BBB Accredited Business since
BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.
Request a Quote
A BBB Accredited Business since
BBB has determined that EagleLift, Inc. meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.
BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.
Reason for Rating
BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.
Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details
|Complaint Type||Total Closed Complaints|
|Problems with Product/Service||0|
|Total Closed Complaints||1|
Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews
|Customer Experience||Total Customer Reviews|
|Total Customer Reviews||0|
Licensing, Bonding or Registration
This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.
These agencies may include:
Contractors State License Board
9821 Business Park Dr, Sacramento CA 95827
Phone Number: (800) 321-2752
The number is 778157.
Type of Entity
Business ManagementMr. Donald Moody, President
Concrete - Prestressed Foundation Repair & House Leveling Engineering Contractors - General Foundation Contractors Concrete Construction Forms & Accessories
10410 Trademark St
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (877) 752-2522 (866) 221-0369 (909) 980-6222 Directions
What is a BBB Business Review?
We offer free reviews on businesses that include background, licensing, consumer experience and other information such as governmental actions that is known to BBB. These reviews are provided for businesses that are BBB accredited and also for businesses that are not BBB accredited.
About BBB Business Review Content & Services:
Some Better Business Bureaus offer additional content & services in BBB Business Reviews.
The additional content & services are typically regional in nature or, in some cases, a new product or service that is being tested prior to a more general release.
Not all enhanced content & services are available at all Better Business Bureaus.
Types of Complaints Handled by BBB
BBB handles the following types of complaints between businesses and their customers so long as they are not, or have not been, litigated:
- Advertising or Sales
- Billing or Collection
- Problems with Products or Services
- Guarantee or Warranty
We do not handle workplace disputes, discrimination claims or claims about the quality of health or legal services.
BBB Complaint Process
Your complaint will be forwarded to the business within two business days. The business will be asked to respond within 14 days, and if a response is not received, a second request will be made. You will be notified of the business's response when we receive it (or notified that we received no response). Complaints are usually closed within 30 business days.
What is BBB Advertising Review?
BBB promotes truth in advertising by contacting advertisers whose claims conflict with the BBB Code of Advertising. These claims come to our attention from our internal review of advertising, consumer complaints and competitor challenges. BBB asks advertisers to prove their claims, change ads to make offers more clear to consumers, and remove misleading or deceptive statements.
What government actions does BBB report on?
BBB reports on known government actions that are relevant to the business's marketplace dealings with the public.
BBB Reporting Policy
As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business.
BBB Business Reviews are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. Information in this BBB Business Review is believed reliable but not guaranteed as to accuracy.
BBB Business Reviews generally cover a three-year reporting period. BBB Business Reviews are subject to change at any time.
Additional Phone Numbers
- (866) 221-0369(Phone)
- (909) 980-6222(Phone)
Complaint Trends - Last 3 Years
Customer Review Trends
BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview
BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.
|Customer Review Experience||Value|
|Positive Review||5 points per review|
|Neutral Review||3 points per review|
|Negative Review||1 point per review|
BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.
