BBB Business Review

What is a BBB Business Review?

Consumer Complaints

BBB Accredited Business since 08/01/1994

Burnside Air Conditioning, Heating & Indoor Air Quality

Phone: (972) 562-7789Fax: (972) 542-6503

BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.

BBB began including the text of consumer complaints and business responses in BBB Business Reviews on 07/01/2013 for complaints filed on 01/01/2013 and thereafter. This includes all complaints that meet our reporting guidelines and that are filed electronically. We also report on the resolution of the complaint, as determined by BBB.

Customer Complaints Summary

4 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 2 closed in last 12 months
Complaint TypeTotal Closed Complaints
Problems with Product / Service4
Advertising / Sales Issues0
Billing / Collection Issues0
Delivery Issues0
Guarantee / Warranty Issues0
Total Closed Complaints4

Complaint Breakdown by ResolutionAbout Complaint Details

Complaint Resolution Log (4)
10/23/2015Problems with Product / Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Complaint
SVC tech damaged my system intentionally to create a sale, but first tried to sell me something different that Burnside already replaced on 8/1/2015.
10-14-2015 is the date of problem. On 8/1/2015, I had my outdoor unit fan replaced and signed up for Gold Star membership. On 8/1 invoice, I am Cust ID: **** with Work ID: XXXXXX-XXX. I paid by credit card. Air conditioning has been functioning fine. I received a call today, 10-14-2015, from Burnside telling me it was time to schedule Fall heating system inspection. I asked if they could come this afternoon. Service Tech James came at 3 pm CT. He inspected the thermostat and turned on the heat system while turning off the air conditioning. Air conditioning was working perfect. Tech went up in the attic to work on unit upstairs. After a long time, he then went outside to the unit in the yard. Then came in turned the air conditioning back on and went out to his vehicle to write up the invoice. Tech James attempted to sale me and convince me that I need my outdoor fan replaced. He went over today's invoice which included replacing my outdoor fan. I let him go on to make certain that I was really understanding him correctly. I questioned him. He said it was wobbling. I then told him that I am confused because Burnside just replaced that fan on 8-1-2015. This is written down on today's invoice for Cust ID: 3201 with Work ID: XXXXXX-XXX. I declined politely and he left. The inspection was free because of my Gold Star membership. The house was not cooling down, so we kept checking the air conditioning to make sure it was on. After several hours, we called for someone to come check this out. Dean Burnside, son of owner, came out with Cust ID: 3201 and Work ID: XXXXXX-XXX. I showed Dean the Thermostat. He said, "Well, the fan is blowing, so I need to check outside." After outside, he said he found nothing. So, going up into the attic, he came down with a video that had a large hiss of air coolant leaking. Then tells me it is $2500 to repair and can't do it tonight. I tell him that Tech James tried to sale me a fan that they already replaced on 8/1/2015 earlier today. Dean looked at James' invoice and confirmed. If that leak is so loud, why did James miss the sound of it? I tell Dean that I don't believe that happened after James left, but that he intentionally damaged my system. Remember, I did not call to have someone come out to look at my system. Burnside called me. I was having no problems with my system. Now, they want $2500 to fix it.

Desired Settlement
The part that James the Service Tech damaged either needs to be repaired or replaced in order for the air conditioning system to work properly and make me whole prior to James the Tech coming to my home. PLUS, this needs to be done soon!!!!!!!!! It is hot!

Business Response
Contact Name and Title: ***** ***** - Service Mgr
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: ******@burnsideac.com
Unfortunately, this homeowner filed this complaint before allowing me the opportunity to help out with the situation. Our technician ran the callback on the service from earlier in the day well after our normal office hours and I was unavailable to help out with the distressed situation until the following morning. Prompt attention was given to this matter and I personally met with this homeowner later in the afternoon. Less than 24 hours passed between the times of the initial appointment to the time I met the homeowner at his home to discuss our options and determine a course of action. The homeowner's concerns were addressed and I believe that all parties are satisfied with the resolution. In fact, we had resolved this before I even knew that the homeowner had filed a complaint with the BBB.

This is an unfortunate case where the failure was neither the fault of the homeowner nor the fault of the technician. The coil in the indoor unit had advanced decay and it suffered a major failure during the operation of the heat pump in the heating mode. There is nothing that could have been done to prevent this failure and it would have happened regardless of whether we ran the heat or if the homeowner ran the heat. The coil in this unit was doomed to fail due to wear and tear. The technician did nothing to cause the failure. All of our technicians pass rigorous background checks and uphold a very strict standard established by Burnside. The short of the matter is that I have 100% trust in all of our employees.

