TM BUILDING DAMAGE RESTORATION

"How unfortunate that I never received notice of this negative feedback from Angie's List. As the president of my company (and the "sympathetic owner" referenced in the complaint) I acknowledged the delays in scheduling and refunded the homeowner's deposit with my deepest apologies. However, I firmly believe in the truth, and must identify the discrepancies in the property owner's account. The date that the water damage to the member' home occurred was 10/5/06, and our technicians responded on 10/6/06. The drying process was performed and completed by 10/8/06, for the invoiced amount of $552.75. Our contract was with the members - NOT with Travelers. We do not work for the insurance carrier, although the insurance carriers will pay claims based on our invoices. Travelers paid the members for our drying invoice. The estimate of $3,170 was provided by the Travelers adjuster, and not by our company. Our estimate to make the necessary repairs to the bathroom totaled $1,585.32. This estimate was for the interior of the bathroom only, and did not include the roof, the cooler, or any other type of work. I can only assume that Travelers payment for the claim would have been based on the adjuster's total. We submitted our proposal to the members on 10/11/06. The proposal (contract) was not signed and no down payment was received until 1/30/07. We will not perform repairs without a contract, and therefore, would not have scheduled any additional work until after 1/30/07. I don't know when the roofing and cooler repairs took place, but any interior repairs would have had to wait until all exterior work had been completed. Our scheduling department did not contact the Saunders' in a timely fashion, prompting the Saunders' to cancel their contract with our company. The contract was voided, and the refund was issued on 2/16/07. At that time, our file was closed. It was established in March of 2007, that the estimator assigned to the members' file had not been returning phone calls to several clients, resulting in termination of his employment with our company. The damage to the tile was noted both by our estimator and by the Travelers adjuster, and would have been included in the adjuster's estimate to compensate the members for the repair needed. During the course of mitigating property damage, secondary damage can result and is sometimes unavoidable. Based on the photos taken of the damages, (which we still have on file) it cannot be determined if the tile was chipped by our personnel, by falling debris from the damaged ceiling, or may even have been chipped before our company ever visited the home. Since the damage was restricted to the bathroom, it is highly unlikely that dust "throughout the whole house" could have been attributed to the drying process which took place 10/6-10/8/06. Despite the fact that the refund was provided, and our apologies were made, this person submitted this post almost two months after we closed the file. I am certainly glad that the other 1,123 clients we serviced in 2006, in addition to the 1,078 clients we serviced in 2007 did not read her post, nor take her "advice.""