Roto-Rooter Plumbing & Drain Service

Pat was extremely professional and very helpful, and saved me from having to buy a new garbage disposal

As we are unable to open the line for the customer we have issued a full credit back to thier credit card for the amount we charged them

This customer has already attempted to stop payment on his credit card stating that is was a charge that he did not recognize and authorizeWe are in the middle of disputing that with merchant services nowIt sounds like somehow he had a deal wth the person he sold the home to and that has some
how fell thru and he wants us to pursue getting paid fom themHe was clearly aware he was paying for the service and was the one that gave us the information to charge his cardIf needed I do have furher documentation to backup our position
Sincerely,
Ray M***

Revdex.com,I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Regards,[redacted]
respons:
#1  I did not ask Roto rooter to service this house
#2.  $658 charged by Roto Rooter service is excessive and absurd.   They did not even fix the issue ! 
#3.  The person that called roto rooter service should be the one responsible for the charges that roto rooter wants to charge.   The person and owner of the house .......[redacted] at [redacted], Spokane, WA. 99208 is the person that asked for the services and should be the responsible party to resolve the charges by Roto Rooter
I refuse to pay anything to Roto Rooter due to the nature of this issue and the absurd amount of money for nothing.

Revdex.com,I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Regards,[redacted]
[redacted] called Roto Rooter without my consent.   
Once I found out Roto rooter was at the site I told the technician to stop and I would handle it from there.....I did not call Roto Rooter services to come to this address, [redacted] did without my consent....I was simply managing the sell of the home to this new owner/buyer.   This home is and was being purchased by [redacted] and she made the decision to have this service done....NOT ME!   
 As the home buyer/owner she made this decision.    If as a tenant to a home  ANY   landlord has 24 hours to remedy such issues that arise under RCW 59.18.060.  No one was informed of the issue and the owner/buyer made the decision to have Roto Rooter come do the work....NOT ME or any associate!   This issue occurred and [redacted] called Roto Rooter immediately without any consent from anyone other than herself.   
 I did not authorize Roto Rooter to do one ounce of this work .   I was fully unaware of all the charges that Roto Rooter was going to try and charge.   I did talk to the technician and told him to leave it alone.      I was not informed of these absurd charges and I will not pay it!  These decisions were made by [redacted] , NOT ME !   She needs to pay roto rooter for there charges NOT ME !   
Roto Rooter needs to bill the home owner at [redacted] Spokane, WA. 99208 .  This should now be resolved and quit harassing me

I called Roto-Rooter to fix a clogged sink in my bathroom. They came out to the house in a timely manner. The first question the plumber asked was "how much do you want to pay" I was shocked by the question, told him a another company said $99.00 but could not come till tomorrow, I said because it's after 6 now, I can see paying 150.00.. He then laughed and said to clean out a clog will be $400.00. But we can give you a discount, so the total price would be $200.00. Then then did the work, after blowing out my pipes with compressed air, which coused them to replace the pipe. They were done in 20 min. I just find this hard to believe, they come in with a high price, so you can't even use there coupon, becasue there giving you a break.. I find this unprosssional, and can not see why you give them such a high rating..

Complaint: [redacted]
 
They can resolve this very easily now.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Spoke with [redacted] and apologized for the issues at hand. Issued a full refund back to her tenant’s card and gave her a 20% discount on her credit...

card.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/04/23) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted] Office Manager
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@rrsc.com
Spoke with Mrs. [redacted] and we have set up an appointment for a licensed plumber to go out and resolve the issue that...

they have. Apologized for the delay and miss appointment last. They understand the issue and are understand that we are working on resolving the issue.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/04/26) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
Roto-Rooter contacted us, and expressed regret for their previous failure to deliver service. Roto-Rooter made and kept a new commitment to deliver service. The plumber was both professional and personable, and we were satisfied with the overall value of the services he delivered. Based upon our most recent experience with Roto-Rooter, we would change their grade from F-to-B+.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2014/09/08) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted] Office Manager
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@rrsc.com
We are scheduled to go back out on 9/29 to fix the issues.

