Servpro of Parma and Seven Hills

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/03/18) */
***
See attached letter and supporting documents
=============================================
(Revdex.com - converted from original document
See file.)
***
To Whom It May Concern:
We are following up with the concerns of mitigation and justification for full payment from *** ***SERVPRO and the restoration industry follow the IICRC Sstandards with proper mitigation protocols and proceduresOur SERVPRO franchise is also a preferred vendor for ***/***, which includes a contract with fixed pricing, 2.5% discount, approval process, internal audit, external audits, and strict guidelines to follow during mitigationPart of our guidelines includes creating an action plan with mitigation specialists for the insured's lossDuring this discussion an agreement is made for mitigation actionsMr***'s complaints should be resolved by a simple phone call to a *** claim specialists who gave us approval for ALL services providedThe file was then uploaded through SERVPRO corporate, which goes through two extensive audits, wherein pricing, guidelines, approvals, equipment calculations, and square footage is all accounted forEquipment requirements follow a strict calculation based on affected square feet and cubic space, which is audited three times before final billingIn this case, Mr*** had proper equipment placement under IICRC calculationsSee attached drying report for calculations; we actually placed less air mover than calculated due to electric capacity and professional opinionThe insured's accusation of overbilling is not only absurd, it's impossible under the program audit System, industry Standards, and fixed pricing
Please see attached document marked Estimate for the price of services providedPer the customer's consent, crew was dispatched and arrived 2/25/at 6pm, after hoursPaperwork was signed by Mr***, in which he received a paper copy of everything signedMr***'s first contact with the office to request another copy of the authorization was faxed on March 7th, Please see attached copy of email, sent to Mr*** on March 8", 2016, with the contract attached, another email with the final estimate, and his response which contradicts he didn't receiveHe also could have received this through his insurance company at any time as well as the estimate or costThis estimate (not final) also includes after hour charges, which were performed on 2/25/*** specialists notified us that there are $5,limits to his policy, but approved all servicesBased on the limits and providing excellent customer service, we provided after hour services for business hour pricing to keep his already discounted final bill down*** recommended providing services next day, however we chose to provide customer service immediatelyIn general for water restoration, most of the labor is completed on initial services, and then monitored thereafterFinal discounts and breakdown will be provided below in the conclusion
During our mitigation discussion with *** specialists, we discussed Mr***'s wall that was removed on initial and on day of removalOur paperwork States, see attached customer information page, we considered this a 3-day dry outMitigation claims are working estimates, therefore set days
is never provided based on unknown variables such as building materials, outside temperatures, inside temperatures, relative humidity, ectOur job is to save the most materials that we can; however, there are materials that are impossible to dryOften we attempt drying to see the progress, then decide if extended dry time or removal of materials is more cost effectiveMr***'s exterior dry wall had wet insulation installed behind itDepending how saturated the insulation is, we determine if immediate removal is necessary or attempt to dry for a few days before removalKeep in mind, drying equipment is still needed on the studs if determined immediate removalBased on the saturation level, we tried to dry the minimal insulation in place, however upon inspection on 2/29/by our Senior Production Manager, it was determined the insulation was still we, although the exterior dry wall was dryMr***'s confusion is the wall provided a dry reading as the insulation was not detected by meters; therefore equipment was pulled on 2/28/on that specific wall in questionAs our SrProduction Manager, Tommie B***, performed his monitor, he contacted the mitigation specialist, Raphael G***, and received approval to remove the wall based on the insulation still saturatedBefore removing, Tommie spoke with Ms*** ***, explained why it needed removed and got another approval from herMs***, asked him how long it would take, as she needed to go to work, Tommie explained 10-minutes, therefore she waited until he was finishedSo, not only did we get homeowner approvals, we also were provided approvals from ***Leaving wet insulation could have caused extensive mold repairs down the road, far more exceeding the minimal wall repairsAt this point, there is no real option to leave wet insulation; furthermore it did not cause extended dry time or additional cost of the mitigationWe never stated the basement was dry, as other rooms were still drying until the 3/1/So, instead of a $10-$15k mold remediation project, in which the insurance company would not cover if an insured refused recommendation of removal, the protocol is to remove the wall now, and have a small repair, very standardMr*** obviously has not communicated with Ms*** nor the *** mitigation specialists to clarify the projectWe also clarified all these concerns with Mr***, on March 8, via phone discussionTo recap, consent was provided by *** ***, and also the mitigation specialist (twice); however, it was not a realistic alternative to keep the drywall in place, as it would have caused more damage than removal
The crux of the issue here is Mr*** contractually agreed on his insurance policy to have an extremely high deductible and also a very low limit for a finished basementThe disputes should be with his insurance company more than the company providing the service for mitigation whom is not involved on policy limits the insured agreed to*** is very respectable company, and I'm sure the decision to have this policy limit was thoroughly reviewed with the insured and agreed uponBy agreeing to the policy, it's understood any loss outside the insurance claim is considered out of pocket costLimits are not our fault, our costs do not increase or decrease based on an insured's policyIn conclusion, price for our services should have been $4,391.00, however we provided after hour discount to help out on limits resulting in final cost of $3,(which includes 2.5% additional *** discount plus the "during hours" pricing - See attached final estimate), a more than reasonable discountMr*** responded to the emails on March 8, 2016, see attached, which shows he received the contract and estimateHe proceeded to demand an unreasonable additional discount and a payment planObviously, we cannot provide an additional $discount on top of the original discount of $Mr*** is requesting a 30% discount from actual services renderedI personally responded to Mr*** and graciously accommodated his payment plan request, see attached email from March 8, 2016, however I did not agree to further discounts, as no company can afford such discountMr*** chose not to respond to email but he has made time to provide information to the attorney general and
Revdex.comPayment of $was received on 3/15/16, leaving a balance due of $We are still willing to keep the current discount with a payment plan of payments of $to resolve, this is stated in the email attachment if Mr*** agreesWe have no obligation to provide further discounting than the 2.5% we are contractually obligated by ***We have addressed every concern, communicated thoroughly throughout the project, and followed all guidelines and pricelists
Thank you,
Matthew K***
General Manager
SERVPRO #
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2016/03/29) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
It is nice to see Servpro finally produce some of the documents I have been requesting since late FebruaryThis is the first time I have seen a copy of the contract I was asked to sign on a mobile device, when the rep assured me a copy would be emailed the following dayI never saw what Servepro marks as Estimtae Indeed the form itself indicates it was not generated until 3/17, weeks after the job was doneThe so called final estimate was not provided until after I again inquired about the charges, several days after the job was doneAttached is a complete set of the documents Servpro provided when they started workIt does not include the copy of the contract or estimates I requested
The truth is,Servepro never provided me with estimates or costs, despite my requests, preventing me from intelligenly directing the work being performed at my homeThey then proceeded to tear out drywall without my knowledge or consent, from a room they had determined was sufficienly dry to remove their equipment the day beforeHad I been asked, I would not have authorized this workIt has resulted in additional unneccesary repair costs
I have offered a Servepro a fair compromise which would pay them most of their chargesTheir obstinace indicates to me a desire to take advantage of an emergency situation