Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/05/06) */
Mrs. D requested OMAC Restoration to conduct a mold test at her rental property. At the time of the test, [redacted] was present as was her tenant and their sick child. The child was suffering from upper respiratory problems. The results of...
the test showed a mild mold infestation, but one that should be addressed since a sick child was in residence. We explained this to Mrs.D. We explained that a wipe down, and HEPA vacuuming in conjunction with a couple of air scrubbers would be sufficient to eliminate the mold and clean the air. We recommended that she move her tenants out of the residence while the work was being done, not prior to work commencing. Likewise, we suggested the rugs should be cleaned, and, out of an abundance of caution, she might want to have the tenant's clothing professionally cleaned. We reject the clients proposed resolution in its entirety. The mold testing and resulting report were conducted by one of the most reputable labs nationally. I have no idea why she chose to bring in another testing company, but that was her choice. She made the choice to follow our recommendation to get her tenant's clothing cleaned. From our perspective, she made the right choice given the situation, but that was not anything we demanded. While, we believe she made a wise decision to move the tenants out of the infected environment, she did so prematurely. Had we moved forward with the project, her tenants would only have been out of their home for less than 5 days.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/05/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Mr [redacted] smith who conducted the test told my tenants according to them" I do not what you are doing here you should move out immediately" by saying this he created a panic mode which led them to move on the seventh. Also mr smith when he came on the 11th to discuss the results of the test with me and the tenants, he came early and started talking to my tenants without my presence which is a violation of my fiduciary duties to me.also mr smith was ignorant of his own work because he conducted the test with the windows open and they should have been closed. He also went under the house and said I have a wet spot of 8/5 feet and I have a major leak, I sent a Plummer to the premises 45 minutes after mr smith left and he found nothing. I chose to bring another testing company upon the recommendation of the textile cleaning company CRDN and I have testimony from them to do so because she doubted the results and the protocol or lack of it they followed in giving me the results and remediation process they suggested.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 11, 2014/06/03) */
First and foremost, this is about moving a sick child out of an environment that contained mold.We advised the parents to do this.I guess if you want to put cost ahead of health, we are not the company you should call.Does she have any idea what the medical repercussions would have been if the child stayed in that environment? She further states that a dry cleaning company doubted the results of a national lab, the protocol of the testing and ultimately the remediation process recommended.This is flawed on so many levels. 1-The dry cleaning company was not present when the testing was conducted. 2- They are a dry cleaning company, not a certified mold remediation company.
Omac Restoration is a certified mold remediation company as such, we follow IICRC S520 guide lines on all mold remediation work we perform. We provided [redacted] with our proposal to eliminate the mold and ensure the health and well being of her tenants. If she decided to bring in another testing company based on the recommendation of a dry cleaning company, that is her choice.
She paid OMAC for the testing that we did to determine the extent of the contamination. We then provided her with a prescribed course of action based on industry standards.Any choices she made after that are her responsibility
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 13, 2014/06/04) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
As the owner of the house, I am not putting money above the health of a sick child. However, this is about me being lied to by the company OMAC. They first and foremost conducted their mold test incorrectly; for example where the windows in the house were supposed to be closed they were open. Furthermore, the man who conducted the tests behavior was unprofessional, having begun to speak to my tenants before I had arrived at the location. This is a breach of his fiduciary duties, which was the first point against his professional behavior that I noted. As the person hired by the owner, he should have waited to begin any and all discussions and tests until I had arrived and not a minute before. He told my tenants before the tests a meme back that they should move out of the residence, causing them to experience unnecessary panic and stress, as well as creating a financial burden on me as the owner of hyena house. This being because as the owner, I am obligated to find them alternate housing until an issue like this is solved. The man who conducted the test also alerted me of large wet spot that was under the house in the crawl space. This alarmed me and caused me to call a plumber after he left. I had the plumber crawl under the house through the entire crawl space, and he he did not locate the supposed wet spot that this previous man employed by OMAC had told me about. This caused me to develop a suspicious attitude toward OMAC. When they recommended the licensed and certified dry cleaning and restoration company CRDN, I immediately called them to come in. The woman who came to the property informed me that she believed the tests were inconclusive and done incorrectly. She had also informed me that as a professional she had never heard of OMAC in all her years of working in this field. This maybe due to the fact that OMAC is not certified by the Pest Control Board of California and are not licensed by the EPA and other organizations that deal with mold and pest infestations.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2015/05/21) */
We were hired by our client to remediate mold in a rental unit he owns beginning April 6, 2015. While most mold remediation projects take 3 to 5 days to complete, this project was extended because post remediation testing continued to...
show elevated levels of mold that had to be brought to normal levels in order to pass [redacted] testing. It certainly would not be in OMAC's interest to "drag" a project out. We continued to incur material and labor costs to ensure the mold was abated properly, so documented clearance could be obtainedat no additional charge to our client.