As for the recently installed fan motor. I personally inspected the fan motor and found the bearings to be sound. While there was a minor wobble to the fan blade when it rotates, it is not related to the motor itself but rather the fan blade. An error was made by the initial technician in differentiating between loose motor bearings and an out of whack fan blade. A simple change of procedure has already been made that will ensure an appropriate and accurate diagnosis and proper recommendations on motors and/or propeller blades. If the motor was indeed bad, it would have been covered 100% by our one year repair warranty and replaced free of charge.


Consumer Response
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
Mr. Weiss displayed the integrity and outstanding service that I had expected the previous day. Mr. Weiss and I worked out an arrangement to rectify the situation to my satisfaction.

08/20/2015Problems with Product / Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Complaint
******** A/C misdiagnosed our A/C issue and charged us $748 for a part that they get for less than $100. We simply want a refund for the TXV.
July 20, 2015
Our A/C system was blowing some cool air from the vent yet the house was not cooling below 79 degrees. The outside unit was working just fine but the coil was covered in condensation. We called ******** who had replaced our furnace a few months prior to come out and diagnose our issue. The service tech started going down his checklist and told us that the TXV was bad and that it would cost $748 to fix the issue. My wife was 6 1/2 months pregnant and it is 98 degrees outside, so we regretfully told him to fix it. After the unit was turned off for a hour or so it turned on and cooled a little better but that only lasted one day. After the issue started again, I decided to look up the cost a Thermal Expansion Valve (TXV) and they cost less than $100. This made us very upset, not only did ******** misdiagnose our issue, they robbed us by marking up a part almost 600%.

I called and spoke with a ******** manager named ***** Weiss and told him that I felt taken advantage of and cheated out of hard earned money to have an A/C system that is still struggling to cool. ***** told me that they had to business to run so that justifies marking the part up 600%. He verbally agreed they they get the part for less than $100. I told ***** that I understand marking up a part for profit and adding the cost for labor but to take it that far is not fair to anybody. ***** would not budge on the part but agreed to personally come to our house and look at our system. When ***** arrived and had time to analyze the issue, he told my wife that they had misdiagnosed the issue. The TXV valve was not what what causing the unit to freeze, it was that the coil was very dirty. ***** took a picture of the coil to show how dirty it was inside. He proceeded to send me an email with an explanation of his findings and sent over a proposal for a new coil but subtracted the $748 for the valve (TXV) that he would have put on with a new coil. To this day as long as we let the A/C system rest during the day the system will not freeze but if we let it run 24/7 it freezes because the coil is dirty restricting airflow. There was never anything wrong with the TXV.

We are out $748 on a misdiagnosis and ******** will only offer "help" if we purchase a new system from them.

Desired Settlement
We are seeking a cash refund for the TXV valve. Store credit does not interest us as we feel taken advantage of by Burnside A/C.

Business Response
Contact Name and Title: ***** ***** - Service Mgr
Contact Phone: XXXXXXXXXX
Contact Email: ******@burnsideac.com
I believe, at worst, an incomplete diagnosis was made on the system and not a misdiagnosis as the complainant claims. Our technician logged before and after readings during the service call that clearly support the fact that the TXV was indeed bad. The technician failed to recognize that the indoor coil was dirty as well. The measurements that were taken on the system would not have given the technician any indication of further issues, given the fact that it was very warm inside the home. Freon pressure readings get elevated when there is a lot of heat buildup inside the home. I personally went to the home and got to see the system running under more normal conditions and was able to recognize Freon readings that were consistent with inadequate airflow. Upon further investigation, I found that the indoor coil had an extraordinary amount of dirt buildup in it and on it. I took photos of the foul coil and emailed them to the complainant. The indoor coil did not get in this condition overnight; it is buildup that occurred from years of neglect.

The complainant states that the system worked better after the repair and that the problem resurfaced once the house got back to normal temperatures. This supports what I've said about such problems occurring when the home is not extraordinarily warm inside. I suggested to the complainant that cleaning the old coil was a possibility but since it was 21 years old, replacement of the coil was the better way to go. The average useful lifespan of HVAC equipment is 12-15 years nationally and that assumes the equipment has been properly maintained. I felt that offering 100% of the repair costs towards a new coil was more than generous. There is some redundant labor that I am absorbing to make such an offer and ultimately, the system will continue to give problems until the coil is replaced or removed and cleaned. It is by no fault of ******** that the coil is in such poor condition, nor is it the fault of ******** that there was more than one thing wrong with the aged unit.

