Moonridge International Relocations

Overall it was a disaster. The company and it's owner (Sam Baker) failed to do any part of thier job regarding the damage claims correctly or on time. Specific points are as follows: 1. Company is required to respond to claim submission no later than 60 days after submission. They failed to do so. 2. After 85 days and 6 attemps to contact the company, we had to request assistance from the military base claims office. They contacted the company, informed them that they had not performed satisfactorily and needed to expedite this claim. 3. The owner called me and accused me of not filing the claim properly (false), that the claim was not legitimate (false), and that he would send an appraisor out to assess the damage. I explained to Mr. Baker that I was not asking him to approve the claim if he did not want to but only that he no obstruct the claims process by doing nothing. He stated he would call me with that information within the week. 30 days later I had received no call nor had an appraisor shown up. 4. We again got the claims office involved and asked for legal assistance as well. They again contacted the company and told them to expedite the claim that was now 3 months late. Mr. Baker called again - was very unprofessional, restated his previous accusations and demanded pictures. I explained that pictures had already been submitted and verified by the claims office but that I would send them to him directly - which I did. 5. After another 2 weeks of no contact - we had the claims office get involved again and elevated our complaints to the Quality COntrol Inspector on the military base. The following day we received an email asking for more information regarding our damaged property - information that we had already submitted (in some cases twice). 6. After another 2 weeks of no contact I hired an attorney. The attorney spoke with Mr. Baker the followign day, Mr Baker began the conversation by stating that he did not have to talk to an attorney at all - he was under a government contract and did not have to respond to anyone other than a government attorney. My attorney explained to him that if his client (me) wanted to file suit against his firm they could certainly do so but that it was preferrable to work it out without having to. Mr. Baker then stated he would make a settlement offer that day. 7. We received a settlement offer the next day and it was an insult to the say the least. Specific examples include: a. damaged furniture valued at over $1700 - offer to repair was $225 with now appraisal or estimate conducted. b. Air compressor valued at $400 - offer was $20 and comment was "go get some paint and paint it yourself. Estimate for repair that I paid for out of pocket was $156 c. Several of the items were outright denied - though no reason given. d. Of the 10 items claimed - he only approved 1 - and that was a lamp that had been crushed into over 50 pieces. 8. The good news is that he has taken action (albeit 3 months after the deadline) and we can now move forward with our appeal through the military claims office. This company failed to adjuticate the claim in the timeline required by the contract. This company purposely stalled the claims process. This company failed to respond to numerous calls and emails This company failed to get damage estimates as required. This company's owner lied about the claims process and how it was to be conducted. This company's owner stated that it was unrealistic of us to expect that our property be returned to the same condition it was prior to our moving it. This company's owner told my attorney that his claim rate was approximately 18% - 10% higher than the national average and much higher the industry standard of 8% or less. This company's owner told my attorney that he was understafe and behind on claims and just could not get to them all which begs the question - why take a contract if you can't fulfill it's terms as required? A google search for this company reveals numerous complaints about the company in general and several compaints specifically singling out Mr. Baker as both unresponsive, rude, and generally unprofessional across the board. Only when threatened by legal action did Mr. Baker take appropriate action and then made an unreasonable offer.