On April 10, our client signed a Property Damage Disclaimer agreeing to the removal of the bathtub, sink, vanity, tile shower enclosure, and 4 windows to allow us to effectively perform remediation services. The risk of potential damage to his furnishings and fixtures was clearly stated and explained.
The windows were potted and covered with mold. Some years earlier, he had installed vinyl windows over the aluminum frames, and secured the vinyl to the aluminum window frame by drilling holes through the vinyl and into the aluminum creating a porous material and a perfect environment for mold to grow in between the two surfaces given the presence of any moisture or condensation.
We informed our client on several occasions the windows could not be saved; an assessment corroborated by an experienced, certified Hygienist with whom we consulted. The Hygienist concluded that the windows could not be cleaned and replaced and that the unit would never be certified as habitable with those windows in place. Further, contrary to the statements purportedly made by "other" restoration companies that "the windows could have been washed with soap and water and bleach and replaced," it is highly unlikely that a restoration company with any credibility would conclude that without seeing the problem firsthand.
Relative to 'destroying' our client's windows without his permission, OMAC Restoration follows IICRC S520 guidelines on all mold remediation jobs we perform. The guidelines explicitly state that all porous, contaminated materials must be removed, wrapped in plastic and sealed for disposal. Our client received the guidelines for remediation and disposal as part of the agreement package he signed prior to the commencement of the remediation. If the windows could have been cleaned, and replaced, we would have cleaned them. We gain nothing by disposing of a reusable product unnecessarily.
OMAC Restoration most certainly held up our part of the agreement. We effectively remediated the mold, disposed of the hazardous materials, which included the windows, and obtained documented clearance that the unit meets industry standards and is now habitable.
OMAC Restoration will not pay for contaminated windows that could not be saved, and that were removed and destroyed pursuant to industry standard protocol. As to lost income because of delays in completing the project, we lost almost four days because our client was not available to sign the Property Damage Disclaimer enabling us to continue our work. There were no delays on our partonly a commitment to ensure the mold in the unit was successfully abated, and his tenants had a safe environment in which to live.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2015/05/29) */
Dear [redacted],
No, nothing has been resolved with this company, they have left messages on my phone that I still owe them $3,500 and that they will put a lean on my property if no paid. I [redacted] end up in small claims court over this matter, I don't know how to go about doing so. I was hoping that once hearing from you that they might resolve the matter. I just didn't want other people doing business with this company if that's how they treat their customers. I guess by being listed on Revdex.com maybe people check to see if they have any complaints with Revdex.com, and won't do business with them. Do you have any suggestion as to what I can do from here? I would appreciate any suggestions from you, all I did was contact Revdex.com which I felt was the right thing to do. I hope you have listed this on Revdex.com as a complaint on this company.
[redacted]
Final Business Response /* (4000, 14, 2015/06/24) */
We read with interest our client's rebuttal to our response to his complaint against our company. It is noteworthy that he could not refute any aspect of our response as his project is well documented. However, in the interest of resolving this matter and avoiding liens and court proceedings, we are prepared to make an adjustment to our client's outstanding balance as follows. The outstanding balance our client owes our company is $2,972.11. The fee our client owes the Certified Mold Inspector that provided documented clearance testing certifying his unit was habitable is $600.00. As our client knows, the $600.00 fee was to be paid directly to the CMI at the time the testing was performed. Our client did not fulfill that service requirement. Provided our client issues payment of $600.00 to the CMI, we are prepared to reduce his outstanding balance to our company to $2,500.00. If our good faith effort to resolve this matter is acceptable to him, we will issue revised invoices for immediate payment.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 18, 2015/06/25) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Being that I was unable to read their rebuttal, I was not able to Respond on the last email that was sent to me. I believe that the reason I was not given back my windows, is not because they had mold, but because they broke them all, I found glass all over the carpet and outside on the ground. I had to replace four windows at the cost of $1,500, plus loss of revenue of $1,000 of income, plus there are other costs due to their negligence that I am willing to forget about.
