VALLEYCAST INC

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Their response to you is the same as what they told meI don't accept their lack of responsibility. The gentleman we purchased the home from is a bachelor, who didn't cookThere was nothing in the way of seeing the destroyed cabinetPlus, all *** had to do was open the doorThe smell alone would have told him there was an issueThat's how I discovered it and I'm not a Senior Inspector like he isNo personal effects were blocking the smell. *** informed me that it is well known that if there is water damage in one cabinetIt WILL travel to adjoining onesIf this is so well known, why didn't their Senior Inspector at least open the door to the adjoining cabinet where he found water damage?
Regards,
*** ***

I have no further comment regarding this issueI have turned the claim over to my Insurance Claims Adjuster for resolution.His contact information is *** Mr.*** ***AmeriSpec Inspection Service

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
As of today, January 2015, I have not received a settlement from AmeriSpec's insurance company and they have not responded to my emails so I am proceeding with a Small Claims Action
Regards,
** ***

ID *** Dear *** ***,In response to your email regarding a complaint submitted to you from our client, *** ***, on the property at *** *** *** *** in San Diego, I have attached the Inspection Agreement (which was read and signed prior to the inspection), the inspection report and
the email from Ms*** dated 10-20-2014.It is important to know that this home was occupied at the time of our inspection with personal property and the usual items stored in the cabinetsItem #in our report states water damage / deterioration noted at shelf below kitchen sink, we advise replacement of all damaged woodDue to the occupied status of the home, the interior and rear wood shelving of the adjacent cabinets were not visible.The photos from Ms***'s email of 10-20-clearly shows empty cabinets with shelf paper peeled back exposing water stainsThe scope of our inspection does not allow us to move or remove personal property, as a result the stains were not found until the cabinets were empty and the old shelf paper was removed.We have found that a personal call to a client with a concern is always the best way to address a complaint*** *** called and spoke to Ms*** and calmly explained the various reasons why this was not something we had missed but something the was not visible at the time of our inspectionUnfortunately Ms*** was not receptive to hearing the explanationWe do our best to shield our clients from problems but we are limited to reporting only what is visible to us at the time of our visit.In summary, we empathize with the situation our client is inIt certainly appears from our review of the report that the inspector *** *** (our senior inspector since 1989) did everything within his capabilities of the services outlined in the Inspection AgreementAs a result, I dispute the contention that the inspector negligently performed his duties.We appreciate your professionalism in inquiring and seeking clarification in this matterPlease let me know if there is anything else you need from us.Respectfully submitted,*** ***OwnerAmeriSpec San Diego***

After sending the email offering the $settlement to Ms*** I did not receive her acceptance notificationI will now send her a General Release form to read and sign and then send her a check for the amount.*** ***AmeriSpec Inspection Service

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved
Regards,
*** ***

I have turned this matter over to my insurance carrier for resolution. Mr. [redacted] has been contacted with a fair settlement offer considering the details regarding his complaint.[redacted]AmeriSpec Inspection Service760-585-2355

Dear Ms. [redacted],       AmeriSpec was contacted by Mr. [redacted] regarding this matter. I forwarded his complaint to my insurance carrier for review and response. My claims adviser has communicated  with Mr. [redacted] by email and they have had a continuing dialogue. There are certain...

