Complaint Improper installation of insulation within the return air/filter box. We had ECM install our entire air conditioning unit back in August of 2010. As part of the installation ECM fabricated a new larger air return/filter box, insulated that box and installed the AC unit above the new box. Just recently the bottom insulation section in the box began lifting up and pieces of insulation broke free almost being sucked into the AC unit. I took a close look at how insulation was attached at the failure points and below. Essentially the installers piled several layers of hvac insulation loosely on top of each other and placed those layers over the concrete floor in the garage. On top of the concrete floor and just under the insulation were various pieces of broken wood and other loose material. The top layer of insulation located on the bottom of the box was then taped to the fabricated side pieces sitting atop the wood scraps and loose material. Because of this method of installation the top piece on the bottom section of the box eventually came loose and began releasing pieces of the underlying material. I've owned several properties over the years and have never seen such a poor installation job. I'm requesting ECM remove and properly replace the damaged and improperly installed insulation.
Desired Settlement Replace and properly install the insulation within the air return/filter box at no charge. The insulation was never properly installed in the first place.
Final Consumer Response East Coast Mechanical (ECM) management agreed to repair the issue at no charge prior to receiving my BBB complaint. ECM scheduled an appointment for the repair, the repair technician showed up as scheduled and the repair was completed to my satisfaction. I appreciate the fact that ECM realized there was a legitimate issue associated with the original install (5yrs ago) and agreed to complete the repair even though the unit passed the city inspection and was outside the normal warranty period. I consider this issue resolved and am satisfied with the result.
Complaint ECM refuses to work with the manufacturer to provide warranty service. ECM installed a new American Standard Kitchen Faucet in 2012. It has failed and is causing a leak. It is under warranty coverage from American Standard. American standard ... on their website at http://www.americanstandard-us.com/customerservice/warranty/FaucetLifetimeFunctionFinish.aspx states "For service under these warranties, it is suggested that a claim be made through the contractor or dealer from or through whom the product was purchased, or that a service request (including a description of the product model and of the defect) be sent to the following address ...". Certain things like the specifics of the failure need to be documented by a technician. In repeated phone conversations (Shirley spoken to last), they have refused to do anything but replace with a new part at full price ... claiming that they are not responsible.
Desired Settlement 1. Work with the manufacturer (American Standard) to provide technical specifics of the issue and to assist with obtaining a warranty replacement. 2. Perform the installation of the warranty replacement at a reasonable cost for labor only.
Business Response Our office has received your report filed by one of our customers, covering the American Standard Kitchen Faucet ECM installed in her home on June 14, 2012. Accordingly, we researched our records and learned that the customer had telephoned us on December 14, 2015(over three years from date of installation), to report leaking to the Faucet. Under the ECM Service Contract, our Technician was dispatched and ordered parts for the faucet, as listed in detail(with both part numbers and descriptions) on the customer's invoice. On December 19, 2015, our Technician returned and installed the parts. Labor for both service calls and all parts were free of charge, as they were covered under the ECM Service Contract. Unfortunately, however, the parts did not correct the leak due to worn components of the actual faucet. Therefore, since it was impossible to repair the faucet,the customer was advised that a new Faucet would be needed. Inasmuch as the ECM Service Contract does not include supplying Faucets, nor the installation of new Faucets, the customer was quoted the discounted installation rate exclusively for contract customers. It is our understanding that the customer's son then telephoned our office requesting that ECM contact American Standard to assist the customer with obtaining a warranty Faucet. Our office attempted to explain to the customer's son that ECM does not get involved in outside issues. In other words, the warranty replacement of plumbing fixtures is between the manufacturer and the customer. Nevertheless, and prior to receipt of this report, our Customer Service Manager telephoned the customer to find out how she could assist her with this matter. The customer advised her that she needed the model number of the defective Faucet in her home to supply American Standard. This information was given to the customer and a follow up telephone call was placed a few days later to see if we could be of any further assistance. At this time, the customer told us her son was handling the matter. The manager also called the customer's son and left a detailed message to return her call. To this end, there has been no further contact from either the customer or her son and, therefore, we are closing our file on this matter.
Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I spoke with Melinda at ECM. First and foremost, one can clearly ascertain from the manufacturer's recommendation that in order to obtain warranty service, "that a claim be made through the contractor or dealer from or through whom the product was purchased, or that a service request (including a description of the product model and of the defect) be sent to the following address ...". Certain things like the specifics of the failure need to be documented by a technician.
While Melinda was very nice and clearly customer-centric in attitude, and while she did make arrangements to provide the part number to us, ECM never fullfilled the need to work directly with the manufacturer to provide this information nor the technical description of the leak ... which was required by the manufacturer in order to provide warranty service. This was something that ultimately had to be provided by a 92 y/o woman with no knowledge of plumbing. As a result, the manufacturer finally DID agree to provide a warranty replacement.