I am willing to split the amount of, $3,572 is what they claim I owe them and pay them $1,786. If they are in agreement, they can send me an up dated invoice and I will send them a check.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/05/06) */
Mrs. D requested OMAC Restoration to conduct a mold test at her rental property. At the time of the test, [redacted] was present as was her tenant and their sick child. The child was suffering from upper respiratory problems. The results of...
the test showed a mild mold infestation, but one that should be addressed since a sick child was in residence. We explained this to Mrs.D. We explained that a wipe down, and HEPA vacuuming in conjunction with a couple of air scrubbers would be sufficient to eliminate the mold and clean the air. We recommended that she move her tenants out of the residence while the work was being done, not prior to work commencing. Likewise, we suggested the rugs should be cleaned, and, out of an abundance of caution, she might want to have the tenant's clothing professionally cleaned. We reject the clients proposed resolution in its entirety. The mold testing and resulting report were conducted by one of the most reputable labs nationally. I have no idea why she chose to bring in another testing company, but that was her choice. She made the choice to follow our recommendation to get her tenant's clothing cleaned. From our perspective, she made the right choice given the situation, but that was not anything we demanded. While, we believe she made a wise decision to move the tenants out of the infected environment, she did so prematurely. Had we moved forward with the project, her tenants would only have been out of their home for less than 5 days.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/05/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Mr [redacted] smith who conducted the test told my tenants according to them" I do not what you are doing here you should move out immediately" by saying this he created a panic mode which led them to move on the seventh. Also mr smith when he came on the 11th to discuss the results of the test with me and the tenants, he came early and started talking to my tenants without my presence which is a violation of my fiduciary duties to me.also mr smith was ignorant of his own work because he conducted the test with the windows open and they should have been closed. He also went under the house and said I have a wet spot of 8/5 feet and I have a major leak, I sent a Plummer to the premises 45 minutes after mr smith left and he found nothing. I chose to bring another testing company upon the recommendation of the textile cleaning company CRDN and I have testimony from them to do so because she doubted the results and the protocol or lack of it they followed in giving me the results and remediation process they suggested.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 11, 2014/06/03) */
First and foremost, this is about moving a sick child out of an environment that contained mold.We advised the parents to do this.I guess if you want to put cost ahead of health, we are not the company you should call.Does she have any idea what the medical repercussions would have been if the child stayed in that environment? She further states that a dry cleaning company doubted the results of a national lab, the protocol of the testing and ultimately the remediation process recommended.This is flawed on so many levels. 1-The dry cleaning company was not present when the testing was conducted. 2- They are a dry cleaning company, not a certified mold remediation company.
Omac Restoration is a certified mold remediation company as such, we follow IICRC S520 guide lines on all mold remediation work we perform. We provided [redacted] with our proposal to eliminate the mold and ensure the health and well being of her tenants. If she decided to bring in another testing company based on the recommendation of a dry cleaning company, that is her choice.
She paid OMAC for the testing that we did to determine the extent of the contamination. We then provided her with a prescribed course of action based on industry standards.Any choices she made after that are her responsibility
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 13, 2014/06/04) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
As the owner of the house, I am not putting money above the health of a sick child. However, this is about me being lied to by the company OMAC. They first and foremost conducted their mold test incorrectly; for example where the windows in the house were supposed to be closed they were open. Furthermore, the man who conducted the tests behavior was unprofessional, having begun to speak to my tenants before I had arrived at the location. This is a breach of his fiduciary duties, which was the first point against his professional behavior that I noted. As the person hired by the owner, he should have waited to begin any and all discussions and tests until I had arrived and not a minute before. He told my tenants before the tests a meme back that they should move out of the residence, causing them to experience unnecessary panic and stress, as well as creating a financial burden on me as the owner of hyena house. This being because as the owner, I am obligated to find them alternate housing until an issue like this is solved. The man who conducted the test also alerted me of large wet spot that was under the house in the crawl space. This alarmed me and caused me to call a plumber after he left. I had the plumber crawl under the house through the entire crawl space, and he he did not locate the supposed wet spot that this previous man employed by OMAC had told me about. This caused me to develop a suspicious attitude toward OMAC. When they recommended the licensed and certified dry cleaning and restoration company CRDN, I immediately called them to come in. The woman who came to the property informed me that she believed the tests were inconclusive and done incorrectly. She had also informed me that as a professional she had never heard of OMAC in all her years of working in this field. This maybe due to the fact that OMAC is not certified by the Pest Control Board of California and are not licensed by the EPA and other organizations that deal with mold and pest infestations.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2015/05/21) */
We were hired by our client to remediate mold in a rental unit he owns beginning April 6, 2015. While most mold remediation projects take 3 to 5 days to complete, this project was extended because post remediation testing continued to...
show elevated levels of mold that had to be brought to normal levels in order to pass [redacted] testing. It certainly would not be in OMAC's interest to "drag" a project out. We continued to incur material and labor costs to ensure the mold was abated properly, so documented clearance could be obtainedat no additional charge to our client.
