Complaints

• Initial Complaint

  04/19/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Several weeks ago, Klassic took a chandelier located at my second home--**** ************** Rd., *********--for repair. They reinstalled it but kept a bulb cover to re-glue its collar. They lost it. The only available replacement required me to buy a similar fixture on eBay for a total of $266.93. (It was listed at $300, but my lower bid was accepted. This figure includes shipping.) Klassic had done some other work, and said they would just off-set the two. I recently learned from my contractor, however, that the recent work was not worth any more than $150. Thus, Klassic is effectively making me pay $116.93 for their negligence in losing my bulb cover. I believe they owe me a check in that amount.

  Business response

  04/26/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2022/04/19) */ We did misplace a bulb that we were trying to fix for the client that was already broken when we arrived. Due to this mishap we had also done more work for the client that was equal to or more than the $300 bulb. The client proceeded to send our company offensive emails and text messages. So we offered to not charge the client for the other work so that she could go onto **** and purchase what she had found to replace the broken bulb. Due to the fact that this was our mishap. After that we politely told the client the we no longer wished to do her electrical work. Consumer Response /* (3000, 7, 2022/04/19) */ First, the response fails to address the crux of my complaint--namely, that I was overcharged for this other work (which magically equaled my expected eBay cost, after he learned what that would be). A proper response would state the time spent and number of workers sent to do that work, if the intention is to defend a charge of $300. In fact, a proper handling of this situation would be for Klassic to send me a fair and appropriate bill for that work, and reimburse me my costs for the replacement. Second, my messages were in no respect "offensive." At most, they were insistent, which is hardly inappropriate given the situation. You already have the emails. I do not know how to send texts to you, so here is a transcript. Judge for yourselves whether anything is offensive: From me to *****, 3/31 9:02pm: Since you are sending someone over tomorrow, could he bring the bulb cover? From ***** to me, 4/1 6:59am: What bulb cover? From me to *****, 4/1 7: 29am: For the kitchen chandelier. It needed to be glued so your guys took it. From me to ***** after learning from his employee that the bulb cover was missing 4/2 10:05: *****, find that bulb cover, fast. It's discontinued, and the only thing I can locate is on eBay for $300. From me to *****, 4/9 2:37 pm: *****--Looking back at my message yesterday, I think it may not have been as clearly an apology as I intended. I apologize for letting my panic over losing the bulb cover affect the tone of my messages to you, and for reading your silence as indifference to the situation. Please accept my apology whether you work for me again or not. I do not wish to leave bad feelings in my wake. Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2022/04/21) */ The owner has now been sent a invoice for the emergency call out to relocate wiring for her sky light. The bill totaled $369.35. There was a few text messages to *****s phone but that is neither here nor there. That is irrelevant at this point. The emergency call we made out to relocate the wiring actually made us have to rearrange our schedule some to accommodate her. The service call was actually more than the cost of the bulb there for we offered to by pass the service call since we misplace the bulb and allow the owner to purchase what she found off of ****. There will be no refund of any sort given to Owner as we did over $300 worth of work that we are not asking for payment on. At this time this matter is closed on our end. Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2022/04/21) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The original claim of $300 for the skylight work was already excessive. Clearly, this business is doubling down and inflating their bill. As I said before, they should be itemizing hours and the number of workers sent, so the fairness of the charge can be made transparent. There's doubtless a reason this wasn't done--hiding an overcharge becomes so much more difficult with itemization. Sending me a FAIR bill is only appropriate if they reimburse me for the costs of obtaining a replacement. And they are both sending me a invoice and not charging me for the work they did, as per the last sentence of their response? Can't have it both ways.

*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. ↩