Now, we must address the issue of pricing that the complainant seems to take issue with. Our pricing is flat rate and is based on national averages. Our flat rate pricing includes the part, the labor, the repair warranty as well as a portion to cover our operating costs and even a little bit of profit. During the first conversation with the complainant, I invited him to call some like sized HVAC competitors to see what they charge for the same repair. I think it's only fair to compare apples to apples. I know what my competition charges and I know how much we need to charge to keep the doors open and our pricing is appropriate. To compare what we charge for a service with a wholesale price that you find on the internet would be like me going to Outback Steakhouse and paying $40.00 for a steak dinner and then complaining because I could have bought the same steak at Wal-Mart for $7.00. Additionally, I must clarify that the cost of the repair was $706.00, plus a service call and a $50.00 repair coupon was applied. The repair cost total was actually $656.00 (with coupon) and not $748.00 as the complainant contends. ALL repairs were quoted up front and preapproved before any work was performed and no one was put in duress to coerce any repairs to the system.

I defend the fact that the repair was correct and justified. I have the documentation to prove it. Never once did I exclaim to the complainant or his wife anything to the contrary. The complainant claims that I told his wife that "we had misdiagnosed the unit". This is simply untrue. The only thing that I explained to the wife and the complainant is that there was more wrong with the system than just the TXV that we had installed. I will not refund any money for the work that we completed but will still extend the offer to apply those monies toward the replacement of the 21 year old, soiled indoor coil.

05/08/2015Problems with Product / Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Complaint
Failure to contact or notify owner of service dates and repair issues and allowing tenant to decline repair vs. contract/property owner.
I purchased a service contract in June 2014 for my tenant occupied property at 3803 Rose Ct, Mckinney, Texas which was to provide two AC/Heating inspections within a year for $99. I told the co that I am the property owner and all requests for service and repair must be authorized by me and they agreed. They asked if they could contact the tenant to schedule an appointment and I said yes. They inspected my AC in June and identified and repaired some things for around $400. They emailed and mailed me a copy of the receipt as requested to my home in Arlington Texas. I recenty realized that I had one remaining inspection and called them today to schedule it. I was advised that the 2nd inspection was done on Jan 6, 2015. I told them I had no knowledge of that and hadnt requested it or received any receipt or notification. I asked what were the results. She emailed me a copy and began to tell me what items were needed and what the technician noted: A new drain pan, $314, a new ignitor $304, a 10 mfd $153 and several recommendations including a system seal for $676, an overflow upgrade $137, a wifi thermostat $368, a madein the usa alarm $69 and additionally, the technician commented that the blower cap was out of factory specs and the ignitor was out of specs and could result in immediate failure and the drain pan is rusted and compromised and could cause water damage in the home at any time. Finally, the system is not functioning properly. the lady I spoke with after reading all of this said that although **** (the assigned technician) was no longer with the co, she could sell me a new contract for $56 for one visit and have all this checked out. I asked how long **** was with the company and she said oh, 4 or 5 years, he was a good technician. I asked her why I wasnt notified of the service date that was scheduled without my permission or the results of the service if I had equipment that was on the verge of causing damage to my property. She didnt know why because it was noted to mail a receipt to homeowner and I an noted as that on the invoice. I asked why the tenant was allowed to refuse the repairs and sign their invoice as Authorized signature and she said she didnt know unless **** thought the tenant was the homeowner. This is hard to believe when it is clearly noted that the owner is a female and the tenant was male. I asked why I wasnt mailed a copy of the invoice and how if the ignitor were not working, how the tenant had gone through the coldest February on record without heat and her response was, well, it wasn't not operable. I said well, it says on the invoice that replacement is required so why would it need to be replaced. I then asked why I would purchase another contract from them when they didnt fulfill the terms of the first one and at that point, she said, now wait a minute, you need to blame your tenant. I said, no I don't, they are not responsible and I didnt have a contract with them, I had the contract with your company. She began a statement to the effect of, now wait a minute, see here, and she raised her voice and was angry. I cut her off mid statement because it was clear, she didnt have any answers for all of these misrepresentations and lack of follow up. Before hanging up, I advised her I would file a complaint with the BBB.

Desired Settlement
I believe that the service package fee should be refunded as they did not follow through with the service that they promised and allowed a tenant to schedule service and to refuse repairs. I further believe that once I have another company inspect the system and determine if these are invalid issues, that they should be penalized for inflating repair estimates and if they are valid issues, they should reimburse me for any repairs that were delayed because they did not notify me of the impending damage to my property.

Business Response
Contact Name and Title: ***** ***** - Service Mgr
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: ******@burnsideac.com
On April 28th, 2015, Ms. ***** contacted our office to arrange for a cooling inspection for her rent house on 3803 Rose Court. Ms. ***** believed that she was due a prepaid inspection for the property, since she purchased our Gold Star semi-annual service on 4/23/14, which includes two inspections. Our Gold Star program clearly defines that the two inspections were for one cooling inspection and one heating inspection. We schedule the appointments approximately six months apart, so they're in the appropriate seasons. The first of her two inspections was a cooling inspection, performed on 6/23/14. The second inspection was a heating inspection, which was performed on 1/6/15. Both inspections have been fulfilled per our Gold Star service agreement. I get the impression from the written BBB complaint that Ms. ***** was expecting to get two cooling inspections for her Gold Star purchase. Our Gold Star semi-annual service has and will always include one cooling inspection and one heating inspection.