On April 10, our client signed a Property Damage Disclaimer agreeing to the removal of the bathtub, sink, vanity, tile shower enclosure, and 4 windows to allow us to effectively perform remediation services. The risk of potential damage to his furnishings and fixtures was clearly stated and explained.
The windows were potted and covered with mold. Some years earlier, he had installed vinyl windows over the aluminum frames, and secured the vinyl to the aluminum window frame by drilling holes through the vinyl and into the aluminum creating a porous material and a perfect environment for mold to grow in between the two surfaces given the presence of any moisture or condensation.
We informed our client on several occasions the windows could not be saved; an assessment corroborated by an experienced, certified Hygienist with whom we consulted. The Hygienist concluded that the windows could not be cleaned and replaced and that the unit would never be certified as habitable with those windows in place. Further, contrary to the statements purportedly made by "other" restoration companies that "the windows could have been washed with soap and water and bleach and replaced," it is highly unlikely that a restoration company with any credibility would conclude that without seeing the problem firsthand.
Relative to 'destroying' our client's windows without his permission, OMAC Restoration follows IICRC S520 guidelines on all mold remediation jobs we perform. The guidelines explicitly state that all porous, contaminated materials must be removed, wrapped in plastic and sealed for disposal. Our client received the guidelines for remediation and disposal as part of the agreement package he signed prior to the commencement of the remediation. If the windows could have been cleaned, and replaced, we would have cleaned them. We gain nothing by disposing of a reusable product unnecessarily.
OMAC Restoration most certainly held up our part of the agreement. We effectively remediated the mold, disposed of the hazardous materials, which included the windows, and obtained documented clearance that the unit meets industry standards and is now habitable.
OMAC Restoration will not pay for contaminated windows that could not be saved, and that were removed and destroyed pursuant to industry standard protocol. As to lost income because of delays in completing the project, we lost almost four days because our client was not available to sign the Property Damage Disclaimer enabling us to continue our work. There were no delays on our partonly a commitment to ensure the mold in the unit was successfully abated, and his tenants had a safe environment in which to live.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2015/05/29) */
Dear [redacted],
No, nothing has been resolved with this company, they have left messages on my phone that I still owe them $3,500 and that they will put a lean on my property if no paid. I [redacted] end up in small claims court over this matter, I don't know how to go about doing so. I was hoping that once hearing from you that they might resolve the matter. I just didn't want other people doing business with this company if that's how they treat their customers. I guess by being listed on Revdex.com maybe people check to see if they have any complaints with Revdex.com, and won't do business with them. Do you have any suggestion as to what I can do from here? I would appreciate any suggestions from you, all I did was contact Revdex.com which I felt was the right thing to do. I hope you have listed this on Revdex.com as a complaint on this company.
[redacted]
Final Business Response /* (4000, 14, 2015/06/24) */
We read with interest our client's rebuttal to our response to his complaint against our company. It is noteworthy that he could not refute any aspect of our response as his project is well documented. However, in the interest of resolving this matter and avoiding liens and court proceedings, we are prepared to make an adjustment to our client's outstanding balance as follows. The outstanding balance our client owes our company is $2,972.11. The fee our client owes the Certified Mold Inspector that provided documented clearance testing certifying his unit was habitable is $600.00. As our client knows, the $600.00 fee was to be paid directly to the CMI at the time the testing was performed. Our client did not fulfill that service requirement. Provided our client issues payment of $600.00 to the CMI, we are prepared to reduce his outstanding balance to our company to $2,500.00. If our good faith effort to resolve this matter is acceptable to him, we will issue revised invoices for immediate payment.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 18, 2015/06/25) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Being that I was unable to read their rebuttal, I was not able to Respond on the last email that was sent to me. I believe that the reason I was not given back my windows, is not because they had mold, but because they broke them all, I found glass all over the carpet and outside on the ground. I had to replace four windows at the cost of $1,500, plus loss of revenue of $1,000 of income, plus there are other costs due to their negligence that I am willing to forget about.
I am willing to split the amount of, $3,572 is what they claim I owe them and pay them $1,786. If they are in agreement, they can send me an up dated invoice and I will send them a check.