BBB Letter Grade Scale
Star Rating scale
BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: Salesman described foam injection to be performed at 2 levels, only performed at 1 level, home not stabilized, never informed us, we discovered Issues #1) Contract stated two levels of foam injections, online videos for Uretek show this, we paid for this, and they also stated they'd know how deep to go based on DCP testing (how weak the soil under the foundation was). DCP testing was performed only in one spot, 22 feet from foundation! Refusing to return to perform DCP testing to prove to us job was done properly. Also shimmed posts under home (against code) rather than replacing lumber as agreed. Placed home on airbags and then blew foam freely, not under pressure as was described to us would be done. Issue #2) Did not reconnect one sprinkler pipe and sealed area up. Eventually sprinkler system flooded area and home shifted. Originally they denied responsibility but we had photos of the cutting of pipes by them, and they then admitted. Agreed to return, but have now, after almost two years, have said they will no longer discuss matter with us. Was warned they would likely not inject as much material as promised, but trusted them (even told them about this warning by two other individuals before work commenced). We never would have discovered the breach in contract (shimmed posts, injection at only one level, DCP test performed only in one spot, 22' from home) had the sprinkler pipe flood not occurred. They never informed us that they only injected at one level until we directly asked them about it after the flood. All online Uretek (a patented material) literature refers to DCP testing (to determine the depth of injections needed) being done near the foundation (to discover the areas of weaker soil strata) yet Eagle Lift performed a single DCP test at 22' from our foundation ("at the lowest area of the yard" as instructed by a salesman, not an engineer). Yet they are trying to justify injecting at only one depth, even though the contract, and everything the salesman described about the process (and how it is shown online) says they will be injecting at two. Mr. *****, the owner, told me via phone that it wasn't my place to question how they did what they did, only that our house was now level. I disagree, especially when their salesman and Uretek online educational materials are very specific about the process, and especially when the flood they caused made our home shift (they've been out to measure and have agreed this is true). If water under the home can move our house easily, and we paid an additional $20k to have drainage work done per the Eagle Lift warranty requirements, and if our home is truly stable, this should not have happened. We believe others who had warned us about Eagle Lift's fraudulent practices were accurate and we should have listened. E.L. claims that no-one ever needs to call-in warranty work (which is really only good for two years, and only if you've had proper drainage installed) and that they have a perfect BBB rating. We believe, without a doubt, this is a systemic practice within the company, to inject less than promised or needed, in order to save $ (they must pay for Uretek foam they use). They will reply saying that they tried to negotiate with us and that we "will never be satisfied", but we have made many adjustments to our original offer and the main thing they won't agree on is repeat DCP testing, with a blow count of 10 as the threshold (what we were originally told indicated stable soil). This is very peculiar and points suspiciously to the fact that proper DCP testing would likely reveal that there is weak soil under our foundation and they did not go down to that level, yet they determined (on their own, without telling us, even though I was home the entire time work was being done) they only needed to inject at 1 level based on the one DCP test done nowhere near the foundation of our home.
Desired Settlement: Settlement amount to be determined: to cover removal of foam, repairs to home, out-of-pocket expenses from us to date to discover these breaches in contract and fraud, attorney fees (negotiations over past year), and refund of monies paid for work that was done.
Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/02/04) */ EagleLIFT appreciates the opportunity to respond to the client's complaint. It is always our goal to ensure that our customers are completely satisfied. When presented with the client's concerns nearly two years ago, EagleLIFT and our Council, began working closely with the client's and ultimately their attorney in an attempt to resolve their issues. While we would like to amicably resolve this dispute, at this juncture a settlement has not been achieved, but not for lack of effort on both sides. Issue # 1- Client states that, "foam injection should have been performed at 2 levels and EagleLIFT performed injections at one level. Feels home was not stabilized. EagleLIFT shimmed posts instead of replaced. Clients describes home on air bags and then blew foam freely, not under pressure as described". Response to Issue #1- The customer is referring to a statement in the contract under the heading, Uretek Deep Injection, it says, "the injections will be placed on 4' centers. The urethanes will be installed to a depth sufficient to stabilize the foundations" The depth is estimated to be at the 3' and 7' levels"... EagleLIFT contends that we did inject at "depths sufficient to stabilize foundations" according