One other detail in the complaint that doesn't add up is that Ms. ***** refers to spending around $400.00 with us in June. I believe she is mistaken because our records show that she spent $225.00 with us on 4/23/14. That was $99.00 for the Gold Star purchase (over the phone) and $126.00 with the technician to clear a blocked drain. It is my belief that Ms. ***** hired someone else to complete work in June, based on the recommendations we made during our cooling inspection on 6/23/14. What leads me to this belief is that our 6/23/14 inspection indicates that there is no overflow protection device (float switch) installed on the unit and our subsequent inspection on 1/6/15 indicates that there is a float switch installed which is not the AquaGuard brand dual sensor overflow device that we sell.

It is apparent that the main issue here is that there was a breakdown in communications somewhere. While it is customary for us to schedule an appointment with a tenant on a prepaid inspection, we do reach out to the homeowner also to keep them aware of the appointment. I cannot prove or disprove whether or not the homeowner was contacted but normal protocol is to contact the homeowner and the tenant. The main reason why the tenant is contacted directly to schedule an appointment is because the tenant is typically the one that has to make themselves available so we can gain access to the property. According to our records, this is the only time in three completed appointments that we either failed to contact the homeowner or were unable to contact the homeowner. Since our dispatcher spoke with Ms. ***** on 4/28/15, notes have been added to our system to make certain that Ms. ***** is contacted prior to scheduling or completing any appointment, regardless of whether it's a prepaid inspection service or a demand paid service.

The next item of contention is the recommendations that were made on the work order which we identified during the heating inspection on 1/6/15. It is important to note that the heating was functioning when we arrived and was functioning when we left. Additionally, the heating apparently functioned for the remainder of the heating season because no tenant is going to ride out the coldest month in recorded history in Dallas with no heat without contacting their landlord or a service company. The recommendations were made based on our testing and general observations. We noted that a blower run capacitor tested outside of its prescribed tolerance and should be replaced. The capacitor was still partly functional but compromised. We noted also that the furnace's hot surface ignitor tested in a range that would indicate that it is likely to fail in the near future. We noted also that the A/C emergency drain pan is rusted badly and should be replaced. Even though the emergency pan is effectively a cooling component, it is in the vicinity of the furnace and we note them even during a heating inspection to make certain that attention has been brought to the potential for water damage. The same recommendation was made on the cooling inspection that we performed on 6/23/15 and Ms. ***** took no action to replace the compromised drain pan. These three recommendations were the ones that the technician deemed to be important and were detailed in the "Required Repairs" section of our work order. Keep in mind that the heating was still functional but there was a likelihood of a breakdown in the not too distant future.

The remaining recommendations are just that.....recommendations. They are items that are not critical to the system operation and are not required. They are simply items that may offer peace of mind, convenience or energy efficiency improvement to a homeowner. These items are detailed in a special section of the work order called "Comfort Concerns/Tech Recommendations". The items recommended were 1. AquaGuard dual sensor overflow device upgrade, which offers additional protection against water leakage from the attic equipment. 2. Complete System seal which would air seal all accessible duct connections in the attic to improve system performance and efficiency. 3. Upgrading the thermostat to a Wi-Fi version because many people like to be able to control their thermostat settings from their smartphone or tablet. 4. Adding a Carbon Monoxide Alarm in the house to provide basic protection against Carbon Monoxide exposure, which can come from many sources such as appliances, fireplaces or attached garages. None of these items are required to be completed and the system will run no better or worse than it ever has if these recommendations aren't performed. Our work orders are design to split the more critical recommendations from the more upgrade type recommendations because we want to be crystal clear and have no ambiguity. It is important to note that the tenant "Declined" every one of the recommendations that were documented on our work order because he does not own the property and did not have the authority to "Approve" the recommendations. Again, this is normal protocol.

The service technician did note on the work order that our office needed to "Mail Copy to the Homeowner", since it was a tenant/landlord situation. I can only assume that the work order was mailed, because we do not send these by certified mail. It is crystal clear to me now that our communications can be improved when it comes to cases like this. In the future, such correspondence will be sent using certified mail. Additionally, we may potentially utilize email to send such documentation, so we can get an "email received" receipt. Rest assured that this is an isolated case. We have dealt with many landlords and property management companies for many years and to the best of my knowledge, this is the first time that we've had such a breakdown in communication. All I can offer is my apology to Ms. ***** that she was not contacted about the heating inspection appointment and apparently did not receive the copy of the work order in the mail. There was no money due for the prepaid heating inspection on 1/6/15 and no unauthorized work was performed beyond the prepaid heating inspection.