Bottom line, while it is true that ECM has "partially" responded by providing the necessary part number, they did not work at all with the manufacturer and they did not provide technical information about the leak ... all of this in spite of being a home service and repair company who performed the original faucet installation. From my perspective, this is unacceptable. However, the warranty replacement is on its way and will be installed as soon as it arrives. So the issue will be resolved soon. But ECM needs to do a better job of taking customer needs and customer sat into consideration in it's "policies" on warranty issues. Again, we are willing to pay ECM for the labor to do the replacement per their estimate. It's the challenge that was presented to a 92 y/o in obtaining the warranty replacement that is where the problem lies.
Final Business Response While plumbing warranty issues remain between the customer and the manufacturer, we appreciate the customers comments and will be reviewing them with our management team. In the meantime, the customer's new faucet was installed yesterday and she was given the Customer Service Manager's extension should she need any special assistance in the future. Under the circumstances, we are closing our file on this matter.
Final Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) Because the issue was resolved and because the business did (after much effort) make an attempt to help by getting the faucet model number for us, I am going to accept the resolution. However, I consider it unacceptable for a company that bills itself as a home repair service to disavow all responsibility to resolve warranty issues with the manufacturer. Especially in consideration of the fact that said company installed the original faucet.
Complaint Failure to fix frigidare refrigerator ice maker The unit makes ice but will not deliver it thru the front door ECM contract # LXXXXXXXL Contract covers our Frigadare refrigerator On 11/27/2015 a repairman from ECM examined the refrigerator and determined that the auger motor was not functioning and needed to be replaced. After that we were informed that a "control board" had to be replaced and the cost of fixing it would be $200 additional. When we inquired as to why it was not covered by the contract I was told "control boards" are not covered. The 5th line on the back of the contract says " conrol Boards" are covered. I then spoke to a employee in the parts department at ECM and attempted to find out why the "control Board " was not covered and what was the part number so I could check the cost with Frigidare. I asked who I was talking to and they refused to identify themselves. They would not would NOT give me the Frigidare part number that had to be replaced. I was told that if I had any further complains, I should speak to "**** *******" who's name is on the ECM contract. The woman on the phone was rude, curt and told me she could not help me any further.
Desired Settlement 1. Return the contract price of $563.92 the complete cost of the contract for 1 year.
2. Repair the icemaker and restore it to its working condition
3.An appology for the rude, uncaring manner displayed by parts department employee of ECM.
Business' Initial Response
BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU
CASE # XXXXXXXX
This is in response to the customers report to your office, regarding his Kitchenaide Refrigerator.
As your office is aware, the customer has since contacted your office to indicate the matter has been resolved.
However, we would like to take this opportunity to clarify that the Control Board that was needed to repair the Refrigerator was covered under the ECM Service Contract up to $100.00. Had this customer elected the Extended Parts Coverage on his contract originally, the Control Board would have been covered 100%.
ECM offers an Extended Parts Coverage on all parts, regardless of price. Unfortunately, this customer did not have this coverage. Please be assured, all Service Contracts have a parts limit which, in this case, happens to be $100 for this part on the ECM Service Contract as follows:
“16. EXTENDED PARTS LIMITATION COVERAGE: Extends the existing parts limits on normally covered parts only. Does not provide additional coverage for non-covered parts and/or premier products which are covered for labor only…
(II.) Appliance - Covered parts are listed and have limits attached. Compressors are covered up to $200 max. and one per contract year, burners, magnetron tubes and gaskets are covered up to $50. All other covered parts are limited up to a maximum of $100 unless Appliance Extended Parts Coverage is taken and listed on the face of the contract…”
Nevertheless, we are glad the issue has been resolved and we have since closed our file as a result.
Final Consumer Response Case should be closed as the parties, ECM and ******* *******, have agreed to a final resolution and no further action will be required
Complaint diagnosed wrong AC unit, did not diagnose unit we called about, offered to come back for additional fee they could reduce but did not reduce 1st fee. invoice XXXXX oct XX XXXX
My store has 3 AC units. I called ECM to fix it. The said they would diagnose it for $120. As they could do it the next day I agreed. I told them which unit was down and that the back unit is very old and needs replacing which we asked for an estimate.
The person called me up and said he diagnosed the back unit. I explained that the center unit for the main room was the one that needed diagnosis. When I saw the invoice it detailed the back units repairs needed but none of the unit we called about. He did note that AC #2 wasn't working, but no diagnosis was done on it. The man was given a coupon printed from their own web pages for $45 off and he refused to honor it. The coupon said nothing about not being for business use on it and should have been used.
3 days later I called and explained that I want them to come back and diagnose the correct AC unit which they said they would only do it for another $120.
They refused to make any compromise, except eventually they offered to drop the second invoice down to $90 if they came back.
I asked them to at least do the same reduction for the 1st invoice which they refused to do despite the wrong diagnosis.
They claimed my store manager told them the back unit had the problem. If ECM had told him the center unit needed a diagnosis and to choose, he would have picked the newer unit or had them contact me. Fixing the newer unit is the obvious solution, not the 13 yr old unit he diagnosed. The note about the 2nd unit not working as well on the invoice shows the person was aware of that unit having problems.
So what I got from ECM was an invoice telling me the problem I had with the unit I wanted an extimate to replace, and the unit I called them in on still undiagnosed. (unless I pay twice.)