We stand behind are warranty and the tech that was sent out the first time did the job right. The paperwork was signed off that the job was done to your satisfaction and that there were no issues when we left. We can’t guarantee how quickly the line might back up again. We understand that this is an unfortunate situation and this is why we offer warranties on our services because lines can back up again after an initial visit which that are out of our control.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2014/05/20) */
Our technician used an 11/16" sewer rod to attempt to clear the mainline. This size rod is adequate to clear roots from a mainline and is sold in all sewer supply houses for such purposes. We disagree with Mr [redacted] that our equipment...

was not adequate for the task or that we overstated the quality of our equipment. We also disagree that anyone at Roto-Rooter attempted to extort money from Mr [redacted] or any of his listed allegations. I will explain the entire situation below.
Mr [redacted] signed our paperwork to start the job as well as a "Hold Harmless" agreement. I have attached these signed agreements. These agreements cover the possibility of our cable getting lodged in a customers line. Mr [redacted], who is an attorney himself, clearly knew of the risks involved with having your sewer cleared with a rodding machine.
I am also attaching some screen shots from the video of his sewer line, pre-repair. In these pictures you will see that the roots were invading the part of the pipe that had severe cracks in it. Mr [redacted] states these were hairline cracks. You will see from the pictures they are anything but "hairline." We could not get a full visual on where the rod had gotten stuck because the massive roots coming in through the broken pipe hadn't gotten removed before the rod got stuck. It probably was in fact stuck at the 20' mark which is where My [redacted] states there is a "piercing."
In "Picture 1" you can see that at 16'11" the pipe is cracked on all sides. Picture 1 is a view looking downstream towards the stuck cable. In "Picture 2" which was approximately 18'4" our technician has manipulated the camera to face back upstream and has a clear view of cracks in the pipe just before the massive root blockage. You can see that the pipe is very cracked and has shifted from itself. This large crack continues into the rootball in picture 3.
It must be understood that when you have a line like this, with large cracks and large roots, there is the possibility that the rod can become lodged in the cracks of the broken pipe or can exit the pipe through the breaks and become lodged. Our rod did not become stuck in the areas of clear pipe, only the area of the pipe which was obviously cracked and damaged.
We disagree with Mr [redacted] that he is owed any compensation because of any of our actions. We have shown that his line was damaged before we rodded it and Mr [redacted], an attorney, understood the risks before we began any work on rodding his line. We have not charged Mr [redacted] for any of our services to date and respect his decision to use another company to repair his cracked and damaged sewer line, but Roto-Rooter is not responsible for his line being broken and having to get fixed.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 11, 2014/05/29) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
HOMEOWNER'S REPLY
Roto-Rooter's response obfuscates the dispositive issue and attempts to substitute self-serving conjecture for facts. The question at hand is:
Who should be responsible for the $5,250 it
cost to remove the snake and augur that
Roto-Rooter "lodged" in our sewer?
As the attached PDF exhibit grahically shows, the answer is simple:
Roto-Rooter used an inadequate snake that it
recklessly bent and abandoned.
Roto-Rooter responds that it should not have to pay the costs because (a) it was not oto-Rooter's fault that its equipment got bent and "lodged" in my sewer and (b) I signed a "hold harmless and release."
1. ROTO-ROOTER USED INADEQUATE EQUIPMENT THAT IT RECKLESSLY BENT THEN ABANDONED.