specifics involved in this matter that I have been instructed not to discuss. Please feel free to contact my insurance claims adviser for further clarification, his contact information is[redacted]  [redacted]  AmeriSpec Inspection Service  [redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
To Whom it May Concern:This letter is in response to Mrs. [redacted]’s letter on behalf of AmeriSpec dated November 19, 2015.I feel that AmeriSpec and [redacted] are continually trying to minimize AmeriSpec’s mistake. In the documents submitted to Mrs. [redacted] and [redacted] it is clearly documented by [redacted] as well as [redacted]ing that the furnace closet and furnace posed significant risk to my family, myself, and my neighbors to include, “LOSS OF LIFE.”Mrs. [redacted] closes her response letter by stating, “…do not appreciate being held to an unreasonable standard.” I DID NOT SET THE STANDARD, AmeriSpec DID. I did not say or claim or make the statement that, “All of our certified inspectors are thoroughly trained and stay updated on current building codes.” AmeriSpec made that statement and set that standard on their home webpage, in BIG BOLD LETTERS. Apparently someone informed AmeriSpec “parent company” because the web page changed and no longer makes the statement. Good for them but too late. No one, not AmeriSpec, or [redacted], or Great American Insurance has explained in legal terms how you can advertise and make such a claim and then not be held liable for failing to meet that standard. Great, I’ll just advertise that I am thoroughly trained and updated on fixing cars and when someone brings their car to me to fix and I miss identifying safety issues with the vehicle or documenting things which place them at risk for an accident or “loss of life” I can say, “Whoa, you are holding me to an unreasonable standard and I am not liable for missing those items because company “X” built that car and those are their manufacturers standards.” This is the same faulty logic that AmeriSpec is using.Mrs. [redacted] makes a blind blanket statement that I have consulted with people who have told me that AmeriSpec is not liable. She did not identify these persons or provide any supporting documentation to this claim. As far as I know Mrs. [redacted] could believe that I met with the President of the United States and he is the person who told me AmeriSpec is not liable. Mrs. [redacted]’s statement is a useless non-contributory statement made with not substantiating material. As easily as she could believe and claim I met with the President of the United States, I could claim that she has consulted with numerous people to include the President who have told her that SHE IS LIABLE. Mrs. [redacted] is correct in that I have consulted with several people; however, multiple people, including the City of [redacted] inspector and our Real Estate Agent Mr. [redacted] of Berkshire Hathaway who recommended AmeriSpec have stated that AmeriSpec is liable. Either way, the fact I have consulted other people and what their response is irrelevant. AmeriSpec made a statement and set a standard which they failed to meet. They are using loos and manipulative language as well as distraction techniques to draw attention away from the issue in an effort to continue to support their argument that they are not liable.Mrs. [redacted] is correct that building codes and building appliance installation specifications/recommendations are different. The furnace CLOSET in which the furnace is housed is neither a system nor a component of the furnace. The CLOSET was not up to fire/safety codes. The deficits in the closet are not a manufactures requirements or suggestions but building/fire codes set in place to keep people safe and prevent fire/explosion and/or reduce the speed of spread of fire. AmeriSpec set the standard that they are trained and current on building codes they need to meet that standard.The Inspection agreement, Mrs. [redacted] refers to in her response states, “We are not required to determine non-compliance with manufacturer’s specifications or applicable regulatory requirements, including but not limited to building code compliance.” As Mrs. [redacted] correctly pointed out above, manufactures installation codes and BUILDING/Fire codes are not the same. The statement in the agreement is referencing MANUFACTURER’S specifications; this is speaking to the installation requirements of an unidentified item per the manufacture’s specifications. “X” item is installed and has “Y” requirements to be installed safely (for support or anchoring.) This is NOT speaking to basic fire and safety codes that say furnace closet needs to be properly fireproofed and ventilated. The AmeriSpec agreement references ASHI. The ASHI SOP 13.2 states, “not required to determine compliance of systems and components….” This is the same as the inspection agreement. The issues were with the furnace CLOSET, improperly vented and not to fire/safety code as documented by [redacted]ing and City of [redacted]. The closet in which the furnace is housed is neither a system nor component of the furnace. The furnace closet is a part of the house and the building and fire/safety codes apply to which AmeriSpec claimed to be “thoroughly trained and up to date.” AmeriSpec has not addressed how the CLOSET is a system or component of the furnace and therefore exempt from examination.Mrs. [redacted] is manipulating the language in an effort to continue to support AmeriSpec’s claim that they are not liable.[redacted], in their report regarding this claim, on behalf of AmeriSpec, referenced CREIA SOP. CREIA states that an inspector is to inspect: Copied from [redacted]7. Heating and CoolingA. Items to be inspected:1.    Heating equipment2.    Central cooling equipment3.    Energy source and connections4.    Combustion air and exhaust vent systems5.    Condensate drainage6.    Conditioned air distribution systemsAs documented by [redacted], and the City of [redacted] Inspector AmeriSpec missed several items as required to be addressed by CREIA:Return air section under the furnace is inadequate and not sealedReturn air section is not isolated from the furnace closet that will cause air to be drawn from the furnace burner compartment area possibly causing flame roll outFurnace closet does not have upper and lower combustion air vents. Current exhaust system is transite asbestos and is incorrect for current efficiency standards. AmeriSpec missed the above items which directly relate to the combustion air and exhaust vent system, #4 of the heating and cooling “items to be inspected” under CREIA SOP.  Either AmeriSpec missed items from the CREIA standards, which were referenced by [redacted] and/or AmeriSpec missed the “Furnance closet is not fire proofed with drywall” as documented by [redacted]. The missed items,1-4, as documented by [redacted] and the City of [redacted] inspector collectively pose huge fire and safety hazards to which CREIA speaks at length about documenting safety hazards.  The home inspection report which was generated simply stated that the combustion There were additional issues with the furnace which were not identified until the removal of the furnace during the remodel of the closet. I understand that the inspector is not required to inspect items that require removal of parts; however, had the issues with the furnace closet been identified, a remodel of the closet to bring it up to fire safety code could have been addressed with the seller and upon removal of the furnace during the furnace closet renovation, these issues could have been identified, just as it happened with us, prior to our purchasing of the home. IE the inspecting agents failure to identify the significant visible fire and safety violations lead to the inability to negotiate in the sellers contract fixing of these problems and prevented identification of the further issues resulting in placing myself and my family in significant danger as well as incurring significant out of pocket expenses. AmeriSpec advertised a service and standard that they set themselves which they failed to meet. Their failure placed my family and me at significant risk to include, “loss of life,” as documented by [redacted]. The cost to fix these issues was an unexpected out of pocket expense which could have been avoided had AmeriSpec conduct an inspection and completed a report in accordance with their own standard. Had AmeriSpec done their job as advertised and correctly, this would not be an issue. AmeriSpec needs to admit its mistake and fix it. V.R.[redacted].
Regards,
[redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted],Being a company that has built its reputation on professionalism and customer service, we do not like to have our clients not be satisfied with our service. On the other hand, I don't appreciate being held to standards that are above reason or having our reputation tainted.As a means of putting this matter to rest, I am willing to send a check for $250 to Ms. [redacted] to help defray the cost of repairs to her home. I have attached a General Release form which needs to be signed by Mr. & Mrs. [redacted] and returned to my office. I will issue a check to them by return mail.  Sincerely [redacted]AmeriSpec Inspection Service[redacted]

