Business ProfileforCiardelli Fuel Company, Inc
At-a-glance
Related Categories
Overview
Business Details
- Location of This Business
- 467 Nashua St, Milford, NH 03055-4919
- BBB File Opened:
- 12/2/2003
- Years in Business:
- 67
- Business Started:
- 8/1/1957
- Business Incorporated:
- 10/11/1963
- Licensing Information:
- 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.
- Type of Entity:
- Corporation
- Business Management
- Mr. Matt Ciardelli, Manager of Operations
- Mr. Ross Quigley, General Manager
- Contact Information
Principal
- Mr. Matt Ciardelli, Manager of Operations
Customer Contact
- Mr. Heather Ciardelli, Office Manager
- Mr. Matt Ciardelli, Manager of Operations
- Mr. Andrew Ciardelli, Service Manager
- Mr. Ross Quigley, General Manager
- Additional Contact Information
Fax Numbers
- (603) 673-0714Primary Fax
Email Addresses
- Primary
- (603) 673-0714
Customer Complaints
1 Customer Complaints
Need to file a complaint? BBB is here to help. We'll guide you through the process. How BBB Processes Complaints and Reviews
File a ComplaintMost Recent Customer Complaint
10/03/2022
- Complaint Type:
- Delivery Issues
- Status:
- Unanswered
Customer Reviews
1 Customer Reviews
What do you think? Share your review.
Most Recent Customer Review
Janet C
10/13/2023
This experience, described here in three chapters, is that while some of Ciardellis work is excellent, it cannot be relied upon either for satisfactory work or, perhaps more importantly, for Ciardellis interest in rectifying problems with both its work and its financial interests.
1. The subject is a simple job of reconfiguring piping associated with a functioning Rinnai propane water heater. Following advice from Ciardelli’s Rinnai excellent servicing person as well as concern to compact the unit’s external piping in its place in a bathroom the work was scheduled as a simple job and therefore understood to be paid for n an hourly basis.
As scheduled, two Ciardelli people came to do the job and were shown the prepared wall space intended for the improved arrangement of piping (in its former space) adjacent to a sink and its accessible drain for its new external overflow tank and run off. This was not a substantial change from the arrangement that had served the unit well for some time, but was to make the arrangement visually less imposing. It was to share a 4 foot wide alcove-like space with a compact toilet sitting closer to its opposite wall.
A person who understood the logistics of the job and the construction of its site
introduced the two to what was to be a straightforward. They talked briefly about
the job and I too talked briefly with one of them by phone about what seemed a
preposterous alternative suggestion: putting the piping in a closed in cabinet to be hung,
somehow, from the ceiling. He clearly had no plan of how, and I heard it in
bemused non-committal disbelief! They needed onsite advice from a more
experienced Ciardelli supervisor and/or the person who introduced them to the job (by
then available nearby and by phone) about whatever problems there might be and
therefore the advisability of this extraordinary solution, and to suggest a more realistic
approach to, in fact, a non-the problem. Someone of experience was needed on site to
point out, for instance, the problems their plan would encounter including displacing
a live electric light and its fixture as well as the possibility of encountering electric wiring
and piping in the ceiling. Their idea looked bizarre, but worse just plain DANGEROUS!
But they were apparently oblivious of the dangers and proceeded with what seemed at
best to be a bad joke! Missing a visit from ‘responsible person’, they were apparently
acquiring a 3’ x 4’ piece of plywood which, as seen and photographed on his next visit to
site, they nailed to the ceiling, indeed removing the light while leaving its fixture in
place and again they were nowhere to be seen. On his next visit, a neat job of repiping
and including indeed a rather large tank had been completed, and again the two were
nowhere to be seen. But the remarkable contrivance was photographed, completing a
record of the job from beginning to end. And did they really think their job was
successfully accomplished?
2. Rather than revisit this dumb and dangerous job with reparation in the bathroom, I unwittingly then agreed to moving the Rinnai unit to an inconvenient site 2 floors below in the cellar. The Ciardelli two returned together with a third (in two trucks) for part 2 of the job, to refit the same Rinnai unit on an already prepared wall and new piping connections to the piping in place 2 floors above.
The move and the new re-piping was neatly accomplished in about the time they had lavished on their bad joke upstairs. But because Ciardelli had locked the propane supply (owned by me) because, they claimed, I had not paid up for the (totally unsatisfactory first job) their work could not then be tested! So could they really expect me to pay for the work of part 1 that surely no fire department could certify as well as for work of part 2 that had not yet been tested?
Surely, in any case, they could not claim that I owed anything for the misadventures of job 1 (and perhaps also take account of their damage to the light and ceiling?).
3. Nor was their communication about this work satisfactorily informative about what they did and did not understand about the job.
- For example, both the Keene office and the Milford office were sent the photographic evidence of before, during and after job 1, together with an account of their work in the bathroom. That should have been a serious and well-acknowledged concern to them, but no – rather, was it in some way my fault?
-They (-and I) should have wanted an agreed change order for job 2 following from the misadventures of job 1, but not a word.
- Their billing processes were short on coherent detail: name of job, dates, people-hours on site, materials used for jobs 1 and 2, etc. One statement also looked to be a case of double billing.
Could these surprising oversights be intentional to obfuscate billing and perhaps also reflect the quality of accounting within the company as well???
In any case, they fall far short of the requirements of a cooperative undertaking between service provider and customer that makes for both the trust and good service every community needs. In fact, I’ve been left wondering whether outright bullying as encountered by them in response to my would have been helpful commentary with photographs (unacknowledged) might be part of the business plan as a means to their, but not the customers’, ends!
I have in fact sent them half of their billing for both jobs 1 and 2, to cover the probably functional but untested part 2 of the job, believing it to be perhaps even more than fair..
Update of customer experience submitted on 8/7/2024:
Now, nearly a year after the account of Ciardelli’s very unsatisfactory work, posted 23 October 2023 by “Janet C”, this supplementary note is prompted by notice from a debt collector that Ciardelli claims I owe it for their work in moving the fully functional unit, as certified by one of their own service people, to its new place, as described above.
Ciardelli’s billing for their work in this move, however, was as described above, exorbitant, but perhaps more important, did not include note of its testing after the move. Our own testing, however, followed by testing by someone familiar with this unit found that the unit had been irreparably damaged in its move from the second floor to the cellar.
It thus appears likely that Ciardelli did not itself test the unit in its new site, as might seem elementary good practice. Or alternatively, perhaps, it had it to discover that it had been damaged in the move but without acknowledgement. In either case, I surely have already paid them over the top (see above) for this misadventure (– quite apart from my own time-).
Indeed! Ciardelli might consider that it owes me for the considerable expense of a new unit, its installation and -indeed, its testing!
Ciardelli Fuel Company, Inc Response
10/20/2023
BBB Business Profiles may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.
BBB Business Profiles are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. BBB asks third parties who publish complaints, reviews and/or responses on this website to affirm that the information provided is accurate. However, BBB does not verify the accuracy of information provided by third parties, and does not guarantee the accuracy of any information in Business Profiles.
When considering complaint information, please take into account the company's size and volume of transactions, and understand that the nature of complaints and a firm's responses to them are often more important than the number of complaints.
BBB Business Profiles generally cover a three-year reporting period. BBB Business Profiles are subject to change at any time. If you choose to do business with this business, please let the business know that you contacted BBB for a BBB Business Profile.
As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business. Businesses are under no obligation to seek BBB accreditation, and some businesses are not accredited because they have not sought BBB accreditation.