I will of course go elsewhere for my future AC troubles. I do not understand why they would want that to happen but it is their choice.
Desired Settlement I wanted the correct diagnosis done for the original fee but as they refused any alternative I would now like them to cancel the invoice as they failed to provide a diagnosis on the correct unit we had discussed on the original phone call. Honoring their $30 dollar offer to reduce the second invoice on the 1st invoice seems a reasonable request but they said no to that. refunding the coupon amount they refuse to accept would be another alternative.
Business Response This is in response to Case # XXXXXXXX covering a recent non-residential service call completed by ECM at "The Book Exchange."
We have completed are in-depth investigation into the customer's allegations and found them to be inaccurate. Based on our findings, we learned that the customer telephoned ECM at approximately 6:30PM on October 30, 2015, to report that one of his three (3) Air Conditioners (identified by him as Unit #2) was not cooling at his place of business ("The Book Exchange"). Our office advised the customer that ECM charges $120.00 to complete a diagnostic on a non-residential Air Conditioner and the customer agreed to pay the charge.
Accordingly, our AC Service Technician was dispatched the following day, on Saturday, October 31, 2015, to the location as promised. Upon arrival, a Representative from "The Book Exchange" advised our Technician that the customer was not present but that they would "direct" him to the Air Conditioner that was scheduled for service (as the AC units were unmarked). Upon conclusion of the diagnostic on that particular Air Conditioner, our Technician telephoned the customer to advise him of the results (inasmuch as he was not at the location). It was at this time that the customer told our Technician that the AC he was directed to for diagnosis was not, in fact, the AC he wanted ECM to service.
Normally, under the circumstances, the customer would be charged another diagnostic fee for a second Air Conditioner. However, as a courtesy to the customer, our Technician proceeded to complete the second diagnostic on a different AC and, on conclusion, again telephoned the customer to report his findings. Unfortunately, this time the customer did not answer the telephone. Therefore, per normal protocol, our Technician completed the Service Ticket for the Air Conditioner and proceeded to request payment as promised.
Surprisingly, however, the Store Representative instead presented a $45 Service Call Coupon from our website meant for our residential customers. The Technician attempted to explain to the Store Representative that he could not accept the coupon, and the Store Representative refused to render payment as promised by the customer when he booked the service call. Our Technician left the premises but had inadvertently neglected to complete a service ticket for the first diagnosis, leading our office to believe he only diagnosed one Air Conditioner.
Therefore, when the customer telephoned our office on Monday, reporting the Technician diagnosed the wrong Air Conditioner, our office "assumed" the customer was correct and offered to complete another Service Call. Little did we know at the time, that our Technician was at the location for one hour diagnosing two Air Conditioners (one requested by a Store Representative, the other by the Owner). Further, no monies have been rendered for our services, other than a request to pay $45 for our time and expertise, coupled with a Complaint Report to your office. We certainly did not expect this type of treatment from another business establishment. Under the circumstances, ECM would prefer to waive the charge and simply discontinue any further service request for the Air Conditioners located at "The Book Exchange."
Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) So they say it is not their fault? Assuming they are not changing facts they didn't mention that they "offered to complete another Service Call" for another 'diagnosis fee'. So I would pay twice for what i wanted.
They never mentioned to me that the technician had diagnosed both units and they did not give me any information on the second diagnosis. They say here that the "Technician left the premises but had inadvertently neglected to complete a service ticket for the first diagnosis, leading our office to believe he only diagnosed one Air Conditioner." This of course was my main problem as well as I could not procede without the diagnosis for the AC machine I had called and described to them on the phone. It seems their tech made an error and their office made an error in not getting the right info from him, and to me.
As to the coupon it came from their own site and there was no limitation as to residential or business use on it. As I recall it was for $45 off, not making the bill $45 total as is claimed above in their response. If they don't want it used comercially then change the coupon to say residential only. They should have honored it. I would have paid their fee minus the coupon amount and I offered to do so with customer service. Instead they made no attempt to correct the situation and demanded the full amount.
They have no concept of keeping the customer happy and apparently were trained to get the money at any cost. So they lost me as a potential customer and got a complaint here.
The BBB complaint finally got a positive response from them with an offer to waive the charge. I received a bill from them in the mail after the call voiding the bill a few days later. (Nice try) Now that I see the offer in print here I will accept it.
Had they attempted to work with me AT ALL to correct the problem, they might have gotten paid a fair amount and had a moderately happy customer. Instead they left me with no diagnostic answers and a bad feeling towards their company.
Even in their response here thay take none of the blame despite the errors they describe here which they blame on a technician's error.
I still do not have the diagnosis on the machine I asked for. You said your tech made one. I have not seen it.
End result, another company is taking care of my 2 bad units, replacing them for me. I called you first. It should have been your company. Read some of the other complaints here. Ask someone impartial to give you an opinion about them, and fix your complaint responses from customer service.
It shouldn't take a BBB complaint to get good customer service responses from your company.