It cannot be disputed that:
1. When asked, Roto-Rooter represented to me that its equipment was strong enough to clear the roots in our sewer and its equipment was better than that used by my usual sewer company.
2. Roto-Rooter used a 11/16 diameter, coreless flexible snake. Six sewer experts, including two village officials, said the snake was not strong enough to cut roots in a six-inch sewer pipe and should not have been used.
3. Roto-Rooter's employee said the equipment "shot right through" the sewer, slowing down "only once to cut through some roots." The correct procedure for cutting roots is to proceed carefully, removing roots as they are cut so as to clear an exit for the augur. Roto-Rooter did not follow proper procedure.
4. Roto-Rooter's employee claimed he ran "more than 90 feet of snake all the way to the village sewer across the street." Actually, the village sewer is on the near side of the street, only 50 feet away. He did not know what his equipment was doing or where it was doing it.
5. Roto-Rooter's employee said that he "did not have any problems at all" until he tried to remove the equipment. As the photos show, when the snake and augur got snagged, either he was in too much of a hurry or he panicked. Instead of carefully trying to work the augur out through the root bunch, he tried to free his equipment with brute force.
6. The undersized snake was unable to withstand the excessive torque from the motor. The snake bent 90 degrees, perpendicular to the line, creating the equivalent of a 7 3/4 inch steel grappling hook, that was too big to pull back through our 6-inch diameter sewer pipe. None of the four private sewer professionals nor the village inspector had ever seen a snake bent like that.
7. Roto-Rooter cut its snake and abandoned its equipment in my sewer.
8. A Roto-Rooter supervisor then falsely told me that the sewer had "collapsed." His superior repeated the falsehood that the sewer had "collapsed" until I asked him how he could claim that when his video camera could not see past the root bunch.
9. Roto-Rooter warned me that its equipment would create a blockage, yet refused to remove it unless I agreed to sign its "Excavation Proposal" and pay $5,782. Roto Rooter even refused to let me view the videotape they had taken of the equipment they abandoned in my sewer unless I first paid the company several hundred dollars.
10. Two weeks later, I obtained a plumbing permit. My sewer company excavated a hole and broke into the cracked but intact and fully functional sewer pipe. The augur was "lodged" on the far side of a large bunch of "hair roots." That bunch was attached to a large feeder root that ran from a small puncture in a joint on the near side of the root bunch. (Our independently taken video taken before the excavation also shows the augur stuck on the far side of the root bunch. Roto-Rooter claims its camera could not see the far side of the root bunch.)
11. It cost me $5250 to remove the equipment Roto-Rooter abandoned in my sewer.
2. THE NEED TO EXCAVATE, BREAK OPEN AND THEN REPAIR MY SEWER WAS CAUSED SOLELY BY ROTO-ROOTER'S NEGLIGENCE.
The three sewer professionals with my usual company, the independent expert who videotaped my sewer, the village plumbing inspector, and the village building inspector all agreed:
A. Roto-Rooter's snake was too weak to cut roots in a 6-inch sewer and should not have been used.
B. Roto-Rooter went in too quickly without properly clearing an exit through the root bunch.
C. Roto-Rooter recklessly used excessive power and bent the snake 90 degrees perpendicular.
D. Sewer "collapses" are extremely rare; it "does not happen even 1 time in a 1000" blockages. Our sewer had not collapsed.
E. Roto-Rooter's equipment got stuck solely because the snake was inadequate and the equipment was misused.
F. Many older sewers have cracks yet remain fully functional. If Roto-Rooter had not abandoned its equipment, our sewer "could have lasted another 20 or more years."
3. THE LEGALESE DOES NOT PROTECT ROTO-ROOTER FROM ACCOUNTABILITY
The last line of Rotor-Rooter's legalese states: "This release and hold harmless will not apply to the extent a claim is caused solely by Roto-Rooter's negligence." As shown above, the facts and expert opinions all clearly show that Roto-Rooter's snake and augur got stuck "solely by Roto-Rooter's negligence." Therefore, the legalese does not protect Roto-Rooter from accountability here.
Moreover, the "release and hold harmless" does not excuse Roto-Rooter from liability for its deceptive trade practices, especially the fraudulent representations made by Roto-Rooter to induce me to sign the "release and hold harmless." I would not have let Roto-Rooter get started if Roto-Rooter had not lied when I asked him whether the equipment was strong enough.
Finally, the hold harmless does not and cannot cover Roto-Rooter's bad faith breach of the very contract containing that clause.
4. ROTO-ROOTER'S CRACKED CONJECTURE
Aware that it is liable under its own contract if the equipment become lodged "solely by Roto-Rooter's negligence," Roto-Rooter attempts to shift blame to grossly exaggerated hairline cracks that were not even at the location where the augur got stuck.
Roto-Rooter does not dare claim that its augur actually got stuck in a crack because there is no evidence to support such a notion. Instead, Roto-Rooter substitutes self-serving conjecture: "It must be understood that when you have a line like this, with large cracks and large roots, there is the possibility that the rod can become lodged."
The facts prove that "possibility" did not happen here: When the pipe was broken open to remove the equipment, the augur was not stuck in a crack. It was caught on its own 8 inches of bent steel. The augur was stuck on the far side of the root bunch, away from the main root and away from the cracks Roto-Rooter says it videotaped "looking back upstream" - the opposite direction from the root bunch and the augur.
