BBB Logo

Better Business Bureau ®
Start With Trust®

BBB Accredited Business since

ServiceMaster by AK Enterprises

Additional Locations

Phone: (808) 664-9911 Fax: (888) 857-7940 PO Box 17811, Honolulu, HI 96817 View Additional Email Addresses

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


This company provides professional cleaning, disaster restoration and general contracting services.

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that ServiceMaster by AK Enterprises 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 16 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for ServiceMaster by AK Enterprises include:

  • Length of time business has been operating.
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size.
  • Response to 1 complaint(s) filed against business.
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business.
  • BBB has sufficient background information on this business.

Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

1 complaint closed with BBB in last 3 years | 1 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 0
Billing/Collection Issues 0
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 1
Total Closed Complaints 1

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

0 Customer Reviews on ServiceMaster by AK Enterprises
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

BBB file opened: November 06, 2008 Business started: 08/01/2006 Business started locally: 08/01/2006 Business incorporated: 08/02/2006 in HI
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:

DCCA Professional & Vocational Licensing
335 Merchant St STE 301, Honolulu HI 96813
Phone Number: (808) 586-3000
The license number is BC27936.

DCCA Professional & Vocational Licensing
335 Merchant St STE 301, Honolulu HI 96813
Phone Number: (808) 586-3000
The license number is BC27937.

State of Hawaii Department of Taxation
PO Box 1425, Honolulu HI 96806
Phone Number: (808) 587-4242
The license number is W99759597-01.

Type of Entity


Business Management
Mr. Kevin Horton, President Mrs. Audra Ryan, Office/Marketing Man
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Kevin Horton, President
Customer Contact: Mrs. Audra Ryan, Office/Marketing Man
Business Category

Fire & Water Damage Restoration Water Damage Restoration House Cleaning Mold & Mildew Inspection/Removal/Remediation Upholstery & Carpet Cleaning Construction & Remodeling Services

Service Area
Oahu and Maui
Alternate Business Names
AK Enterprises and Services, Inc.

Additional Locations

  • 744 Kohou St

    Honolulu, 96817 (808) 664-9911 (808) 643-9911

  • PO Box 17811

    Honolulu, HI 96817


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.

Professional AffiliationsX

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
  • Delivery
  • 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 significant government actions involving business' marketplace conduct.


Thank you for your feedback!

Help us improve by taking our survey.


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 Email Addresses

Find a LocationX

  Change Location
Show Only Accredited Locations

Complaint Detail(s)

3/3/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: At the suggestion of a ServicMaster employee I authorized them to clean my sofa's upholstery. They damaged the fabric and have not made restitution. On 5 March, 2013 ServiceMaster personnel came to my apartment and cleaned my sofa's upholstery. I had agreed for them to come at the urging of one of their former employees, *************. Their invoice # is **** for $141.36 which I promptly paid with my check number ***. Their treatment resulted in damage to the upholstery in several locations. Supervisor *********** and the technician ***** viewed the sofa on or about March 12, 2013 and agreed ***** had damaged the fabric, offering to clean my carpets as restitution. Since ***** had cleaned all the carpets in my apartment the previous December, I considered the offer unsatisfactory. ***** took one of the arm covers to see if the fabric could be matched locally. (I bought the sofa through an interior decorator in Carmel, IN when I lived in the Mainland.) No one contacted me from ServiceMaster so I phoned them on repeated occasions, speaking and emailing with former employee ************ who advised me on 3/12/2013 the matter would be handled by her supervisor "*****" who was on the Mainland. ***** did not contact me so I phoned her. Finally, after months of contacting them and following up one of their employees contacted me and we agreed on a settlement of $100 which was in my opinion woefully inadequate but to which I agreed simply to get the matter resolved. (I'm sorry but I do not recall her name but this conversation must have taken place at least 3 months ago.) There has been no written or verbal contact since then and I have not received the $100. The representative also agreed to return to me the arm cover ***** had taken. To date I have received nothing, am frankly sick of dealing with them and do not intend to contact them again. My next step, following your investigation, will be to take the matter to Small Claims Court if the matter is not resolved to my satisfaction. Either they are woefully incompetent or dishonest scam artists and I regret agreeing to have them in my apartment.