to the contract. EagleLIFT performed and used DCP test results to identify the sufficient depth. The DCP test was not a line item in the contract, but was performed for the client, by EagleLIFT, to ensure that we injected at the proper level. The verbiage in the contract expressly states that 3' and 7' are "estimated levels" of injection. They are not necessarily the actual injection points. Client alleges that the home is not stabilized, the client does not provide information or data for us to evaluate and respond to this allegation. It is EagleLIFT position that upon job completion the home was stable. We have pictures of the work in progress, documentation of the work and pre and post job elevations. In regards to the shimmed posts, EagleLIFT offered a replacement repair, despite the fact that the contract only called for "adjustments". To address the clients contention that the geopolymer was free blown and not administered under pressure the free blown bearing capacity of the product must be taken into consideration and appropriately compared to the required bearing capacity of soil for new foundations. The latter will be addressed first. The bearing capacity of soil for new foundations is 2500 PSF. The free blown capacity of the geopolymer is 9000 PSF, therefore, even in a free blown state the polymer is nearly 4x's stronger than the bearing capacity for new foundations. Issue # 2- EagleLIFT did not reconnect the sprinkler line. Client states," EagleLIFT initially said they would return to the property but after two years EagleLIFT has said they will no longer discuss the matter with us". Client further asserts that we "breached the contract" by shimming the posts, injecting at one level and performing a DCP test that they allege was 22 ft from the home". Response to Issue # 2- In response to the sprinkler line disconnection, there is an invoice from the Contractor hired by the client's to repair their detached sprinkler line. In the document dated May 24, 2013 an employee of EagleLIFT confirms that pipes were disconnected but one remained disconnected. Upon discovery, Bill McKeown, the foreman on the job worked with the Contractor to identify problem. The client's complaint goes on to describe that EagleLIFT will no longer work with them. EagleLIFT employee's, VP-Operations and EagleLIFT's Council spent roughly 1 1/2 years negotiating with the client's and their attorney. To address the client's allegation that EagleLIFT breached the contract by shimming the posts and conducting a DCP testing 22 feet from the house, we cite the contract (Option B) selected by the client. Option B included: Uretek Deep Injection, Interior Post Adjustment, Excavation, R&R Concrete and mobilization. The contract does not include the DCP test that the client alleges we did improperly. Based on the contract, EagleLIFT was not obligated to conduct the DCP at all, but did so to ensure positive results for the client. The client insists that EagleLIFT systematically engages in fraudulent practices. EagleLIFT has completed hundreds of successful residential, commercial and Public Works projects for more than 15 years. During this time we have built relationships with clients that have brought us repeat business. In response to this claim, EagleLIFT emphatically denies deliberately engaging in fraudulent practices, It is our stance that the "so-called breaches of contract" were not items listed in the contract or were specifically excluded in our contract such as damage to utility and private lines. Please see attached recent testimonials from satisfied EagleLIFT customers. The final part of the complaint states that EagleLIFT will reply by saying that we tried to negotiate and the client will never be satisfied. Please find the attached correspondence detailing EagleLIFT's final offer to the client during the negotiation process. This offer, denied by the client, included Option A -$ 12,000.00 monetary settlement and additional improvements per agreement. Option B- a monetary only settlement, in the amount of $17,000.00, which is over the half of the original contracted amount. The client's declined to settle with either Option A or B. The complaint closes with the client stating that we will not agree with the parameters they have set forth for administering our DCP test. Again, EagleLIFT would like to point out that the DCP was not even part of the original contract and therefore the claim that we "breached" the contract by performing it erroneously, is false. Nevertheless, EagleLIFT made concessions with the client during our final settlement agreement we agreed to perform DCP's at two locations on the property. In the interest of client satisfaction and to avoid a lengthy and costly litigation, it has been our inclination to resolve the client's issues. Please read recent testimonals from satisfied customers. 