Hello-On December 16, 2014 AmeriSpec agreed to send me a refund of $250, which I still have not received. What is the status of the refund? My mailing address is- [redacted]Thank you for your assistance. [redacted]

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.There is not much to say. Mrs. [redacted] didn't attempt to answer my questions or address my concerns and appears to be ending the discussion.
Mrs. [redacted], AmeriSpec, [redacted], Mr. [redacted] have continually flat out refused to engage in a meaningful discussion or even attempt or address my concerns. Mrs. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted] of [redacted] are  stonewalling. I have attempted to address these issues with Mr. [redacted] directly as well as through the Revdex.com and the CA Department of Insurance. I will be continuing my dialogue with the CA-DOI and Revdex.com regarding [redacted] and seeking further methods of engaging AmeriSpec in this discussion as well as [redacted].
No one, not AmeriSpec and Mrs. [redacted] or Mr. [redacted] and [redacted], has made even the slightest attempt to answer my questions. I believe that if AmeriSpec is truly not liable then my questions should have simple straight forward fact based answers and my concerns should be able to be addressed in a straightforward professional manner. This continual stonewalling by Mrs. [redacted], AmeriSpec, Mr. [redacted] of [redacted] suggests of policy of denying a claim until the claimant fatigues or runs out of options.
It boggles my mind that a company can make such an advertisement as AmeriSpec, make such a mistake, and claim no responsibility. It further boggles my mind that AmeriSpec would continue to stand behind the illogical non-fact based report (with documented evidence directly to the contrary of the reports unsubstantiated statements) that was issued by Mr. [redacted] and [redacted]. The documented evidence I have stands alone and speaks for itself. AmeriSpec nor [redacted] has provided any new evidence, any evidence to substantiate the claims made in the report, or any evidence to contradict me.
AmeriSpec's mistake placed my family and me, as well as our neighbors, at significant risk of injury and even death. That is simply unacceptable in any profession. Regards,[redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted],   Please find my attached  response letter   Best Regards  [redacted]  AmeriSpec Inspection ServiceNovember 19, 2015Dear Ms. [redacted], I feel I need to respond to Mr. [redacted]’s latest email regarding his assertion that AmeriSpec was in some way negligent in the inspection of his home. The basis of his complaint is a heater unit which was installed without permits and not to code. Our inspectors are kept up to date with building codes, however; as codes and standards vary from cities to municipalities it is impossible to call code violations specifically on every home. It is important to understand that building codes and built in appliance installation codes are different. Each unit has manufacturer’s specifications for installation and proper permits need to be issued when work is done.The inspection agreement Mr. [redacted] read and signed prior to the inspection clearly states that”We are not required to determine non-compliance with manufacturer’s specifications or applicable regulatory requirements, including (but not limited to) building code compliance, additionally item #[redacted] in our report states “This home has undergone major renovation and additions. As it is beyond the scope of this report to verify building codes, or the existence of permits, we advise obtaining this information prior to close of escrow”. Mr. [redacted] apparently chose not to heed this advice and now wants AmeriSpec to pay for his mistake.Mr. [redacted] has consulted with several people involved with this transaction and been told that AmeriSpec is not responsible in this matter. Contacting the Revdex.com is the latest tactic he is using to try to pressure us to give him money.We do not like our clients to be disappointed and do everything in our power to satisfy their demands, but do not appreciate being held to an unreasonable standard.Sincerely [redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted],  In the last few days my insurance company has reached a settlement with [redacted] regarding his complaint #[redacted]. As soon as we receive final confirmation of resolution of this matter I will send you copies for your files.Regards[redacted]AmeriSpec Inspection service760-585-2355