Complaint Came out to give me an estaminet on a/c replacement for future so I wouldn't have to make a decision on short notice. Claimed that I had a freon leak Claimed that I had a freon leak.$189 charge to find leak which would be deducted from total a/c replacement. Also claimed a water deposit in evaporator pan which indicated a coil problem. Because I was suspicious,I called my service provider for a call.Nothing was said to him about my interaction with ECM.I told him of a problem with fluctuating cooling. He checked the freon pressure first thing and reported it was fine
This leads me to suspect that the ECM man was trying to stretch the truth to expedite the process
Desired Settlement An apology and refund
Business Response This is in response to the customer's report to your office requesting a refund for the services completed by ECM to the Air Conditioner in his home. Accordingly, we have researched our records and learned that this customer had telephoned ECM and requested an estimate for a new Air Conditioner. Based on this request, we dispatched a Comfort Specialist to the customer's home on September 14, 2015, for a comprehensive home survey and energy assessment. This service is complimentary and part of the estimate process. However, during the assessment, the customer agreed to pay for a "Leak Check." We believe this was a wise choice, as the AC wasn't cooling properly. This is usually a sign of a Freon Leak which sometimes can be in the Refrigerant Lines that transport the Freon between the condensing coil and the Air Handler. When this is the case, a new Air Conditioner will not solve the problem. The Specialist did find traces of a Freon leak to the AC Coil and informed the customer of his findings. The Specialist then proceeded to complete the survey and assessment and ultimately provided the customer with the AC estimate they had requested. We understand from the customer's report that they are now requesting a full refund for the "Leak Check" they agreed to have ECM perform. Under the circumstances, ECM has authorized the refund to the customer's charge account, as a gesture of good-will, and we have since closed our file on this matter as a result.
Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I am disputing the fact that the so called "freon leak" was based on a falsehood. The technician supposedly checked the freon pressure and claimed low pressure due to a leak in the system. That is when he proposed a "leak check ",which I agreed to, on the basis of his " findings". After paying for this, I had suspicions of his intent & called anotherA/C firm which showed up w/in the hour. Without telling him what had transpired earlier, he performed a freon pressure test and found it to be normal. I know the tech from even did not add any freon as I was with him most of the time. The second tech made no mention of the need for a "leak check" as there obviously was no leak My complaint is based on the fact that the technician, in his attempt to make a sale was untruthful $ there was no need to perform a "leak check".The $189. chg was to be deducted from any a/c replacement charges. This was done to sweeten the deal I have a copy of the second A/C company's service report with the date, time and freon pressure
Final Business Response We are sorry this customer continues to believe ECM was "trying" to sell him an AC. The customer telephoned us for a new AC estimate. Due to pressure differentials to the Refrigerant, we recommended a "Leak Search" to be certain a new AC was what was needed. We regret our efforts were misconstrued. Inasmuch as we already refunded the customer for the charge, we will not be taking any further action.
Final Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
Complaint Added charge of $75 "processing fee" I renewed my contract with ECM for over $600 this morning but haven't received my copy of it yet but the woman who I renewed it with on the phone told me they changed the contract and there was now a $60 deductible fee for repairs. I asked then that would be the only charge for a repair and she said yes. The service man (Robert) came today and did a good job of the repair and went out to do the paperwork. When he came back there was a line item of $75 "processing fee" which I didn't expect to see given what I was told earlier that morning by the service contract department. I called ECM and was transferred 6 times until I finally gave the phone to the technician to try to get to the right person/department. A service manager named **** Acosche called the technician's phone and I spoke to him and he said that if I didn't pay the $75 processing fee, his service guy would remove the contactor part that he put in. I told him I would not let the technician remove the part but would pay the $60 that was I was told would be the bill and that they could bill me for the $75 until I see where it said such in the contract I was being mailed. In fact if it has the $75 then I would not agree to the contract in the first place given what I was told this morning. Later the manager **** Acosche called me back to ask if the service technician had explained the charges before he started. In fact we had discussed the new $50 deductible but nothing about any processing fees. The service technician was good and found the problem was a contactor which is a $7.50 part. He also blew 2 small fuses in the process (auto ATO fuses). Total cost of parts would have been $8.00 max. The technician asked me to sign the paperwork but wouldn't let me write on the paperwork that I was told by the service center that there was only supposed to be $60 payment for service. Inasmuch as he wouldn't let me put that before I signed it, I refused to sign it.
Desired Settlement first need to see the renewed service agreement, then contact by the business and apology for the miscommunications of service center vs the service manager. explanation of why $75 processing fee is for $8 in parts?
Business Response We were sorry to receive this report from our customer, as we learned a misunderstanding was at the crux of his complaint. The customer had just renewed an ECM "Silver Plan" Service Contract, designed exclusively for Air Conditioners, and was in contact with one of our fairly new Air Conditioner Managers. The Manager requested the customer pay a warranty processing fee for an incidental part that does not require the usual labor-intensive steps needed to replace an AC warranty part with the manufacturer. His handling was incorrect; and we have since taken measures to prevent any reoccurrence in the future. In addition, we have also telephoned the customer and asked him what ECM could do to remedy the situation. Per his two requests, our Air Conditioner Manager personally apologized to him for the error, and our Customer Service Manager discussed the terms of the contract with the customer. Nevertheless, the customer chose to cancel the Service Contract and, as a courtesy, will be receiving a full refund of the purchase price. Under the circumstances, ECM will be closing our file on this matter.
