Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Better Care Appliance Repair Inc.'s headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Better Care Appliance Repair Inc. has 2 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  Better Care Appliance Repair Inc.

  4425 46B St Delta, BC V4K 2M8

• 

  Better Care Appliance Repair Inc.

  48 W 20 Ave Vancouver, BC V5Y 2C1

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:23/08/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I hired the business to come repair my freezer. Now the freezer is worse than before and the business will not respond. We have called and texted several times. They claim to have a warranty but that is not the case. Even if we have to pay more, thats okay but they are refusing to even respond to give us more information.

  Business Response

  Date: 23/08/2024

  We have attached the invoice of what was done at the visit for this client. We have tried to contact her both the technician and the office to book another visit to follow up but she hasnt answered the phone. 

  As stated in the invoice, if the issue wasnt resolved after the service part might need to be replaced. However, the issue the client reported when she called after the visit didnt seem to be related, thats why we wanted to schedule another visit from the technician.

  We sent a message to the client on August 22nd asking her to call the office back since she wasnt answering the phone.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 29/08/2024

   
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, while I dont agree with their efforts to contact me and the fact that they didnt respond to my texts, until after I filed this complaint, they did immediately contact me and I appreciate it. I find that the technician was helpful and has provided a resolution that is satisfactory to me. I would urge the business to look at their customer service agents in charge of responding to the phone because they are the ones that were not providing adequate communication.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************

• Initial Complaint

  Date:01/05/2023

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  This company presented a work contract and charged us based on false contract reps & warranties. The incident in question is for a refrigerator repair in April 2023.
  
  We were provided an estimate and work contract on the representation that the necessary replacement parts were to be "sold at cost". Shortly after the work was done, we did a quick online search, which indicates that we were charged $785.50 for something that costs about $200-300. (Our family members intervened as the $785.50 seemed very high and we are an elderly couple in our 60s.)
  
  The part in question is a freezer motor fan: ***** **** #********.
  
  When we asked the company to present evidence that the part was indeed sold "at cost", they were uncooperative. The company responded with "** **** *** ***** ** ****** *** ***** ** *** ****" - no one is disagreeing about this - but is the company's original cost actually $785.50? The reps & warrants for the contract at the outset is that the company will sell "at cost" (i.e. company bought it for $785.50 and is selling it to us at $785.50): a quick online search suggests this is highly unlikely (market cost seems to be $200-300) and the company has thus far refused to provide proof of their original cost.
  
  Furthermore another common theme from the company's response is something on the lines of "you accepted the contract". That is certainly true, but the contract was agreed on the company's reps & warrants that the part was to be sold "at cost". This representation, based on our independent research, seems highly unlikely and the company has refused to provide proof.
  
  Based on our research and interactions with the company to-date, we believe R&W was breached and the contract was made on false premises, which brings into question the legal validity of this entire work contract under Canadian contract law.
  
  Supporting documents are attached for your reference.

  Business Response

  Date: 16/05/2023

  Unfortunately there is a lot of missing information here.

  1. The person that filed the complaint was not present at the time of the appointment, I was not giving a true information about what happened at the first visit & second visit. 

  2. The person that booked the job has refused to pay for the part that was installed ,and ask the technician to leave the house without paying him, the technician ask him to take our part back since he decided not to pay but the customer asked him to leave the house and told him that he will only pay after a few days. The technician explained that it does not work this way and he needs to get paid on site,but the client again refused to pay and ask the technician to leave. 

  3. The client call again a few days after and complaint that the fridge doesn't work, at this point we only wanted to take the part that was installed back since he did not pay for it.

  4. The client had another problem with the fridge and ask again for a qoute, the technician found another issue with the fan and provide with a qoute. 

  5. The  client approved the new quote and ask the technician to order the parts. The client had the opportunity to compare with other companies before approving it.

  6. At cost simply means better care appliances resale cost. 

   

   

  Customer Answer

  Date: 16/05/2023

  Better Care’s response on May 16 has once again showcased the
  company’s willing misrepresentation of facts, as well as its failure to
  understand basic business concepts. I will prove Better Care’s deception with WRITTEN
  EVIDENCE in this response

  1. The person that filed
  the complaint was not present at the time of the appointment, I was not giving
  a true information about what happened at the first visit & second
  visit. 

  *This complaint was drafted and filed jointly on behalf of the
  victims, an elderly couple around their 60s. The victims were directly at the
  worksite and experienced the company’s deception first-hand.

  *The company’s WRITTEN RESPONSE sufficiently paints a picture
  where the company deliberately misled elderly citizens. Legally, the company’s
  own self-contradictory emails would be “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” and would
  be seen as such by any average member of the BC judiciary (judge, jury,
  mediator or arbitrator). The company broke contractual reps & warranties, falsely
  charged the victims, tried to lie about it, but were caught red-handed by its
  own writing. See “Email Exchange - Exhibit 1” for proof.
  