1/22/2015 I have owned my house for 7 years now, and around 2 years ago my wife and I have noticed we were having door issues(sticking), and several cracks were appearing through out our home. we realized we had sinking foundation issues. When we finally decide to get this issue taken care of, we contacted EagleLIFT and set up an appointment, They were very quick to respond and was able set up an appointment on the day that I had requested. I met with Gary Tyler, and he was very friendly and knowledgeable, and explained everything very thoroughly. He also helped me throughout the entire process from the beginning to the end. The actual work was performed over a three day period. The foreman Armando Rodriguez called me and said he and his crew Juan and Jose, would be at my house at a specific time and they were very prompt, and they were very professional. As the work was being done, Armando explained everything and answered all my questions. I am a very satisfied customer, and would recommend EaglLIFT for anyone who is having issues with a sinking foundation. Thank you very much for a job well done!!! 12/1/2014 Thank you EagleLift for sending out Van and his crew to fix my foundation. They did a great job! this was scary for me to go thru and Van was very thorough in communicating and explaining everything that was going to be done and answering all my questions that I had for him. I am very impressed with all the work they did to fix my foundation. This was a major job and they got it done. I would definitely recommend them. Thank you! 12/9/2014 FIVE STARS FOR EAGLE LIFT, THANK YOU GUYS! Short summary: What? my foundation is sinking? 2 years ago, my wife and kids moved into an 8 year old home and noticed in the interior some cracking in the floors, walls, and ceiling, as well as on the exterior. After discovering our foundation was sinking on the whole south side of the house, we were stressed out to say the least. The builder was contacted and thankfully totally accepted responsibility and contacted Eagle Lift. After the foreman Van with his crew Juan and Jose showed up, they totally put us at ease with their courteousness, knowledge, experience, and professionalism. They kept me informed and even gave me some education on the lifting process which helped me mentally feel more comfortable. They worked incredibly hard digging, drilling, setting, and even removing some sections from our patio concrete. After completing the whole lifting process which went exceptionally well, they re-poured the concrete and replaced all the landscaping with care and washed down the areas to look as if they were never there. To the crew, my wife and I say a big thank you and obviously, we highly recommend this company.... Can provide documents. Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (4200, 10, 2015/02/12) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) First, to keep things less muddled, there are two broader issues here, which I will clarify: 1) The sprinkler pipe not being reattached led to Jouvenat testing the sprinkler system over and over for several days. Around this same time I noticed our bedroom door wouldn't open fully, French doors to back yard wouldn't close or lock, and a few other issues which I wrote to Brendan Barrett about promptly, not knowing it was related to the sprinkler pipe. It wasn't until Jouvenat crawled under the house that he saw the flooding, caused by E.L. leaving the pipe cut. He then dug up the concrete in that area, took photographs, and repaired the pipe. This is what E.L. was billed for by Jouvenat. Bill McKeowan came out and agreed the house had shifted (French doors wouldn't close, still won't lock, altimeter showed settling in areas that weren't that distince before, and Bill agreed E.L. would return once soil dried (which took a long time) and would reinject, and do whatever was necessary to remedy the situation caused by the flood. Concrete was to be replaced then too. This never happened, and finally we had someone pour concrete to protect the house from further water damage during the winter of 2014. So this has never been fixed or addressed, although it's a SEPARATE issue from the original work that was done, and E.L. has claimed full responsibility (after first denying that they cut that pipe, and then admitting it once we showed them photos from the original work), and our property has not been REMEDIED one bit in this respect. All that was done was the concrete was torn up, the pipe was repaired. That's it. Our home was left with doors to the outside that would not fully shut at times, and have never locked again. A shelf fell off our wall, damaging property and there are other obvious signs of settling, and there is a clear cause. In talks with E.L. this has never been in dispute, yet it still needs to be completed. This should not be confused with the original contract dispute. (We were also told on multiple occasions, by E.L., that the repair work for the sprinkler pipe flood damage would not be counted as a warranty visit but that it was clearly a separate issue they would take care of. 2) Re: the original work and contract. Many areas of clarification. a) DCP testing was always discussed with Brendan and I was repeatedly told (both times he visited the property and via phone calls, and an email) that this is how E.L. DETERMINES how deep to inject. It was never spelled out as a separate item that wasn't part of the "Uretek Process", which I was told over and over was patented and used all the time, I was told about videos online, etc. All of this included "DCP" or "Penetrometer" testing and it was explained to me how this worked to take any guess work out of how deep to inject. E.L. is NOW saying that it was not an line item in the contract, so we weren't really owed the DCP testing. Well neither was cutting pipe to push down into the injection holes or many other steps of their process. It was always conveyed to us that DCP or Penetrometer was part of the entire specialized PROCESS we were paying for. How else would E.L. determine how deep to inject? This is also why I was told the "ESTIMATED" depth would be 3' and 7', and that's also what the contract says. But once