Americool Air Services, Inc.

"Thank you so much, it has been a pleasure doing business with you."

"This is a case of a new owner moving into a home where the previous owner had contracted the work that this customer is complaining about! The previous owner did not want to have the duct system repaired or replaced; she only wanted the actual air conditioner unit replaced, which was done on 11/2/09, with no complaints by the previous owner for 1-1/2 years afterward! The new owner moved into the home and felt that there was problems with the air flow, and called Americool. There were two appointment cancellations, due to a bad flu virus going through the staff of the company, which was regrettable but we did not want to get the homeowner sick!! Once we inspected the system, we found that the original duct design had some issues that contributed to poor air flow; our course of remedy offered to the new homeowner was that we could try a less-expensive solution ($720) by installing duct booster fans to help push more airflow to the rooms that were not getting enough, but that it may not solve the problem - that ultimately they might need to install a new duct system, which could cost around $1,500 to $2,000. We told the customer that we would credit all or part of the fan cost toward a new duct system, if the fans did not work, after they chose to try the fan option first. We also noted to the new homeowner that there were several other problems that were not related to the air conditioning system, such as drafty, outdated windows and poor insulation in the attic, that were affecting the cooling in the home. The NEW HOMEOWNER made the choice to try the least-expensive, non-guaranteed option of installing the duct fans first, and did not contact us afterward to tell us that this solution did not work to their satisfaction. instead, the new homeowner decided to hire another company to replace the ductwork, and then wanted a refund on the fans afterward. We refused to refund the cost of the fans, as it was previously agreed that we would credit the cost on the fans toward OUR company replacing the ductwork if the fans did not work. In summary, we tried to offer the most cost-efficient solution first, instead of just charging the highest cost for work that may have been unneccessary, and this honest approach to business is now being used by this complaintant as a reason to damage our reputation - no good deed goes unpunished! As far as the other notations made by the new homeowner, such as a disconnected duct and an absence of screening. we would like to once again state that we were NEVER contracted to work on the duct system before installing the duct fans for the new homeowner; our contract with the original owner was to hook up a new air conditioning system to the EXISTING DUCTWORK, as the customer was an elderly woman who was planning to relocate and could not afford to do additional work - and she had been happy with the work that was done. At the time that the air conditioner was installed, back in 11/09, a new shroud was attached between the home & the new air conditioner and if there were any gaps that could allow rodents, it must have been the result of something that was done by someone else during the 1-1/2 years before the new homeowners took possession. Also, we cannot be responsible for damage that may have been caused by other contractors - this customer has stated that they had other contractors working in the home, so it is blatantly unfair to point their fingers at our company. It is also important to note that our employee that worked at this home is very young-looking, but has been with the company for five years and is very experienced and reliable. Another unfair judgement based upon appearances, not facts! Americool has never had a complaint with the Florida Department of Professional Business Regulations, and we will stand by our work, as long as we are given the chance to do so!"

"First, I would like to reply by pointing out that the a/c system in this home is 30 years old and in exceptionally poor condition; and the statement concerning the cobwebs is exaggerated and untrue, as I personally inspected this system by taking off the panel to the condenser to inspect the situation with the fan motor. Anyone who lives in Florida can contest to the fact that webs can occur practically overnight; my wife and I have a barn, and we can clean cobwebs off of the rafters, walls and corners that seem to magically reappear within a week, if not a day! Regardless, in this particular case I found a fan motor and condenser that was in such poor condition that the screws and brackets supporting the fan motor were totally rusted through, and the labels were unreadable. As a contractor, I have to make recommendations that I feel will serve the homeowner's best interests, and while it may be possible to rig up something to support a fan, in the long run it does not benefit the customer to put money into a system that is basically falling apart. It is too likely that something else will occur, and then the homeowner will want to hold me liable if the fan motor burns up and then causes the compressor to fail (very expensive) because of it. In regard to the complaint about recommending an entire new system, I would like to point out that I was only following the law; it is illegal for me, or anyone else, to install a used R-22 refrigerant-based a/c component in a residential home. In January, 2010, the Florida State Mechanical Code stated that I, as a licensed contractor, could not install ANY used system or component without having an engineer's certification that it could meet certain efficiency mandates and permitting codes, and the Code also mandated that R-22 based systems could no longer be manufactured. The Code goes on to state that I cannot install just one used or new part of a R-22 based system (the air handler or the condenser), since it could not be permitted and inspected by the local building officials. What this means to anyone that has a R-22 based system is that if one part (component) of their a/c system fails, then they must unfortunately replace both components with a matched-efficiency system that uses the new R410A refrigerant instead of R-22. In order to understand this, it is important to note that a split air conditioning system is made up of two components, but both parts make up the system - many people believe that the two components are separate, but they are designed to work together in order to meet the legal requirements of the Florida Mechanical Code. I certainly sympathize with my customers that have problems with their old R-22 based systems, as it is expensive to install an entire new system instead of just one component, but I will not risk my reputation or my license by installing illegal equipment just to save the homeowner some money, although many shady contractors will ! It can be very difficult to try to explain the current Code situation to customers, especially in this tough economy, but I did not make the rules - I just have to follow them! I am sorry to lose this customer, but the recommendations that I made were made with integrity."