On Sep. 2, 2004 we entered into an agreement with M&M Heating and Air Conditioning Service Company to replace and install the air conditioning unit, furnace and evaporator coil for our house. This was done because the old unit has been found to be consuming high energy already. The agreed upon price of $7,200 included labor, permits, and removal of the existing equipment. Further, a 5 year guarantee and 24x365 emergency service was included. A copy of the agreement is attached. Our energy bill did not improve instead we incurred the same if not higher .
In June 2009 the AC was not working. When contacted the company refused to honor the contract and insisted that he warranty is only good for one year. A tech came on June 29th, and did work for which we paid $99.00.Summer 2011 , bothered by the high cost of energy, I had someone check our AC and they found the attic to be a mess and partially unfinished. I checked all my files to see if I could find some kind of document to go after them and found the correction notice from the City of Tracy. (attached as well) There is a list of items which the company must complete. They will not complete the work without additional payment.
Desired Settlement: W are asking for nothing more than for them to comply with the correction notice issued by the City of Tracy. We consider them in breach of a written contract of which has been paid in full.We have had another contractor verify the findings of the city of Tracy and feel that they are responsible to finish the work without charging us additional money.
Business' Initial Response
On August 30, 2004 ****** ****** contacted our company for a phone estimates on what it would cost to install a condenser and evaporative coil only and a condenser, furnace, and evaporative coil. ****** further stated he had other quotes and time frames for installs from other companies and he wanted this done as soon as possible. We explained we could start the install by the end of this week or the beginning of the following week. ****** requested we send someone out to give a firm estimate that afternoon, we sent out our representative Mr. Daniels to meet and discuss options again with the ******'s. A contract was signed on August 30, 2012 for $6,700.00. On September 2, 2004, after the state required 3 day waiting period, we ordered the equipment. On that same day Shirley ****** called and wanted our representative to come back out to discuss and change the contract. We were able to cancel the shipment of the equipment and had our representative back out to discuss what changes they want to make to the contract. A new contract was entered into September 2, 2004 in the amount of $7,200.00.
On September 8 - 10, 2004 we installed the system as per the contract agreement. M & M pulled the City of Tracy building permit #XX-XXXX to perform the work. During the course of the job the customer requested several changes. Some changes we were able to accommodate and some we were not. The customer was asking that our installers do additional work not included in the contract amount. We found duct work bunched up in attic area restricting air flow. Customer did not want to pay to have duct work corrected, they wanted this work done under the contract amount, we explained that we could not accommodate that request as it would cost additional. Our contract with the customer did not include any duct work. The duct work was existing, the contract signed on September 2, 2004 only included replacing the furnace, evaporative coil, air conditioning condenser, plenum modifications so that the new furnace connects to the system, the two zone system and the permit to perform the work. The customer contacted the office on the final date of the install and requested to meet with our representative before the job was completed. On the final date of the install September 10, 2004 our representative delivered all paperwork (ie: owners manuals, warranty registrations, etc.) as per customers request. The customer told our representative how unhappy they were with our company for not performing all the requested additional work. He explained that it was not included in the contract. He further explained that we could complete that work, but, it would be additional to the contract amount, they refused to authorize the additional work. During the course of these few days the customer became very upset and contacted our office several times because they felt as though we should have done everything they requested at no additional charge. After the job was completed, the customer was upset with our company for not performing all of their requests.
From September 10 to the first week of November our office called the ******'s and left several messages to set up a time for the City Of Tracy Inspector to come out to their home and do a final mechanical inspection. We did not receive any response from the ******'s so we mailed the customer a letter on November 9, 2004. The letter stated that the City only gives us 120 days to clear and final the permit and we wanted to get it completed. The City charges additional permit fees if it expires. After leaving several more messages in November and December with no response, we stated in a phone message the permit was due to expire on January 10, 2005. Shirley contacted our office on January 3, 2005 and scheduled the inspection for Friday January 7, 2005. The inspector contacted our office and stated the customer was not home January 7, 2005 for the inspection. We tried contacting her before the inspector left and was unsuccessful. Shirley contacted our office the following Monday January 10, 2005 and stated she would take care of it and did not want to deal with our company any further. We mailed the building department a letter stating the customer would not allow us to complete the permit process and she would be contacting them.