the testing was done, we would know if our soil needed the injection at a deeper level, and specifically where (our home was sinking deeper at a certain area near the master bedroom). E.L. is now saying we didn't pay for a separate DCP test but they only did it as a courtesy. That makes no sense. And we don't agree. As further evidence that DCP testing was indeed part of the original agreement, in an email, dated March 20th, after a conversation with Brendan and the decision to go forward with the contract and begin work, he wrote: "We will be able to tell if a failure of the URETEK materil is to blame for further settlement by doing ADDITIONAL Dynamic Cone Penetration (DCP) testing. By testing the density of the aggregate materials carrying the load of the home and knowing what depths we injected URETEK at, we are able to know whether or not an issue is at a depth that was suppose to be corrected by our work. Of course we do the DCP IN THE FIRST PLACE to ensure that we are influencing at depths below the soil that is contributing to the settlement problem." (emphasis in capitals is mine). So... Brendan reiterates what he and I discussed many times, that the DCP test WAS part of the process that they were going to do "In the first place", and he also answered my question about what if there was settlement and how the warranty applied, by stating they would do "Additional" DCP testing. If they weren't going to do it in the first place, to determine what depth they should inject at, they why did he write this? E.L. is not telling the truth now, and is trying to muddle the whole DCP step that was not done properly to begin with. b) E.L. is claiming DCP testing was not supposed to be part of our work b/c it wasn't a line-item in the contract. If that is true, then WHY did they use the RESULTS of the DCP test, that was done approximately 22' from our home (nowhere near the soil that had settled and was causing problems) to JUSTIFY the fact that they didn't inject at the two levels in the contract? They can't have it both ways. They want us to believe they only performed the DCP test as a courtesy, but then they also want to use the results to justify not injecting at two levels. The contract did say "estimated depth" of 3' and 7', yes. And E.L. points to that often. But there was still always discussion of TWO levels. The contract does not read that two levels is what's estimated. It reads that the depth of those two levels is what's estimated. They did NOT inject at two levels at all, and never informed us of that until we discovered things on our own and confronted them about it via phone. We were then told by Bill that he chose the DCP location based on what Brendan, the salesman, told him (22' from our home). How is this at all related to truly discovering what depths our home actually needed stabilized? Makes no sense. Additionally, we were told that they like to see DCP results in "the double digits" (meaning 10 and above, obviously) and that closer to 20 means the soil is densified and no need to inject at that level. Bill showed me the log for the single DCP test that was done that day and I recall (will have to pull up the copy) it being close to a reading of "18" and Bill saying that's the level they would inject at. I was NOT aware that this test was done nowhere near the actual foundation of our home or that this meant they would only be injecting at one level. NEXT AREA: 1) E.L. claims they have acted in good faith, have tried to negotiate with us, and that we refused all reasonable settlement proposals, etc. etc. We have on two separate occasions, been told by E.L., after lots of back and forth, that they are referring the case to their insurance company, and they are no longer interested in discussing with us. They backed out as we were close to a resolution on two separate occasions. Additionally, we came very close to a settlement, where they would give us a partial refund, plus repair the original work that was not done properly (gaps left under the foundation footing; foundation cracked and only sealed with silicone; shimmed posts under the home) but the main sticking point was that they wanted the DCP tests to read only "5" or below... not in the "double digits". Originally when I tried to negotiate, for a long time, without an attorney, they absolutely refused to do further DCP testing. This strongly raises our suspicions about why it was never done near the home in the first place. Learning the true DCP value under the foundation footing, would prove that they should have indeed injected at two levels to begin with, and/or deeper than they did, and/or should have used more material than they did. And this is what they did not want to do. A DCP test is simple, and during our final negotiations I agreed to a DCP value of 8. I also asked, as I always have, that it be between 1 and 4' from the actual footing of the foundation, not out in the middle of our yard as the original one was done. And THIS is where E.L. continues to dig in their heels, which is so telling. We were ready to move forward, and then E.L. instructed their attorney to cease all talks with us, that we would "never be happy", attempted to make us out to be unreasonable people, when really we are just asking for what we have always asked for, and what should have been done to begin with. We were told via phone in original talks that they would be happy to come back out and inject at whatever levels needed, yet in the end, during the final round of negotiations, before we were told