Desired Settlement: Since the upholstery on the sofa was in fine condition when they cleaned it, I am seeking to have the sofa reupholstered at ServiceMaster's expense with a fabric of my choosing. I believe they have, through their repeated failures to make good on their obligation, negated the $100 restitution offer. The fabric must be of similar color and quality to that of the original. The tears are small but are clearly visible and cannot be hidden.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/02/11) */ February 11, 2014 Dear BBB Representative, We are in receipt of case #********. We take our accreditation and reputation very seriously and look forward to resolving this case. On February 28, 2013, ServiceMaster was contacted by Mr. ******* to schedule an upholstery cleaning appointment. The appointment was schedule for March 5, 2013 between 2pm-4pm. Our technician has been with the ServiceMaster family and carpet/upholstery cleaning industry for over 25 years. He is CRI (Carpet & Rug Institute) Certified. Payment was received on March 6 with check #*** in the amount of $141.36 with no indication of a problem. ServiceMaster was contacted by Mr. ******* via email on March 11 that he found tears in the upholstery. He agreed to meet with the Production Manager and technician on Wednesday, March 20, to assess the situation. Photos were taken of the upholstery as well as a sample of the upholstery to see how to proceed. The assessment concluded that the couch is very old, and fabric that is aged is weak and can create tears. Our technician explained and confirmed that he had not caused the tears on the couch, and the couch was falling apart due to age and wear. Based on inspection and experience, we felt that we were not liable for the tears; however a cleaning reimbursement was offered to Mr. *******. He declined and requested a reupholster service. ServiceMaster priced from two locations the cost to reupholster the couch, which would cost about $2,000-2,400. We decided not to pay for the reupholster, based on the depreciated value of the couch, which Mr. ******* stated was over 20 years old, did not produce a receipt for the couch, or know its original price. We feel it is unreasonable to expect $2,400 to reupholster a couch that is over 20 years old. Mr. ******* stated that we were unreachable; however, we tried on several occasions to contact him, but were unable to reach him. We were informed that Mr. ******* was traveling out of the country, and then was unavailable because of unfortunate health circumstances. Still, we wanted to resolve the situation and offered Mr. ******* a cleaning reimbursement. Based on the depreciated value of a couch, that is over 20 years old, we offered the reimbursement of the cleaning, and an additional $150.00, to the total amount of $291.36. Mr. ******* agreed in August, to be reimbursed for the cleaning ($141.36), as well as an additional $150.00 for the alleged damage that occurred to the sofa. With Mr. *******'s approval on this resolution, a payment of $291.36 was sent with check #***** on September 25. We assumed the issue had been resolved, since we were never notified or contacted by Mr. *******, letting us know that he never received the payment. We here at ServiceMaster guarantee our work and are happy to reissue the payment of $291.36 to Mr. *******. Please let us know how we can proceed with this matter. Thank you *********** Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 13, 2014/02/24) */ Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 8:31 PM Thank-you for replying, *****!! Let's see if this works. If not, I'll ask my roommate, the technowizard, to assist when he gets home tomorrow. I find Service Master's response to be as self-serving and disingenuous as my entire experience with them. I repeat the cleaning was undertaken at the urging of one of their employees, a former neighbor of mine (who I believe left the company and is now living on the Mainland.) I would make the following responses: #1 I left the check they reference with my neighbor to whom I had given a key so that the cleaning could take place in my absence. She obviously turned it in the day after they cleaned the upholstery, ie before I noticed the damage. My payment in no way implies my satisfaction with the performance of the cleaning. I did not closely inspect their work for several days as the cushions were left propped together to facilitate drying and it wasn't until I was putting the cushions back on the sofa, after they had dried out, that I noticed the damage and contacted Service Master. #2 On their March return visit the Production Manager offered to clean the carpets in my apartment and reimbursement for the upholstery cleaning to compensate me for the damage to the upholstery. I declined because they had cleaned my carpets several months before and I did not need to have them cleaned again! #3 The sofa is not "falling apart due to age and wear," as claimed and no one made that representation to me. It is perfectly sound and their comment is completely false. Neither the technician nor the Production Manager ever claimed to me that, "he had not caused the tears on the couch, and that the sofa was falling apart. I sat on it today and it is fine. #4 The sofa is not 20 years old however it is approaching that age. It was purchased in the mid-90's through an interior decorating firm in Indianapolis, Indiana which was assisting me in furnishing and decorating a condominium residence there. I cannot itemize the cost of the sofa as they were purchasing additional furnishings, providing built-in shelving for my office/den there and coordinating draperies, wallpaper installation and painting, however I have no interest in misrepresenting that fact and I was very open with Service Master about my inability to accurately support the cost of the soft. #5 At no time did anyone from Service Master contact me regarding the estimates they received regarding reupholstering the sofa. Until August every single contact was initiated by me. In fact their failure to contact me is the primary reason why I initially filed my complaint with the BBB. #6 They have not returned to me a covering for one of the sofa arms which they took as a fabric sample in March; #6 To claim that they tried unsuccessfully to reach me because I was travelling and had an "unfortunate health circumstance" is characteristically untrue and disingenuous. I was in Germany for two weeks early in May, 2013 and was hospitalized there for 8 days due to what was thought to have been a stroke. I returned to Honolulu on 15 May and have been here with two brief exceptions ever since. There were no messages during my brief absences on my home answering machine, no emails, no calls to my cell phone. I would remind the respondents that this issue has been essentially ignored by them for almost a year. #7 I did agree to a settlement in August primarily because I was sick of their incompetence and delays. I have received neither their check nor the fabric sample mentioned above which was promised by their representative in August and I challenge them to produce a check signed or cashed by me. Any competent accounting technician should long ago have followed up on an open check or item in their books written in September, further proof, in my opinion of their unworthiness to represent Service Master in Hawaii. It is correct I did not contact them regarding my not having received their check; to me it would have been pointless given their lack of responsiveness. That is why I filed my initial complaint and that is why I reject their response. I repeat they are either very very incompetent or in total disregard of their customers and I regret ever having had them in my apartment. I have had it with them. (Looks like it worked!) ***

BBB's Final Determination: After reviewing the position of all parties, BBB determined that the business made a reasonable offer to resolve the complaint. However the consumer did not accept the offer.