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
To Whom it May Concern:
AmeriSpec cannot speak to its own defense?  AmeriSpec continues to use stonewalling tactics.
I find the response from AmeriSpec offensive in that they do not seem to care or understand the degree of danger that their inspector's negligence placed me and my family. Additionally, their response in no way addresses the persistent concerns that I have tried to have addressed via both AmeriSpec and [redacted]. I have met the same persistent resistance in addressing my concerns and answering my questions from [redacted] that we are receiving from AmeriSpec.
AmeriSpec’s inspector failed to identify significant fire / safety violations within the furnace closet placing my family at significant unnecessary risk and costing us significant out of pocket expense. This claim is substantiated by documents from [redacted], and the City of [redacted]’s inspector, preventing us from negotiating for correction of the problem prior to purchase of our home.
AmeriSpec’s home webpage USED to advertise, “All of our certified home inspectors are thoroughly trained and stay updated on current building codes.”  I use the term USED TO because since engaging AmeriSpec about these missed items their webpage has been modified. I can provide time / date stamped screen shots of their home webpage prior to its changes. AmeriSpec and [redacted] have in no way addressed how AmeriSpec can legally make such a statement and not be held to this standard. AmeriSpec nor [redacted] have both failed to address how legally this is not false advertising for which AmeriSpec should be held liable. AmeriSpec made a statement, set the standard, and should be held to it. Any deviation from these standards needs to clearly be explained as to how / why this is legal and precludes AmeriSpec from any liability.
Fundamentally, AmeriSpec advertised a standard which they did not meet placing me and my family at significant risk and costing us significant avoidable out of pocket expenses.
AmeriSpec and [redacted] continue to dance around my concerns which I have attempted to have addressed and answered multiple times by AmeriSpec and [redacted].
Mrs. [redacted]’s response does nothing to move this discussion forward in that I have already attempted to have this discussion with [redacted]. Mrs. [redacted]’s response is consistent with the stonewalling, “wait them out” tactics that I am encountering with [redacted].
V.R.
[redacted] Regards,[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have review** the response made by...

the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determin** that this propos** action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I review** appear below.
 I have not received a fair settlement offer -- not even close.  There is no amount of money that could compensate me for all of the expense and trouble this incompetent business has caused me and my family.  My intention now is simply to get a judgement entered into the public record against this defendant.  To that end, a Small Claims Lawsuit and Form SC-100 will be filed against defendant, [redacted], on Monday, January 12, 2014 at the [redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.  I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.Thank you. We signed what was attached... it didn't look like a general release form, but it was the only attachment. The property address is NOT our mailing address. Please mail the check to- PO Box [redacted]Rancho Santa Fe, CA [redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]