As for the desired resolution that Ms. ***** detailed, a refund of the Gold Star service program is not due because we fulfilled all obligations and performed both the heating and the cooling inspection as outlined in our Gold Star program. Furthermore, our Gold Star agreement clearly states that it is non-refundable. We will continue to have any adult who is present on the worksite initial the "Accept" and "Decline" boxes, as well as sign the work order. If the adult present is not the property owner or an authorized representative thereof, they will be asked to decline all recommendations. If a landlord is contacted and authorizes any recommendations, a tenant will be asked to initial the "Accept" box(es) on their behalf. Otherwise, the landlord will need to come to the property and initial the "Accept" boxes themselves, because we will not commence any work without expressed written consent. I have no doubt that upon inspection by another contractor, the "Required Repairs" will be confirmed to be true and I strongly recommend that they be addressed by someone. Since the delay in completing these recommendations did not lead to any property damage or even any system downtime, I don't believe that it is reasonable to think that ******** A/C should responsible for paying for the repairs, regardless of whether they are in the "Required Repairs" section or the "Comfort Concerns/Tech Recommendations" section of our work order. ******** A/C will be taking measures to ensure that any line of communication should have some redundancy and we need to utilize services that provide us proof that we made every reasonable effort to communicate with any homeowner. These improvements will be implemented immediately.

Kind regards,
***** *****
Service Manager


Consumer Response
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Mr. ******* response if full of errors and fabrications. I have attached the receipt from their initial service call on 4/23/14 which was not an AC inspection. The reason for the call as noted on the invoice was that there was water leaking through the ceiling from the drain pan. I purchased the Gold Star package during that call because of the 10& discount offered with it on the repairs that day. There is nothing noted on the invoice in regard to recommendations or repairs like Mr. Weiss has suggested regarding the need for a float. They only noted that there was a blocked drain and broken drain line. No one has done any work since they were there on April 23, 2014 because according to their inspection, all was well and working. As for the confusion on the amount spent, I can tell you why I approximated $400. ******** charged me twice for the Gold Star service package on my credit card which would make the total charges $326- thus the approximation. They refunded the $99 error as seen on the included credit receipt. Because this is a tenant occupied property, I recently realized that I had not had the 2nd inspection and called them to find out that the 2nd one had been scheduled with the tenant not me, the property owner which is clearly indicated on their receipt. They provided nothing to me at purchase in writing about the Gold Star package, only the receipt for charging me so he needs to prove that it's one heating and one AC inspection. Furthermore, their system was already noted in 2014 to contact me not the tenant regarding scheduling and repairs because I made it clear when I ordered it and it was noted on their invoice without having talked to me to schedule the January inspection so that proves they were aware to contact me and mail me a copy. No, I'm sure they don't send it certified but I had no trouble receiving the prior invoice so why is there a problem with me receiving this one? The dispatcher said she didnt know why I wasnt mailed a copy. If I had received a copy, why would I call in April to schedule a 2nd inspection? It's very clear that their now non employed technician **** was trying to rack up charges on a home that is occupied by a tenant and the owner is in another city. Mr. ***** mentions a worn out capacitor which is strange because it was just replaced in summer of 2012, the drain pan was replaced in 2010 and couldnt be rusted out. If it were rusted out last April, why didnt they make that recommendation at that time? In fact, the entire system was installed new in 2007 so it appears that Mr. ***** is trying to cover the fact that he hires people that lie or he condones or covers for them after the fact. I use a large, local Remax realty office to manage this property and you can rest assured, they will advise their clients to never call ********. I expect them to produce proof of the terms of their Gold Star package and still expect reimbursement of the cost of it due to lack of fulfillment. I am the owner and should have been contacted to schedule, accept or acknowledge any and all inspections and or service. They didnt seem to have a problem in 2014 with getting me to authorize repairs by phone but now, when scheduling the 2nd appointment, they did. An apology at this point is not acceptable.