Here, Roto-Rooter resorts to another shameless lie that "our rod did not become stuck in the areas of clear pipe, only the area of the pipe which was obviously cracked and damaged." However, Roto-Rooter's camera could not see beyond the root bunch. Again, there is no evidence whatsoever that the pipe was cracked where the augur was stuck.
5. ROTO-ROOTER'S MALICE
Roto-Rooter again blatantly lies: "We have not charged Mr [redacted] for any of our services to date ... ." On the contrary:
Roto-Rooter's supervisor called me in Denver and threatened to sue if I did not pay them "$415 for clearing my sewer." After I aaid that it would cost more than that just call to a lawyer, he threatened to call the "county" and have them "condemn your house."
Knowing I was out of town, Roto-Rooter maliciously called my village's department of public works and deliberately lied that "raw sewage was spilling into the street." Two village public works officials came over, examined the site. They told my wife the puddle was "clear water" from the sump and there was no emergency.
6. ROTO-ROOTER MAY BE SYSTEMATICALLY ENGAGING IN DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES.
Roto-Rooter has a reputation within the industry for failing to clear sewers and falsely telling home owners that their sewers have "collapsed" and need "emergency repairs." Roto-Rooter's business plan appears to consist of selling new sewers, whether needed or not.
There appears to be substantial evidence that Roto-Rooter may be systematically engaging in deceptive trade practices, targeting the elderly, the distracted and the distressed.
Indeed, there are more than a hundred remarkably similar complaints from victims of Roto-Rooter's practices posted at the Consumer Affairs site, http://www.consumeraffairs.com/homeowners/rotorooter.html. Two examples of complaints similar to our are recited in the attached exhibit. Notably, these other victims say Roto-Rooter employed the same frightening language Roto-Rooter used in our case - "collapse" and "condemn."
CONCLUSION
As the photos in the attached exhibit clearly show:
8 INCHES OF STEEL BENT
Final Business Response /* (4000, 13, 2014/06/12) */
While we respect Mr [redacted]'s response, we do not agree with his opinion that our equipment was inadequate to clear roots from a 6" mainline. We clear thousands of these lines every year with this same equipment without issue. Mr [redacted] had a faulty sewer line as the pictures showed. We have our customers sign our hold harmless agreement prior to cabling the line because damaged lines can damage our equipment and we cannot accept responsibility for this. Roto-Rooter declines to pay any financial requests of Mr. [redacted] due to his sewer line being heavily infiltrated with roots and cracks.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 15, 2014/06/13) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
HOMEOWNER'S SURREBUTTAL
It is a fundamental axiom of simple logic that a conclusion cannot be correct unless it is consistent with the known facts.
In its surresponse, Roto-Rooter repeats the naked and unsupported conclusion that it was not Roto-Rooter's fault that its equipment got bent and stuck in my sewer. However, Roto-Rooter does not even attempt to refute the known facts that compel the contrary conclusion:
1. Northbrook Sewer had been successfully clearing reports from my sewer mainline for more than ten years without incident.
2. The manager of Roto-Rooter was on vacation when I engaged Roto-Rooter to clear the roots from my sewer line.
3. Roto-Rooter expressly represented that its equipment was not only strong enough to clear the roots from my sewer, but that it was even better than the equipment that Northbrook Sewer had been using.
4. Roto-Rooter's employe raced into the drain, having "no problems at all" and claimed to have run more than 90 feet of snake, even though my mainline is less than fifty feet long.
5. Roto-Rooter's employee failed to clear an exit path for his augur either because he was negligent or because the Roto-Rooter equipment was not strong enough to cut through the roots.
6. There is visible evidence on both videotapes that on its way back out, Roto-Rooter's equipment hung up on the far side of root bunch. There is no evidence that Roto-Rooter's augur got hung up on a crack or that there were even any cracks where RotoRooter's augur got hung up.
7. Multiple sewer experts, including three village officials, stated that Roto-Rooter's snake was inadequate for the job and should not have been used.
7. After he got it hung up on the root bunch, Roto-Rooter's employee should have tried to carefully unsnag the augur. Instead, as the photographs clearly show, Roto-Rooter's employee hastily revved his motor and bent the snake 90 degrees perpendicular to the line. This bend created the functional equivalent of an almost 8 inch grappling hook.
8. The 8-inch grappling hook was too large to pull back out through a 6-inch diameter sewer line.
9. Contrary to Roto-Rooter's assertion, Roto-Rooter has experienced numerous problems with its equipment as is evidenced by many of the 111 complaints listed at just the one consumer site referenced in my rebuttal.
It is not at all surprising that Roto-Rooter refuses to reimburse me for the costs of having a competent sewer company excavate and remove the equipment that Roto-Rooter abandoned. Roto-Rooter's refusal to be accountable for its own wrongdoing confirms my belief, shared by more than a hundred other victims, that Roto-Rooter does not appear to be in the business of serving its customers' needs. Rather, the evidence indicates to us that Roto-Rooter may be in the business of unscrupulously preying on the unwary and taking its victims for all it can get.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 12, 2014/09/02) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted]
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@rrsc.com
We proviced the customer with a credit of $56.67 and they stated they were okay with this resolution.
9/3/14 additional...

