Complaints

• Initial Complaint

  07/05/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  1. Briefly describe your problem. On June 13, 2023, I made a demand of $39,731.28 against Carter Services **** (Carter Services), Contractors License # ******, for my damages caused by their negligence in not properly sealing pre-existing items on a roof after connecting various refrigerant lines from a new 2 ton heat pump. I have not received any reply from Carter Services other than they have zero responsibility. They claim that the items on the roof were already there when they connected the various lines from the new air conditioning unit, and therefore, had no legal responsibility from any damages caused by the fact that it was improperly sealed. I offered to Carter to come and look at the problem. They never came. They were predetermined to deny everything and made their decision in bad-faith. Therefore, I am filing this complaint with the BBB. Even though their insurance company claimed they do not owe money, it was not a judicial ruling and not in anyway compliant with the law or negligence. The bottom line argument here that Carter through its insurance company tries to make is that the items on the roof that were already there was not Carters responsibility (even though different items directly from the new air conditioning unit was hooked up to those items on the roof.) In other words, Carter Air Conditioning, with over 30 years of experience and is licensed and is specifically licensed in air conditioning could not check for leaks or anything else to ensure it was properly sealed. They apparently could not assume that it would have been possible that putting a new air con and attaching new hoses, etc. may have caused the very leaks. In other words, the insurance companys only argument is that because it was not Carters actual items on the roof, the fact that the new air conditioning had hoses and other items connecting to those items completely absolves them of any responsibility to have ensured there were no leaks.

  Business response

  08/07/2023

  Having been through a significant roof leak experience personally at a prior building we occupied, I have a lot of empathy for Mt ******* experience.
  At present it is our belief we are not the cause of the leak(s) on the Flat roof of Mr. ******* building.
  In Mr. ******* letter and statement of facts there are some omissions of facts and misstatement or misunderstanding of facts. Some are addressed below.
  We have asked **************** for the invoice from the roofing company, indicating what they found and their recommendations. What is the overall condition of his roof? With all the documents he has presented, that invoice document is missing from his exhibits and has never been presented to us.
  In Mr. ******* letter he extracted out of context our mention of a leak test, implying we did a water leak test but failed to check the existing roof penetrations. The leak test we performed was a refrigerant gas leak test at our brazed connections. Our invoice states System was brazed in and a leak check was performed. Vacuum was brought to 300 microns.  This is the process followed to ensure no leaks of refrigerant.
  **************** stated that we did not test to make sure it was not leaking{water?}. It is unclear how he expected that test will be performed. During the 19+ months after the installation there was plenty of rainfall to perform his desired test. One full winter and most of a 2nd winter before the water leak occurred. In December 2021 there was significant rain with 2 of rain in a single day in **********, with no reported leaks. There was rain in 2022 and plenty of rain in 2023 prior to his leak. 20 to 25 inches worth per the NOAA.
  I have forwarded Mr. ******* 10-page letter to our insurance company for review. I am not an attorney, so I wont try to address Mr. ******* legal arguments.
  Our insurance company advised **************** that when he provides additional information to support his claim they will gladly reconsider their liability determination.
  

*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. ↩