Repair was completed on metal floor lamp. Repair person improperly picked up handblown glass shade for lamp causing cracks in the glass.
On the afternoon of Friday, September 26, 2014 ***** ******** from **************** returned to our house to complete repairs from our move. The repair was on the metal portion of a ************ floor lamp. ***** ******** had taken the floor lamp to the shop for repair. I had kept the handblown glass shade here at the house. When he brought the lamp back from the shop we plugged it in to see if it worked, and it did. ***** asked me to bring the shade for the lamp. I brought the shade from upstairs and set it on a fabric ottoman next to the lamp as ***** was still tinkering with the lamp. The next thing I knew, ***** had picked up the glass shade from the ottoman by the decorative finial on the top of the shade. I immediately rushed over to ***** and lifted the shade from the bottom edge out of his hands and placed it on the lamp. I told him that it was fragile and that it couldn't be handled by the finial! The finial is purely ornamental.
I was gone for the weekend and when I returned, I wanted to move the lamp to another corner of the room where I could plug it in more easily, and noticed that there were cracks all around the finial.
I called *** at **************** who told me she would talk to ***** and get back to me. She emailed me a few times and told me that ***** would be happy to stop by to look at the lamp. I asked 3 times for an appointment to have ***** stop by, but she informed me on Oct 3, that I should direct all inquiries to my adjuster at Action Moving.
I contacted ************ to see if a replacement shade could be ordered. Unfortunately the lamp has been discontinued and there are no replacement shades. I have the receipt for this lamp that I purchased from Marshal Fields. I paid $256 for the lamp. I received a 40% discount for the lamp since I was an employee of the parent company.
I have repeatedly emailed and called ****** (my adjuster) but I have received no response whatsoever.
The shade is very fragile. The stress from the shade being picked up by the top finial stressed and put hairline cracks in the glass all around the finial. I greatly regret not carefully inspecting the shade when I placed it on the lamp, but there was so much going on, the other repair person was in the next room repairing the teak dining table that the moving company had broken and I was in the middle of talking to him at the same time. Pictures of the damage are available. I will be out of range of cell phone and computer email till Nov 9th.
$256 the amount I paid for the lamp. If a replacement shade could be found I would also be satisfied with that.
November 3, 2014
Complaint report ********
Action Moving Services, Inc. response to complaint.
Ms. M contracted with Action Moving Services, Inc. to relocate her household goods from Eden Prairie, MN to Sunland CA. in June of 2014. In her contract, she elected to pack all of her cartons. We, as the carrier, packed the mattress cartons only. Her shipment was loaded on June 10, 2014 and was brought to our facility for a brief storage period. Her shipment loaded out of our facility on July 3, 2014 and delivered in Sunland, CA on July 12, 2014.
During transit, a few items were damaged along the way. One of which included a floor lamp. This floor lamp had a glass shade that was packed separately in a carton. This carton was packed by Ms. M.
Ms. M called Action Moving on July 25, 2014 to inquire how to file for Loss and Damage Claims. We discussed her packed by owner cartons, one of which she was claiming damage to the contents of the carton. She advised at that time there was no external damage to the outside of this carton that would give cause to damage the contents. We advised at that time, the limits of carrier liability on packed by owner cartons does not cover acts or omissions by the consignee (improper packing).
Ms. M filed a Loss and Damage claim on August 12, 2014 for the lamp and the other items that were damaged in the move. She also filed for this carton that was discussed which contained pottery that she had packed. Although we advised her that liability for this would not be accepted due to no damages to the carton prior to her claim filing, she filed for this item and indicated on her claim form that there was damage to the carton. We assigned a repair firm of W******** G*** in Los Angeles, CA. to view this carton for damages and to take photos. They were also assigned to repair the metal floor lamp that had damage to the bulb socket. Since this repair would need to be performed in the shop, the lamp was taken in along with a few other items that would also need to be repaired.
Her items were returned to her on September 26, 2014. Our reports from W G were received for processing on September 29, 2014. Included in this report is the lamp base only that was returned to her, as the shade was not part of the claim and was not taken to the shop. Included in this report were the photos of all the items that were claimed as well as a release signed and dated September 26, 2014, stating all repairs were completed to her satisfaction.
On October 2, 2014, we processed the remainder of Ms. M's claim, which included a denial of the packed by owner carton of pottery. The status letter was emailed to Ms. M. The same day, we received a rebuttal to the denial of the denied carton. There was no mention of a glass shade for a floor lamp whatsoever.
In turn, we contacted W G for further information regarding this carton. On October 9, 2014, we were then informed, that Ms. M was contacting them regarding the lampshade on her lamp that was repaired and signed for. We learned that while the repair firm was at the home, the repair firm placed the glass shade on the lamp. There was no damage to the shade at that time. They also advised us that Ms M had called them a few days after they were in the home and advised she noticed the cracks in the top of the glass shade when she was moving items around inside the home, one of the items she moved included this lamp.
On October 10, 2014, Ms M called us and told us how she told the repair person not to pick up the lampshade by the finial and he did and he cracked it. She then advised us that she put the shade on the lamp.
On October 11, Ms M sent us photos of the lamp and a letter via email, stating when the tech was placing the shade on the lamp, she immediately rushed over to him and lifted the shade from the bottom edge out of his hands and placed it on the lamp. I told him it was fragile and that it couldn't be handled by the finial."
On October 14, 2014, we forwarded this information to W G. On October 16, 2014 they responded, advising they would have noticed if the shade was cracked while he was at the home. If this was something they felt they had done they would take full responsibility. Since this incident had not been reported until after they had left her residence and the release was signed that everything was completed satisfactorily and this incident was after she had been moving items around inside her home, they would not be able to take responsibility. The photos that were sent along show the cracks in the top area of the lampshade and are rather obvious.
Since the information we were initially inquiring about for Ms. Ms rebuttal to her claim was for a carton containing pottery and we received the information we requested, we advised W G they did not need to contact her on our behalf. We prepared and sent our rebuttal response on or about October 21, 2014. The rebuttal response was for the denied carton as this was the only item in the rebuttal request. Since the lampshade is an issue outside of the loss and damage claim, we did not address it in the rebuttal as it was not an item on the loss and damage claim.
In regards to the dollar amount she is requesting from Action Moving Services, Inc. for the cracked lampshade, we are not in a position to offer compensation. We feel we have enough evidence to support this denial as this was not a transit damage related claim related to her relocation. This was not damaged in her home by the repair firm as she states or they would have noted this and taken full responsibility. We assert this lampshade was damaged in her home by her when she moved the lamp herself.
Action Moving Services, Inc.