info from business:
We spoke with Irena who is the home owner and we issued a credit to her for the inconvenience and she was satisfied with this credit that was issued when we spoke with her.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 13, 2014/09/08) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted] Office Manager
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@rrsc.com
Issued the customer a credit of $82.50 for the repairs they had to make on thier own and aplogized for the inconvience.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. Either the Revdex.com or the contractor, LVX, makes reference to attachments previously sent, which I have not seen.How can I see those attachments ?
Regards,
[redacted]

The customer has not returned calls. Our warranty covers all rodding as the camera is free of charge it is not covered under any warranty. When we went out to the home on 6/24 there was...

no evidence of a backup and therefore we can’t rod a line as it increase the risk of damage to the pipes. Our warranty on the rodding is valid until 7/15/16 and we will honor that should the line backup and there is evidence of this when we go out. If the customer would like to pay for a camera again we will provide another camera inspection and a copy of what we find.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. I'm happy with the outcome. The person contacted me was very professional. Thank you very much for your help. 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 12, 2014/09/08) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted] Office Manager
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@rrsc.com
Issued a refunded for half of the amount of what was charged to the customer.

We offered to fix the additional problem free of charge for the customer and only charge for the issue we were initial call that we went out for. She declined to have us do the service....

Tell us why here...

2 months ago I had Roto Rooter come out for the 1st time to rod out my sewer line that had been backing up lately. The guy informed me of a program where they camera the line and have the city come out to prove to the city that they(their tree roots in the front of my house) are the cause of my backups. If I wanted to go through with that program, the remaining balance was 1st told to me as being a little over $300. When they left my home, they called my cell and left a message saying that the $300+ was a mistake and the correct remaining balance would be $175. I reluctantly agreed, only because I really wanted to get this issue out of the way. I called them 2 months later in early August to set up the appointment. They came out early the following week, August 17. This was a different guy. I told him about the 1st Roto Rooter guy before and said that it's the city's tree roots eating up my pipe line causing my backups. He said that the city didn't fix tree roots in the line. He said if it was something major like a broken pipe, etc... then the city would fix it. I think to myself, why would they even bother scheduling appointments, etc... if they know that the city isn't going to fix my problem? The new guy insists that the 1st guy just didn't know. I immediately called the office to inform them that I would not be paying the balance because they city isn't going to fix what THEY (Roto rooter) told me they might fix. The secretary who answered my call was rude and acted as if she didn't want to be there. She then tried to insult my intelligence by being condescending: "we re.pre.sent. Ro. To. Roo. Ter. Not the City. Of. Chicago." Really? That wasn't even my point. She, then, transferred me over to a woman who transferred me to a so called manager. He seemed as if he cared at first, then he began yelling over the phone(While I'm still on it with him) to another person in the office: "Yea, call (the service guy) tell him it's cancelled, she ain't paying. Well, I wouldn't be rodding it out neither if I ain't gettin' paid. She said she didn't know it would be a gamble with city. We can make the city do nothing.' Aren't managers supposed to be educated? Shouldn't they sound educated? At this point I knew I would end up in a argument with this individual, so I just asked for his name (Chris) and hung up. He couldn't wait until I hung up to start talking about me while on the phone with me?

The whole 'can't make the city do nothing/ we rep.re.sent. Ro. To. Rooter. Not the city. of. chicago.' argument was not the point I was trying to make. These individuals don't even listen to problem. My problem was that if they know the city isn't going to fix the problem that they're coming out to see, I'm not paying for your presence. I never said that had to put a gun to the city's head and force them to fix anything. However, if they knew FOR SURE the city wouldn't do tree roots and that's what you came out here for, then you're not going to get my hard earned money. I was under the impression that they knew this stuff. I had no idea that only a select number of service men knew about this. I would think a big company like this would have their men prepared before they inform their customers of things they should know about.

Had Chris explained the situation to me as the 2nd service guy did, I wouldn't have had an issue with him. He just listened to the 1st half and ran with it. Had I known that all of their service men didn't know everything they were informing me about, I would've never agreed to this program THAT THEY TOLD ME ABOUT. They pressured me into doing this, because I was hesitant to go through with it. Had I known that the 1st service man didn't know the city wouldn't cover tree roots, I wouldn't be typing this. They have the receipt in front of them. The receipt only said TREE ROOTS. If the 2nd guy knew, shouldn't the 1st guy(who recommended me the program) who came out known? They are unprofessional, unorganized, uneducated and rude.