Final Business Response
I'm not sure where ReMax comes into play in this. We never dealt with ReMax. Ms. ***** contacted us directly and we only dealt with Ms. ***** and/or her tenant. Apparently, Ms. ***** does not have the paperwork from the June 23rd, 2014 appointment, where we completed her Gold Star Inspection one of two for cooling. The invoice that she has attached to her correspondence is from an appointment on April 23rd, 2014, where all we did was clear a blocked drain. Ms. ***** actually purchased the Gold Star Inspection Service from us, over the phone on April 23rd 2014, when the appointment was made for the water leak through the ceiling. It is apparent to me that Ms. ***** was aware of both the April and the June appointments because she references the June Gold Star appointment in her initial complaint and even acknowledges that she had given us permission to reach out to the tenant directly to schedule the appointment. Ms. ***** clearly states that she "realized she hadn't had her 2nd inspection" performed and that's why she called us. Ms. ***** did not attach the paperwork from the first inspection on June 23rd 2014 when we performed the cooling inspection, which was one of two of her Gold Star inspections. That paperwork is where the inspection recommendations were made the first time, not on the initial appointment on April 23rd 2014. The April 23rd 2014 appointment only dealt with the immediate concern of water coming through the ceiling.

Ms. ***** states that she did not receive anything in writing about the Gold Star package after purchasing it in April that spelled out any details of our program. As with any tenant/landlord situation, we always take great care to mail copies to the property owner as well as leave a copy behind on the property. I find it very peculiar that the only copy of anything that Ms. ***** received is the very first invoice form April 23rd 2014. That means that the Gold Star paperwork was not delivered with the invoice from April 23rd 2014, the June 23rd 2014 paperwork was not delivered for the 1 of 2 Gold Star cooling inspection and the January 6th 2015 paperwork for the 2 of 2 Gold Star heating inspection was not delivered. I dare say that this scenario is virtually impossible. Again, I cannot prove or disprove the delivery of the documents no more than Ms. ***** can prove or disprove the receipt of them. It's just odd that the June appointment is acknowledged in Ms. *****'s complaint as well as there is a statement that "some things were repaired for around $400" in June, when our work order shows only recommendations and no work performed aside from the prepaid inspection. As you can see in her attached copy of the invoice from April 23rd 2014, there is one single thing that was repaired which was a "blocked and broken drain line", not multiple "things" as Ms. ***** indicates. Therein lies my confusion. These are the circumstances that led me to believe that additional work may have been performed by others. I'm not trying to fabricate anything, I'm only trying to analyze the stated facts as they've been presented to me.

I have attached the Gold Star agreement and missing invoices for review. I'm not sure where all of the accusations of deceit or "trying to rack up charges" stems from. I have two work orders from two different technicians on two separate appointments that document the exact same issues with the emergency drain pan and the blower capacitor, which Ms. ***** seems to take exception to. There was obviously a water leak with the system, since that is what initiated the original appointment on April 23rd, 2014, so it is indeed possible for the pan to need replacement even though it was replaced in 2010 (by others). If was, after all, replaced in 2010 (by others), a mere three years after the entire system was replaced in 2007, it would stand to reason that five years later it needs to be replaced again. This is why we recommend adding an AquaGuard overflow prevention device. It would shut the system off, rather than let it overflow into the emergency pan and potentially the ceiling. We don't recommend such a device to "rack up charges" we do it to provide protection to the property and so that an emergency drain pan doesn't have to be replaced every few years. The simple fact of the matter is that the emergency drain pan is rusted and compromised and needs to be replaced. Otherwise, further water damage to the ceiling is likely to occur.

The furnace's blower capacitor is rated at 10 microfarads and there is a +/-10% allowable tolerance from that rating on all capacitors. Some capacitor manufacturers prescribe a stricter tolerance of +/-6% of the rating on the capacitor. That is very simple to prove, because the rating and the tolerance is most always printed right on the capacitor itself. On June 23rd 2014, the 10 microfarad blower capacitor tested at 7.9 microfarads and on January 6th 2015, it tested at 7.8 microfarads. At 22% off the prescribed rating, it is a simple fact that the capacitor is bad and needs to be replaced, regardless of when it was installed. Incidentally, most every system has three capacitors in it. There is one capacitor for the indoor blower motor, one for the outdoor fan motor and one for the compressor. Ms. ***** may be mistaken on which capacitor was replaced in the summer of 2012 (by others) or it is even possible for a three year old capacitor to test that far out of specifications.

I want to make one thing absolutely clear. I don't have to defend anything that any of my technicians do in the field because I have 100% confidence that they do the right thing. There are definitive tests that we run and extensive training on proper identification of potential problems that we all conform to at ******** and the proof is in the paperwork. There is nothing to "cover up" as Ms. ***** states in her rebuttal. Our organization is 100% transparent and we only employ the very best technicians and the best practices in the industry. We had previously been given permission to contact the tenant directly to schedule an appointment and it was a prepaid inspection service. There was no billable service performed, therefore no money required and no unauthorized recommendations were performed. Our obligations have been fulfilled and the requested full refund is unreasonable. While we may have failed to deliver the documentation for the January 6th 2015 appointment, which cannot be proved or disproved, we do have a reasonable expectation that the fail-safe in such an event would be an open line of communications between a tenant and their landlord. Any tenant has a certain responsibility to make their landlord aware that service was performed on the property. That is why we leave a copy of our work orders behind on the premises as well as mail copies to the property owners and/or property management companies. My apology stands and I mean it sincerely. I take this complaint very seriously and I have already implemented measures that ensure accurate and timely communications when any of our services are performed on a rental property and involve a third party. We deal with many rental properties and this is an isolated incident but there is always room for improvement, which has been done.