Complaint *********, inaccurate repair causing flood damage to home I called ECM because my air conditioner was draining water. They came, checked it, and said it was fine. They continually said it was dry, and that there was not s problem. Since the water continued to leak all over the floor, I called them again. They said they would send someone back out between 4 and 6, no one showed, I called at 7, they said he'd be right out and no one showed. I called again and was told no one could come, and I was forced to call another company after hours. Turns out the drain was clogged the whole time, and as a result of ECMs negligence, I now have flood damage to the house. The repair guy from the other company took a picture of where the ECM employee merely stuck a pice of blue filter in the drain, charged me and left. Horrendous!
Desired Settlement ECM needs to pay for a service master to come suck all the water out of the attic and master bedroom, pay for all the water removal caused by their negligence, possible new drywall, and put in a new unit at a discounted price because the water damage ruined the insulation of the first unit. They should also pay for my time in having to wait for the first moron that showed up, then waiting 6 hours for the no show, and then the time now to repair the flood damage.
Business Response We have received the report from the customer and offer the following as our response.
In June, 2015, the customer had telephoned ECM for the first time to report three (3) of the Air Conditioners in her home were not cooling. As a result, on June 25, 2015, our Technician was dispatched to the customer's home and completed service to each of the three (3) Air conditioners, as listed on the Service Tickets signed by the customer, and outlined below for your review:
UNIT 1 - 15 Year old Armstrong Air Handler/Trane Condenser AC servicing Living Area Breaker Tripped. Compressor having a hard time starting. Installed a Hard Start Kit. AC is temporarily cooling. Customer purchased new AC from ECM to be installed.
UNIT 2 - 9 Year old Carrier Air Handler/Trane Condenser AC servicing Bedroom Found the system cooling. Replaced weak capacitor in condenser unit. Not ready to replace AC. Needs insulation in attic.
UNIT 3 - 13 Year old Carrier Air Handler/Trane Condenser AC servicing Bedroom Found the system cooling. Added 1 pound of Refrigerant (Freon). Added a Hard Start Kit with relay and sealed supply that was sweating. Not ready to replace AC. Needs insulation in the attic.
On July 1, 2015, ECM replaced UNIT 1 with a new 2-ton Lennox Air Conditioner, Model 14ACX-024.
There was no further contact from the customer until three months later on October 31, 2015, when the customer called to report that one of her Air Conditioners was leaking. Later that same day, our Technician arrived at the customer's home. The customer immediately directed our Technician to the grill in the ceiling of one of the bedrooms that showed evidence of moisture condensing on the grill. To further investigate, the technician went into the attic and found that the grill belonged to UNIT 3 and not the new Lennox Air Conditioning system ECM installed in July.
This Air Conditioner is not under warranty. Therefore, the customer agreed to pay the $45 diagnosis fee, as a result, and the Technician proceeded to continue his investigation. Photos were taken by the Technician (which we will be happy to send to your office upon request) depicting the sweating grill, along with photos of the actual Carrier AC (clearly showing no evidence of water whatsoever in the drain pan or the surrounding areas of the AC). Therefore, he assumed that the condensation would have been related to an airflow deficiency in the old Air Conditioner.
This brings us to November 2, 2015, when the customer again called to report leaking and a service call was scheduled for that same day. Unfortunately, however, we learned that our dispatcher inadvertently neglected to notify our Technician to return to the customer's home and, therefore, ECM did not show up as scheduled. By copy of our response, we would like to again extend our apologies to the customer for any inconvenience caused her as a result. As a further gesture of our apologies we are refunding the customer the $45 diagnosis charge she paid on October 31, 2015. Certainly, this is not the normal way ECM does business and rest assured we have since corrected this situation to prevent any reoccurrence.
Nevertheless, ECM did offer to complete the service call the following morning, but the customer refused as she reported she was having another company complete the service. This was of course the customer's option; and we have closed our file on the matter inasmuch as there were no issues with the AC that ECM installed for the customer.
