| Spectrum Inspection Group |
| Spectrum Inspection Group BAIT AND SWITCH scam!!!!!! Las Vegas, Nevada |
| 26th of May, 2011 by User504601 |
| I was quoted an amount for an inspection on my current residence for a home inspection which included a pool inspection, to which I agreed, as I thought that it was a great value. Once the agreement was in place the cost of the service went up because of a quoting error on the part of Spectrum Inspection Group, Inc. I agreed to the higher quoted price and booked the appointment. Upon arrival at my inspection I was presented with an inspection summary which lasted approximately 8 minutes total. I offered payment if he could wait 5 minutes while I went to the back... Harold refused. I then contacted Spectrum Inspection Group, Inc. the following day to complete payment via paypal which I never received a call back on. Lastly approx. 30 days after my inspection I was asked to render payment over the phone using a credit card which I felt very uncomfortable with and provided to Spectrum Inspection Group, Inc. Approx. 30 days after payment INFORMATION was given to Spectrum Inspection Group, Inc. I received another call for payment on services rendered I declined any further requests for payment as I felt that my multiple attempts where enough and my customer confidence had been shaken in the method in which Spectrum Inspection Group, Inc. had handled my personal information. |
|
|
|
|
I am Paul Donohue and the owner of Spectrum Inspection Group.
This article written about our firm is an example of what can happen if you do not submit to extortion. It is simply amazing that someone can go on line and write something that damages a company’s reputation without containing a grain of truth. We are forced to provide this rebuttal because these false accusations are damaging our reputation. This is a classic example of why companies like Reputation.com are gaining relevance in our society.
Here is our side of the story and the accurate account of what happened:
This gentleman had a three hour long home inspection appointment with our firm for a home he was purchasing. Prior to the appointment he advised us that he wanted to be present for the entire inspection to "pick our brains" as the inspector went through the home. We advised him that we do not recommend distracting the inspector during the course of the inspection but if he wanted to attend the entire 3 hour long inspection he was more than welcome to do so.
As part of our customer care program procedure this gentleman received a phone call from the inspector 30 minutes prior to the inspection to inform him the inspector was enroute and would on-time for the appointment. The call went to voicemail. The inspector arrived at the property on time and commenced the inspection. The inspector continued the inspection unaccompanied until 45 minutes before the conclusion of the inspection where the inspector placed a call to this gentleman informing him that the inspection was nearly complete. Again the call went to voicemail.
Once the inspection was complete the inspector waited on site an additional 45 minutes waiting for the gentleman to arrive, meet the gentleman, discuss the issues found in the course of the inspection, and collect payment for the service rendered. This gentleman arrived 8 minutes before the time the inspector needed to leave the site to be on time for his next inspection appointment.
This gentleman told the inspector he wanted to go through the entire home and discuss all the inspectors’ findings. The inspector informed this gentleman that he could only provide him with a summary overview of his findings because the inspector had another inspection appointment commitment where punctuality was required.
The gentleman became quite incensed and agitated and insisted on the inspector providing him good customer service. The inspector informed this gentleman that a very detailed report would be available for his review no later than 8:00 a.m. the following morning and the inspector would be delighted to discuss all the findings of the report but the inspector did not have the liberty to be late for his next scheduled appointment.
It is important to note that when this inspection appointment was scheduled this gentleman had informed our scheduling coordinator that he would be paying for the inspection with a personal check on site. Our Scheduling Coordinator called him the day prior to the scheduled appointment to remind him to bring his checkbook. When the inspector requested payment on site the gentleman informed the inspector he forgot his checkbook.
The gentleman asked the inspector to follow him to an ATM machine "up the street" where he would pay cash for the inspection. Again the inspector advised the gentleman of the inspectors impending appointment commitment and asked the gentleman to call our office or go online with his credit card payment.
It is our company policy that will perform an inspection prior to securing payment for the service but we do not release the report prior to receiving payment. In this case the gentleman’s agent had expressed that, with regard to "Due Diligence", time was of essence so we made the decision to release the report prior to receiving payment.
At the time of the inspection we were supposed to inspect the pool. However the pool equipment was not functional at the time of the inspection and we could not provide a meaningful inspection. We disclosed the need for a licensed and qualified pool contractor to review and repair the system to place it into back into an operational condition. A week later when we received notification that the pool equipment was now operational our inspector returned to the property to re-inspect the pool equipment, which he did, and the inspector issued an addendum to the report. There was no additional fee for this service.
The gentleman never did call into our office with payment. It took more than four month of tracking him down and calling him and we never received a return phone call. Four months after the inspection and after four month of failing to respond to our persistent and now daily phone calls he finally answered the phone.
At this time he lodged the complaint that he was dissatisfied with our service and only felt we were “entitled” to half our fee. We strongly disagreed. He argued about the fee for more than 30 minutes and only capitulated when he was informed we were done arguing and would allow a judge to make the decision in small claims court.
He promised we would be sorry that we crossed sword with him.
We do our best to serve the needs of our customers and clients and provide an exemplary level of customer service. We take customer service very seriously. Sometimes and with some people you just can’t win. We protected this client’s interests to the best of our ability. He profited from our report and was able to get the seller to perform several repairs for issues that we discovered and disclosed that would have otherwise cost the client a significant amount of money. We were faithful and put his interest over our own interests by providing our service without receiving payment. But we do insist on getting paid.
These accusations are insulting. I am a retired United States Navy Chief Petty Officer and my entire life has been focused on honor, principles, ethics, and commitment. Bait and Switch? No, sorry.
Paul J. Donohue |
|
|
Post your Comment
|
|
|
