our plumbing firm as a whole feel ********* and brought in to false premises of a honoured Payment after completion of the work. This is our side of the story, we have the facts on our side and we have presented to the best and most respectful possible way our perspective while limiting our own opinion.

  Customer response

  10/12/2022

  
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  The business is making a false claim that complainant threatened to call the police. We also did not withhold your tech for 4 hours. We called the main office on the day of to try to seek a credit on the first invoice as the issue was not resolved. The issue was never the amount of the invoice of the second visit but rather that the issue was not resolved in the first visit and therefore a credit should be applied to the customers account and we wanted to net settle with the second invoice. Main office refused to negotiate in good faith and was **** and ****** to my spouse on the phone. After wasting time with main office on the phone, who did not offer any resolution, we suggested that Suraj leave us an invoice and we will call the main office to resolve the payment. We are not the ones that withheld your tech, it was the business' lack of adequate customer service and lack of willingness to come to a reconciliation that ultimately wasted your own tech's time. 

  The clog Suraj found on the second visit was 35ft from where the clog was. A clog that far does not magically appear in the course of 10 days.

  The business' response, which contains no apology for a lack of effort to reconcile on the day of the second visit, subsequently tries to turn the blame onto the customer. Of course there are two sides to every story but this shows a complete lack of willingness to take ownership for any error and grief the business has caused. 

  Sincerely,
  
  ***** ********

  

  Business response

  17/12/2022

  Dear customer,
  
       We do not want to go back and forth and we have a business to run, we understand we cannot please everyone with the service we provide, we started from humble beginnings since 2013 and we have only got this far through hard work, due diligence, respect, and honesty in our work. Before every visit by our Everest drain & Plumbing technician to a job site we clearly communicate via phone call from our call centre to our clients, the time of arrival and approximate job costs including variability of costs as the availability of materials can have an impact on the cost. The fact is Suraj our second tech can attest to the complainant withholding payment for about 4 hours and the threats the complainant made to Suraj. During the second visit with Suraj the complainant try to negotiate a pre agreed price of $680, and we tried not to budge as we have mouths to feed in our own company as well. The complainant could not be reconciled with and we lowered the price to $330 which puts us at a profit loss. Regarding the first visit with our plumbing expertise in Tenzin we found the best solution and nothing happened for 10 days. For the issue which was not resolved within the first visit we would also direct the complainant to our previous statement, “ We are expert plumbers we try to assume all the scenarios, but cannot check for all of the possibilities because that would take us days and  we would lose many of our clients business, and for a simple clog only a couple hours to resolve is sufficient as demonstrated by both Tenzin and Suraj. Suraj and Tenzin( correction )also tested his work by running the fixtures, resulting in resolution of the deficiency, again demonstrating our plumbing firm’s firm commitment to due diligence in our work to all of our clients. “           After the first visit no issue for ten days as we have reinstated numerous times, but the main drain line later become the issue and over the 10 days anything can happen the complainant may have flushed excess waste down a toilet, or any other fixture. Over time the accumulation of waste probably created a clog later discovered by Suraj. Also If there was no issue with the second visit then why is the complainant trying to push for a net settle with the second invoice, there is no merit in the complainant case, this is all trying to look like a ***** scheme, and we do not want to be part of such a ********* transaction. In addition, we have checked, interviewed, and verified the office caller and we can attest that no one in the office has been acting as ****** or **** to the spouse of the complainant. 
  
  Since 2013, we have not received any complaints that we have been ******* or **** by anyone, yes our tone when we say certain plumbing and drain processes, procedures, and terminology may sound condescending, we do not mean to sound that way, and we only try to explain it gently and nicely to all our consumers. We have been both hurt by this transaction, but the profit loss we incurred can never be recovered. In conclusion, we believe the complainant is trying to underpay for a service for fair value since the start shown by withholding payment from Suraj for 4 hours after pre agreeing a price of $680, and also trying to net settle with the second invoice when the complainant says there was no issue with the second visit by Suraj.
  

  Customer response

  19/12/2022

  
  Better Business Bureau:
  

  I do not find the business response acceptable but I do not wish to waste any more time on this matter when it is clear the business has no understanding of wrongdoing, does not investigate incidents properly, nor do they understand what the term "net settle" means. If the business continues to lose customers due to its lack of adequate customer service that is not my problem.

*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. ↩