David *****
Service Manager


Final Consumer Response
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Mr. ***** doesnt seem to understand simple written English. Remax wasnt involved in the repairs. Remax is the realty office that manages this property for me but they do not handle maintenance and repairs, I do. My comment was that due to ********'s lack of service, lies and continued denial of the fact that they had a contract with me and didnt honor it by contacting my tenant and failing to mail me receipts and failing to contact me to schedule service appointments, they are now on the black list for the Remax office that I work with which has a huge client base in Plano, McKinney and Frisco. I have made it very clear to them not to refer any of their real estate clients to this obviously unfair company called ********. Mr. Weiss has repeatedly dodged the issue and that is they failed to honor the contract with me, the purchaser. And, in the copy of the package that he provided, he failed to copy the back of the page that shows terms and conditions. So sneaky and low down. I guess he forgot that too. I guess they also forgot to have the tenant initial the Refused boxes on this receipt from June that they obviously didnt mail me the June either. Why would I knowingly call them to schedule an inspection if I knew that inspections had taken place? I still expect a refund of the non service package.

08/01/2013Problems with Product / Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Complaint
I was not listened to and subsequently had to pay for a service I hadn't authorized. I paid by check in fear of a home lien if I didn't.
I used ******** for the first time in the Spring of 2012 because I needed a repair on my ac uniit. I was impressed with their quick service and courteous technician so I decided to buy their Gold Star service for the year. I used my included heating and ac inspection on the same day in June 2013. My unit was working just fine with no issues before the inspection. I was told by the technician that I needed to do a chemical cleaning of the outside unit and I needed to add less than one pound of freon to the unit. I declined at that time so I could price around. The same day of my inspection in the evening I noticed my ac unit was not cooling my house. I called the next day to inform them of my unhappiness that my working unit before inspection was now not working. They set up an appointment for a technician to come back out and see what was going on. The technician came and said that my freon was low and that it needed to be filled and that I might have a leak somewhere that would require replacing a coil. He threw a bunch of price quotes at me and said he was going outside to look at my unit again. I specifically said to the technician not to do anything to my unit until he told me exactly what he would be doing becuase I was thinking about what I was going to do. The next thing I know he is back in my house with a clipboard and said that my freon was replaced and it took two pounds. I was caught off guard because I had told him not to do anything until I authorized it. We spoke about all the other options regarding a leak test, leak filler, Gold Star service plan and replacing a coil. I asked about the chemical cleaning and was told all I needed to do was wash it down with a hose because it was not that dirty. I declined all of the other suggested services including the Gold Star service plan because I was annoyed at this point but was polite and courteous. I am now a dissatisfied customer because I had priced around for freon and found several coupons that I could have used and am now unable to because this technician did not inform me about what he was doing like I had told him to.

Desired Settlement
I had researched other companies and found places that offered free freon with inspections. I was not given the opportunity to choose my own option before he filled my freon. Last year with my service I watched to make sure it was being fixed and if I was going to have him fill my freon I would have gone outside to observe so I saw what I would have been paying for.