Complaint Unreliable warranty! Don't trust what they promise you! Even the stuff in writing means nothing to them! BEWARE ECM installed 2 Trane XL20i units in Feb 2010 with a warranty of 12 yrs on compressor and 10 yrs on all other parts. I have it in writing from ECM. In Sep 2015, an airhandler broke requiring repairs. They inform me that the part is no longer under warranty and that the original warranty was from the manufacturer and not from them. They tell me that I have to deal with the manufacturer if I have a problem with the warranty. The fact that ECM's agreement says 10 yr warranty on parts doesn't apply!! Makes absolutely no sense. They just transfer the responsibility to the homeowner and DON'T honor what they have in Writing. Don't trust any of their warranties NOT A TRUSTWORTHY COMPANY
Desired Settlement All I ask for is for ECM to honor the warranty that I have in writing from them: i.e. 10 yr parts
Business Response Upon receipt of this report, we researched the matter and have verified that ECM installed two Trane XL20i Air Conditioner systems for the customer on March 3, 2010. Both Air Conditioners came with a limited manufacturer's warranty for parts, as do all Air Conditioner systems that ECM sells. However, we also learned that because the customer did not register the Air Conditioners with Trane, within 60 days from purchase, the limited manufacturer's warranty to his over 5-year old Air Conditioners expired on March 3, 2015 (5-years from purchase). As a point of clarification, the warranty time frames ECM listed on the customer's proposal were based on the advertised manufacturer's warranty, per the Trane product line warranty schedule at that time. Customers were required to register their products within 60 days from purchase. Certainly, we realize it is our responsibility to make certain a new Air Conditioner unit is properly installed in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions but the terms of the manufacturer's limited warranty have always been between the consumer and the manufacturer who provides the warranty. As I am sure your office can understand, ECM is not a manufacturer warranty representative nor did we state anywhere on the proposal anything regarding the warranty information other than quoting the eligible years for the warranty. In fact, with each Air Conditioning installation, ECM provides a comprehensive packet covering much more than just the warranty information and we have been doing this since we have been in business. However, we will add that this is not a unique situation in our industry. Our industry is infamous for having a high "none registration" factor with all manufacturers. It is for this reason, that ECM recently implemented courtesy registrations for customers. Nevertheless, the customer still remains ultimately responsible for the registration of their Air Conditioner. To this end, we appreciate the opportunity this report afforded us to clarify this situation. Under the circumstances, we are closing our file on this matter.
Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) ECM completely blew it on this one!! I never received any instructions from ECM telling me that I must register my units within 60 days or otherwise my warranty all of a sudden drops from 10 years to 5 years. Had I received those instructions, it would be "insane" for me not to follow them. It is a blatant lie and ECM is trying for cover up for it! Shame on you, ECM! I will be pursuing this through the attorney general's office.
Final Business Response We are in receipt of the customer's rebuttal and appreciate the opportunity to again respond. At the outset, we would like to address the comment, "I never received any instructions from ECM telling me that I must register my units..." Please be assured, ECM does in fact inform customers of the need to register their equipment. In fact, with each Air Conditioning installation, ECM provides a comprehensive packet covering much more than just the warranty information. In addition, we hope your office can appreciate the fact that we cannot (nor do we believe can the customer), recall/confirm something that transpired over 5 years ago. Again, this is not a unique situation in our industry our industry has a high "none registration" factor with all manufacturers. To this end, ECM maintains our position that we are unable to extend the terms of this customer's limited parts warranty for his Trane Air Conditioner.
Final Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I don't appreciate the accusation of being a liar by ECM. ECM has no proof that I ever received their registration/warranty packet. It's their word against mine. In addition, I have a contract signed by ECM and myself saying that warranty is for 10 years. There are no contingencies in the contract specifiying that the units have to be registered in order to get the 10 year warranty. Also, if it's so "common in your industry to have this high none registration rate", perhaps the reason is that you don't give instructions properly?? Consider that!!
Complaint Failure to repair appliance on first attempt Failure to even attempt to repair appliance on second visit, claiming that there was no malfunction ECM called to repair refrigerator which was running warm at the top,causing food to spoil.
First repairman changed several parts, but it soon became apparent that this did not solve the problem. He suggested that we purchase thermometers, which we did.
Second repairman made no attempt to repair the unit, but instead told us there were no problems. He ignored thermometers indicating a problem, stating that the thermometers were "unreliable".
Based on the second visit, when we were told that there were no problems, we concluded that ECM would not repair the Unit, so we replaced it.
We continued to experience food spoilage during this process. ECM claims no responsibility for food spoilage, in spite of language in their contract to the contrary.
Desired Settlement We requested a modest refund of our service contract of $100 to compensate us for food spoilage, as well as not repairing the Unit and the cost and inconvenience of replacing the refrigerator.