We provided two precision tune ups as per the contract to make sure the system was properly maintained so that the guarantee/manufactures warranty would be valid in case of any defects within the unit. The maintenances would have been due in March 2005 and September 2005 which is once every 6 months for a year. The customer declined to allow us back at the property to perform these routine maintenances. After stating we were no longer allowed to perform any work on the property, Shirley contacted our office several times for work.
On March 11, 2005 Shirley contacted our office because their system was short cycling and running all night. We explained to Shirley, at the time of the phone call, if it was a warranty problem there would be no charge, but, if it was not covered under warranty there would be a trip/diagnostic charge of $79.00. Our technician found that the return air filter was dirty to the point it was fully restricted. The customer paid the $79.00 fee, but, again was not happy because she felt that she should not have to pay for it because it should be covered. We explained to them that they need to change their filter on a regular basis and they said they know that, this is not their first system.
On October 12, 2007 ****** contacted our office and stated that we were suppose to provide them with maintenance as per the contract agreement. We explained that Shirley had told us not to perform any more work on her property and that the maintenances were provided in the first year after the installation. M & M went ahead and accommodated the customers request once again and scheduled and performed a routine maintenance on the system on October 17, 2007. This is the first maintenance M & M performed for the customer since it was installed per our knowledge. The filter again was dirty at about 70% restricted.
On June 29, 2009 Shirley contacted our office and stated that the unit was down and wanted someone there today. We scheduled our technician for that afternoon. He found that the main control board had gone out on the unit. We contacted the manufacturer of the equipment for the warranty status of the parts, they explained that we were within the 5 year guarantee and they would honor the part replacement at no charge, but, no labor, tax, or freight would be covered. I explained to the customer that we provide a one year warranty on our installation and that the 5 year guarantee is provided through the manufacturer. I further explained she could review her warranty information provided at the time of installation or she could contact the manufacturer if she did not believe M & M. Since it was after hours when we performed diagnosis it was too late to order the part on June 29. We ordered the part on June 30, 2009 and received it late in the afternoon on July 1, 2009. Shirley wanted it installed that afternoon and I explained to her it would be overtime charges if we were even able to squeeze her into the schedule that afternoon. Again Shirley was very upset and stated she should not have to pay for anything. We further explained due to their lack of maintaining the system there could be further problems in the future. The customer paid the trip/diagnostic charge of $99.00 and the labor, tax, warranty processing charge and freight charges of $320.00. The total paid was $419.00. Again Shirley was upset and said that she no longer wanted to do business with our company and told us do not come back to her home ever again. Shirley further stated she was going to file complaints against us and tell everyone she knows what a horrible company we are.
On June 19, 2012 Shirley contacted our office and stated that she had a correction notice from the City of Tracy. That correction notice was dated January 11, 2005. If you will recall on January 7, 2005 Shirley Okayed to have the inspection done. That inspection could not be performed by the City of Tracy Building Department due to no one home at the ****** residence. Shirley stated she had other companies over to her home to check out the system and in the attic area and that it was a disaster up there. Shirley further stated that we needed to come and fix all the duct work in that attic and finish our job. We explained to Shirley that it is 8 years later and reminded her that she stated back in 2005 that she did not want us on site and she would take care of it herself. Shirley stated she did not care and we better come do all the work from the correction notice and the work the other companies said was not completed or she would report us. She began yelling and threatening us so the call was terminated.
On July 30, 2012 we received a call from Rebecka Calvert with Better Business Bureau regarding a complaint filed by the ******'s in June. Rebecka explained that the complaint had been emailed to our company previously with no response. We explained that we were informed not to open any emails from the BBB due to the fraudulent problems going around. Rebecka stated she contacted us for this exact reason. Rebecka emailed us the complaint along with several other documents attached (ie: the contract signed 09/02/2005, the letter regarding scheduling inspection dated 11/09/2004, copy of work order dated 06/29/2009, bbb complaint letter, City of Tracy Correction notice dated 01/11/2005, signed not from ****** dated 01/14/2005).