Business' Initial Response
On Tuesday, June 4, 2013 we had one of our technicians out to perform a preventive inspection service. Two items were identified that needed attention. First, was that the system was low on refrigerant. Ms. ****** declined to add refrigerant to the system. Second, was that the outdoor unit coil was dirty and needed a detergent cleaning. That recommendation was declined as well. Two days later on Thursday June 6, 2013 we responded to a call that the A/C was not cooling. We found that it was related to the low refrigerant that we had identified two days earlier. She says that the unit was working fine prior to us coming out on 6-4-13. This suggests to me that she thinks we may have sabotaged the unit or something. Furthermore, during the second visit when she inquired about the outdoor coil cleaning, recommended on 6-4-13, to the technician, he told her that she could wash it herself as an alternative to paying us to detergent clean it. This was interpreted as, the first technician recommending service that was not needed, by Ms. ******. It was merely made as a suggestion to help save her money and would be an appropriate course of action if she did not want to pay for the detergent cleaning. ******** AC/Heating is in the business of giving customers choices about how they want to handle issue(s) with their HVAC equipment. We never coerce or pressure anyone into performing any work and we are careful to educate our customers so that they can make an informed decision before spending their money. Ultimately, the customer's comment in her complaint about not being consulted prior to the adding of two pounds of refrigerant is my only confusion in this complaint. The invoice for this service does have Ms. ******'s initials in the "Accept" box for the proposed repair (Adding refrigerant). I contacted Ms. ****** on Monday June 10th 2013 at approx. 7:45 AM via phone call. I agreed to refund 100% of the cost of the refrigerant that we added during our service call on 6-6-13. I believe from my conversation with her, that she was more upset about not being able to witness the refrigerant being added because she wanted to be more involved in the process. What was unclear during our phone conversation is whether or not she knew about the refrigerant being added, prior to it being done, even though the initialed "Accept" box would indicate that she was aware. We adhere to a strict policy that we will not perform any repairs without a written consent prior to the work being performed. Therefore I would rather refund the money than have a breach in the trust that we share with our customers. When I offered to send back the check that Ms. ****** had written us, she expressed concern that we might then file "a lien against her property". I assured her that this was not the case and that my only desire was to acquire her 100% satisfaction. I will mail Ms. ****** her voided check back and a copy of her revised invoice that reflects the waived charges for the refrigerant that we installed in her system.

Consumer's Final Response
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
It has been a week since I spoke with the service manager and I have not received my check back so I'm not really sure if I am actually getting it back or if that was just hot air.
The service manager called me at 0747 in the morning and started the conversation out very rude because he was upset with me that I had made a complaint without talking to him first. He actually said to me later in the conversation that "he doesn't need to be threatened with a BBB complaint". I told him that as a consumer I have the right to make a complaint whether he liked it or not.
Ever since they looked at my machine I have been having problems with it cooling, it was working just fine before.
The suggested services were denied by me at the first inspection because I wanted a chance to price around. I specifically asked the technician if it would damage my machine by not doing it that day and he told me no but it would need to be done sooner rather than later. The only reason I had the second ******** technician come to my house was because my machine was no longer cooling after the first technician inspected it. The second technician filled my freon without my consent. The paper I signed that said I agreed with the service was AFTER he had already filled my freon. That can be proven by the fact that I was told by the technician that they won't know how much freon is needed until they fill it and when I was told to sign the paper saying I accepted and declined services it said two pounds of freon were added. The paper was never given to me nor signed before he performed the service. I signed it because I was so upset and angry that he filled it without my consent and I just wanted this to be over and wanted the technician ot of my home. I mean what if he had told me that he had to fill ten pounds. Again I specifically told him not to do anything until I authorized it and he did it anyways so I wasn't going to argue with someone in my home at 8 in the morning.
As far as the detergent wash I do feel like I was being taken after the second technician told me that my unit was not that dirty and it did not need a detergent wash. He was not trying to save me money as the service manager stated. I had to ask him about it and he said "oh yeah I was going to talk to you about that. I saw where the first technician suggested that to you but it doesn't need that." He told me to run a garden hose over it with some pressure on it and that would do the same thing. He told me they suggest the detergent because they couldn't charge a customer for running a garden hose over the unit. If it was a necessary service it would have been on the paper that I was told to sign that said what service I accepted and declined and it is no where on that.
The response from this service manager is just amazing. But it is what it is and I will no longer use them nor would I recommend them.
I will say that I am saddened that this happened because I was satisfied with them on my first service call with them last spring. I was so satisfied last year that my parents used them for their home and they said they will not use them now after all of this.


Business' Final Response
The check and revised invoice will be picked up by USPS today (June 18, 2013). We desired to send it certified mail and there was a delay in our office in getting it sent. I'm sorry for the delay. As for the details of the rebuttal from Ms. ******: First, I apologize if I came across rude in our initial phone conversation. This was certainly not my intention. I was curious and did inquire about why she hadn't reached out to us to resolve the problem before going to a third party. In hindsight, I should have taken some time to collect myself before reaching out to Ms. ******. Secondly, the adding of the Freon was refunded 100%, because it was the right thing to do in this case. Our policies and procedures exist to ensure that our customers are well informed and involved in the services that we provide. Unfortunately, we failed Ms. ****** in this case, which is why I refunded 100% of the money.

Industry Comparison| Chart

Air Conditioning Contractors & Systems, Heating Equipment, Heating Equipment & Systems Cleaning & Repair, Duct Cleaning, Air Conditioning Systems - Cleaning, Air Conditioning Repair, Heating & Air Conditioning - Filters, Air Conditioning & Heating Contractors - Commercial, Air Conditioning & Heating Contractors - Residential, Heating & Air Conditioning, Heating & Cooling Demolition, Heating Contractors

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.

X

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.

X

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.