We have received your notice regarding a report filed by this customer, covering a GE Refrigerator ECM serviced and which the customer has since replaced. As we already discussed with your office prior to receiving this report, the customer contacted us and threatened to file a report with the BBB if we did not comply with his demands. To elaborate on what we discussed on the telephone, we have listed below what transpired and why ECM will not be changing our position. On January 7, 2015, we dispatched a Service Technician to the customer's home in response to his telephone call that the GE Refrigerator in his home was not cooling properly. Upon arrival, our Technician replaced both the Defrost Heater and the Main Control Board to the Refrigerator. On January 13, 2015, the customer again telephoned to report the Refrigerators was not cooling properly. Inasmuch as this was a "repeat" service call, our office dispatched a Senior Refrigerant Specialist to evaluate the Refrigerator. Upon arrival, our Specialist completed a thorough diagnostic on the Refrigerator and could not uncover any type of issue whatsoever. He found the Refrigerator cooling, as intended, and notated on the Service Invoice that the Refrigerator was working fine. The customer signed and dated the Service Ticket under the section that reads: "Work completed to my satisfaction. Accept recommended work." There was no further contact from the customer until our Service Contract Department received a letter from him dated July 27, 2015, over six months after the service call. The letter indicated he purchased a new Refrigerator and that he would not be renewing his recently expired contract because ECM did not replace his Refrigerator under the contract. While we were sorry to lose the customer, our hands were tied. The terms of the contract clearly stipulate replacement coverage only applies if the equipment is non-repairable, in line with the terms and conditions of the contract. As covered herein, the last time we had heard from the customer was 7 months earlier, when he signed an invoice agreeing there was nothing wrong with his Refrigerator. After we advised the customer of our position, he sent us a rebuttal, via email. An excerpt from the email reads, "...We did have food spoilage between the first and second visit, and the time it took to replace the unit. I can't say that it reached $100 but this is what I'm asking for to resolve my claim...I'll wait a week for a favorable response from you, and then give up on the $100, and replace it with a formal complaint to BBB..." Certainly, we hope you will agree that ECM has done nothing wrong. We serviced the customer under the terms of the contract. He signed a Service Ticket agreeing there is nothing wrong with his Refrigerator. He chooses to purchase a new Refrigerator. His ECM Service Contract expires. He then warns us that unless we issue him money he will contact your office. Needless to say, ECM will not be issuing any type of compensation to this customer for services completed earlier this year to his old Refrigerator. As a result, we are closing our file on this matter.
Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The statement that the second service technician performed a "thorough diagnostic" is completely fallacious. The technician did practically nothing other than to try to convince me that there were no problems. He ignored the thermometers indicating a problem and actually handed me a bottle of beer asking,"isn't it cold?"
If I signed anything stating that the refrigerator was working satisfactorily, then this was done without my knowledge. I thought that what I was signing was just something to document that the technician had been at our house.
The Contract stipulates that replacement coverage applies if the equipment is non-repairable (according to ECM). Given my "assurance" that the equipment was in proper working order, I believe that I reasonably concluded that no more service calls would be made, and given that a properly functioning refrigerator is a necessity, we replaced it. I think it should be understood, that if the refrigerator was OK, we would not have replaced it. So, I did not create this cost merely to bolster making any accusatory remarks.
Final Business Response We believe our initial response clearly explains the situation. As a result, ECM's response remains the same.
Final Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The proposed resolution is to hold ECM blameless, and is unchanged from the previous response.
My resolution was to ask for a small amount of cash, to placate myself that ECM did, indeed, not perform in an adequate and professional manner.
Complaint This company has damaged my home from poor, service. They have taken advantage of my elderly mother and done the most shabby work.They refuse to admit wrong doing and do nothing but take your money and cause more damage. Product_Or_Service: ***** Account_Number: XXXXXXXXXX
Desired Settlement The company left my air conditioner exposed with a gaping hole in it. Which means that all of the dirt in the air gets sucked right into the whole and cause dirt and dust to be sucked into the ac unit and spread it all over my house and in the air and in all the ducts and vents. My children have been caughing, sneezing, having headaches. The house has dust and dirt from what is blowing through the vents. I believe it is a health violation. They refuse to admit this horrendous mistake.
Business Response This is in response to the report the customer's daughter filed with your office regarding her mother's 10-year old Amana Air Conditioner listed on the Service Agreement her mother purchased from ECM on February 12, 2015. At the outset, we would like to take this opportunity to mention that we are quite confused by the information in the report sent to your office. Simply put, we believe the allegations are incorrect. To substantiate this claim, we are listing below what has transpired regarding the service to the Amana Air Conditioner. On Friday, August 21, 2015, we received a telephone call reporting the Air Conditioner was not working. Later, that same day, our Technician was dispatched to the customer's home. The Technician believed the Evaporator Coil was the source of the Freon Leak, and added two pounds of Freon to provide the customer with temporary cooling, pending a repair. The customer signed the ticket and there was no notation of any issues whatsoever. On Monday, our office telephoned the customer and spoke to her daughter. At this time, her daughter advised us that she would call us back when she was ready to proceed with the repair. The following day, on August 25, 2015, the customer's daughter telephoned demanding ECM clean the Ductwork throughout the home. She claimed that our Technician did not replace the "Tape" she had previously placed over the AC Filter Compartment and, therefore, airborne particles from the garage had dispersed through the AC System and into the ductwork, ultimately going into her living area. However, please be advised that this is literally impossible. As a point of clarification, any airborne particles that could get past the Air Conditioner filter would be stopped at the Evaporator Coil located inside the Air Handler. Under no circumstances, would airborne particles travel past the coil into the ductwork. In addition, we sent a Technician back to the customer's home, who removed the duct tape in order to educate the customer on using the built-in filter door, engineered with the Air Conditioner system. We believe the customer finally understands why taping the filter compartment shut serves no purpose. In the meantime, we also sent a supervisor to the customer's home to verify what was needed to repair the customer's Air Conditioner. Our Supervisor discovered the Air Conditioner was losing Freon due to a "rusted out" filter drier. For further clarification, the filter drier is located outside of the home and is there to remove impurities and moisture from the Freon that travels through the Air Conditioner lines. As you can imagine, Air Conditioner Driers are continually exposed to the elements and will, over time, become rusty and sometimes leak. In addition, rust and corrosion is considered a preexisting condition and is not covered under the ECM Service Contract as follows:
"27. RUST AND CORROSION EXCLUSIONS: Any replacement and/or repairs, parts, components or failure of equipment related to or caused by rust and/or corrosion in the first year of contract is not covered..." Under the circumstances, we have since telephoned the customer' daughter and advised her that we can replace the "rusted out" Filter Drier for a minimal charge. Unfortunately, the repair was refused and, therefore, ECM has closed our file on this matter.
Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The company totally lied about all the events that took place. It's laughable how they have twisted every detail. Here are the facts. 1. The company claimed we had to have the coil replaced 2. The company ripped off the av tape they had placed on the av and left the av exposed. Stating they would get back to us regarding the coil replacement 3 two days later company called and explained to my mother they could not replace coil at my home and needed to bring ac into the shop and we would be without ac for at least 2 days. 4 I called the company to ask why they left the ac exposed and what they were going to do to fix the mess they left my ac and now filthy ducts due to their service. 5 The company refused to acknowledge what was done even though I had taken pictures. 6 I filed a complaint with the B B C 7 - Four days later the company sent a service man to home in order to take pictures because they were nervous they were going to be sued for their incompetence and deceptive practices. 8 After they took pictures, I asked them to replace the original front filter of the ac and enclose the hole on the ac they left exposed. This was done. The broken coil they originally said needed to be replaced in the shop, was magically a non issue. The damage to my ac and vents were ignored. 8 The company proceeded to cancel our contract the next day and chose to run away from our complaint rather then taking responsibility for their incompetent service. 9. Thier response to my complaints with their above statements are total lies and they are obviously trying to cover up their inept service and avoid a law suit. 10. SHAME ON THEM. I guess the coil they said needed repairing magically fixed itself. 11.The gaping hole that their technician left exposed which allowed all the dirt to be sucked into our vents was ignored 12 They took no responsibility for the mess they created and then tried to deflect blame, lie, and literally ran away from the mess they created. 13. SHAME ON THEM for taking advantage of the elderly and for lying about their actions to cover themselves, and then for running away because they know what they did was so shady and dishonest
Final Business Response ECM's position remains the same. However, we would like to mention two things. First, ECM takes offense to the comments in the latest report to your office. ECM hasn't been in business for over 25 years by taking advantage of customers, especially Senior Citizens. In fact, Senior Citizens happen to represent a great majority of ECM's customer base. Secondly, it was very clear to us that the customer was dissatisfied with the terms of the ECM Service Contract as written. Therefore, under the circumstances, we believed that we could not meet this customer's expectations and decided to exercise our option to cancel the customer's contract. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond.
Final Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) There was no resolution offered. The company just cancelled my contract due to my complaint. As you can see by their actions they claim to provide quality service yet they do not deliver. They did take advantage of my mother and I have spoken to other clients who have had similar experiences with this company. Shame on them!
The information in the table below represents an industry comparison of businesses which are of the same relative size. This is based on BBB's database of businesses located in Southeast Florida and the Caribbean. Businesses may engage in more than one type of business. The percent of time the business engages in a type of business is not accounted for. There is no known industry standard for the number of complaints a business can expect. The volume of business and number of transactions may have a bearing on the number of complaints received by BBB.
BBB records show the issues raised in the complaint have been resolved. Either customer confirmed the complaint has been resolved, or business confirmed the complaint has been resolved and customer did not respond to BBB correspondence informing customer that complaint will be considered resolved unless BBB hears otherwise from customer.
BBB found business made good faith effort to resolve complaint but customer not satisfied with business response
BBB found that business adequately addressed the disputed issues and made a good faith effort to resolve them; however, customer has informed BBB that he/she is not satisfied with the outcome. In some cases, business may have agreed to mediate or arbitrate the complaint but customer declined to participate in mediation/arbitration.
Customer not satisfied with business response; BBB did not find business made good faith effort to resolve complaint
BBB did not find that business adequately addressed the disputed issues and made a good faith effort to resolve them, and customer has informed BBB that he/she is not satisfied with the outcome. In some cases, customer may have agreed to mediate or arbitrate the complaint but business declined to participate in mediation/arbitration.
BBB did not receive a response from business
BBB did not receive a response from business after two attempts to contact business, and BBB communications with customer do not show that business contacted customer to resolve the complaint.
BBB cannot process complaint
This includes situations where BBB cannot locate business, business is no longer in business, or business is in bankruptcy and complaints must be submitted through bankruptcy trustee.
Your complaint will be forwarded to the company within two business days. The company 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 company's response when we receive it (or notified that we received no response). Complaints are usually closed within 30 business days.
BBB began including text of consumer complaints and business responses in BBB Business Reviews on July 1, 2013 for complaints filed on that date 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.
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.
Some Better Business Bureaus offer additional content and services in BBB Business Reviews. The additional content and 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 and services are available at all Better Business Bureaus.
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
5 points per review
3 points per 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. Details
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.
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.