We contacted the City of Tracy building department on July 30, 2012 and they did not upload or keep correction notices in their computer system back in 2004. They have no record of the original correction notice nor the letter I sent the City stating the customer was going to take care of their final inspection with the building department. The correction notice is very old by the city address; they are no longer in that location. We are not positive and with no way to verify at this point, but, this correction notice is not anything like we have ever seen. When you have a mechanical final inspection, it is strictly mechanical. There are corrections listed about cleaning trash, proving a ladder, providing owners manuals, verifying efficiency, etc. Another correction says there need to be 2 wraps of tape? Did someone remove the tape because that is the only way to tell if it is wrapped twice or not? There is another correction that says to anchor the compressor down??? The compressor is in the condenser and came from the manufacturer anchored down inside the condenser, we do not take condensers apart when we install them.
The correction notice looks very peculiar to say the least. If the inspector is unable to do the inspection for access purposes they usually contact us to provide them access. This inspection looks as though the customer had some influence on the results. It seems as though the inspector did have access to the attic area as item # 7 states that the metal wye in the attic needs insulated.
The customer has had several opportunities over the last 8 years to provide us with the correction notice and has not done so. This customer is requesting that we make all the corrections and final a permit that expired in 2005, this is not reasonable. Shirley stated many times she did not want us on her property and she would take care of the permit. It would cost to pull another permit and the corrections would be different today than in 2004 or 2005 due to building department changes done frequently. The systems installed in 2004 to code and not to code under the 2012 code standards. This customer has been trying to get us to do as much work as possible at no charge to them. Through all the jobs that we have performed for this customer, we only made a small amount of money on the install job, the rest of the jobs we lost money on.
This customer is going after our company in a derogatory manner because they have been unable to continue to use us at our expense. The customer requested and paid to replace their heating and air conditioning equipment. At no time was there any guarantee of their energy consumption or bill, this would need to be discussed with PG & E. When we originally signed a contract with this customer on August 30, 2004, it was for a higher efficient system (ie: a 15 seer condenser and a 96% efficient furnace) than the contract signed September 2, 2004 for a 12 seer condenser and 80% efficient furnace with a zone system which was actually installed. The customer was told that the high efficient equipment helps save on the heating and air conditioning equipment portion, but, they have several other appliances in the home that weigh heavily on their bill, not just the heating and air conditioning. The customer called and changed the contract to lower the efficiency of their equipment, which was their choice.
After a very long drawn out situation with this job and customer requests I hope you can understand that we have done our best to try and satisfy this customer on several occasions and have been unsuccessful. After being told on several occasions to stay off their property, they contacted us back to go do additional work which we did. If the attic area was checked in the summer of 2011 as per customer's complaint, where is the documentation from the company performing the work making those statements? Why is this being brought to our attention a year after this was performed? If the system was checked for efficiency, what were the findings? Was the system maintained (ie: filters clean, coils clean, properly maintenanced, etc)? What was the condition of the equipment at the time of these findings?
I hope you understand what we go through with the building departments in order to properly process our permits and final inspections. There are very few HVAC companies that actually pull all permits as we do. We go out of our way to make sure that jobs are completed properly. The time frame of requesting this work to be done now is beyond any limits set for companies as I was able to find a part of the documentation in the archived pallets of old files.
It is M & M's opinion that the ******'s intent with the filing of this complaint is to cause as much harm as possible to M & M Heating & Air Conditioning Service Co.'s name and reputation and therefore we are requesting that the Better Business Bureau remove this complaint from our record entirely. We would like to request documentation of any outcome due to this complaint for our records. If you are in need of any further information please feel free to contact our office.
BBB's Final Determination: Business offered a resolution. Consumer did not pursue further with BBB and the matter was assumed to be resolved