  2. The person that
  booked the job has refused to pay for the part that was installed ,and ask the
  technician to leave the house without paying him, the technician ask him to
  take our part back since he decided not to pay but the customer asked him to
  leave the house and told him that he will only pay after a few days. The
  technician explained that it does not work this way and he needs to get paid on
  site,but the client again refused to pay and ask the technician to leave.

  *This claim is 100% false – all deposits and payments were made.
  Written evidence and invoices are attached herein to prove it. It’s astounding that the company is willing to lie so openly about payments, where there is WRITTEN PROOF including emails and invoices.

  *The company visited for an initial assessment and charged a
  $250.95 assessment fee. This charge was paid in full on Friday April 7. See attached
  “Exhibit A - Assessment Fee” proof.

  *The company told the victims that certain parts of the fridge
  needed to be replaced (the advice turned out to be incorrect, which we address
  below) and asked for a $452.97 deposit for the replacement parts. This deposit was
  also paid in full on Wednesday April 19. See attached “Exhibit B - Deposit for
  Parts” for proof.

  *The company installed the parts after the deposit was made and
  said to wait for 1-2 days to see if the problem is resolved. The problem was NOT
  resolved as the installed parts were incorrect. When the company asked for
  payment for the remainder of the invoice, the victims asked the company to come
  back and properly fix the issue before the remainder of the invoice is paid, as
  the issue was not resolved. This request is 100% in line with Canadian contract
  law: remainder of payment is to be made when contractual obligations (in this
  case, fixing the fridge) are fully completed.

  *The company came back, recognized that the initial replacement parts
  recommendation was incorrect, and said new replacement parts needed to be
  bought & installed. The “final invoice” for the new parts and labour was
  for $1,383.32, which was also paid in full on Tuesday April 25. See attached “Exhibit
  C - New Final Invoice” for proof.

  *Once again, the crux of the issue is as follows. At the
  worksite, the company mentioned that the replacement parts were to be sold “at
  cost”. This is double confirmed IN WRITING by the company employee. See
  attached “Email Exchange - Exhibit 1” for proof.

  3. The client call again
  a few days after and complaint that the fridge doesn't work, at this point we
  only wanted to take the part that was installed back since he did not pay for
  it.

  *This claim is 100% false. Up until this point in the work
  project, only the deposit has been requested and the said deposit was paid in
  full on Wednesday April 19. See attached “Exhibit B - Deposit for Parts” for
  proof.
  

  4. The client had another problem with the fridge and ask again
  for a qoute, the technician found another issue with the fan and provide with a
  qoute. 
  

  *This claim is 100% false. There is not “another problem” – it’s
  the SAME problem that the company did not fix per contractual obligations, as
  the first recommendation for replacement parts was incorrect.
  

  5. The  client approved the new quote and ask the
  technician to order the parts. The client had the opportunity to compare with
  other companies before approving it.

  *We once again go back to the crux of the issue, which the
  company seems to have a  lack of
  understanding. The victims approved the contract based on the company’s
  contractual reps & warranties that the parts were to be sold “AT COST”
  (which again is verified in writing by the company; see “Email Exchange -
  Exhibit 1”).

  *“At cost” was economically acceptable to the victims, who accepted
  the contract on this contractual reps & warranties. As we subsequently
  found out, the victims were actually falsely charged on contractual misrepresentation: the parts were highly unlikely to be sold “at cost” based on independent
  research. The company has so far failed to address our calculations, as doing so would prove them guilty.
  

  6. At cost simply means
  better care appliances resale cost. 

  *It appears that employees at
  this company do not know what a dictionary is. The definition of “at cost”, per
  ***************, is as follows: “for the amount of money that was needed to
  make or get something: at an amount that yields NO PROFIT”

  *Better Care is welcome to
  explain to members of the BC legal system why “at cost” means “better care
  appliances resale cost”.

  *Local universities such as UBC
  offer free online courses in business management. I strongly advise employees
  at this company to take advantage of such free resources so they can learn what
  “at cost” means.

  *I will further note that – to this
  day – the company has refused to provide proof of its original cost. Doing so
  will prove the company guilty.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 17/05/2023

  Hi ******,

  Thank you for your message.

  For avoidance of doubt, this is not a third-party complaint. I (***** ***) am the party that made the referenced transaction with the company - you can see my name on the invoice (see attached).

  Please let me know if you require any additional information. Thank you!

   

  Business Response

  Date: 19/05/2023

  THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS APPARENTLY THAT  ARE INVOLVED IN THIS MATTER, TWO OF THEM WERE NOT PRESENT AT THE TIME OF THE DECISION WITH THE TECHNICIAN. THOSE INDIVIDUALS  HAVE ALSO POSTED DIFFERENT REVIEWS WITH A FEW DIFFERENT NAMES AND POSTED UNTRUE INFORMATION.
  THIS MATTER WILL BE TREATED ACCRUDANLY & LEGALLY OUTSIDE BBB SINCE IT IS A BULLYING BEHAVIOR. 
  
  THERE IS HIDDEN AND MISSING INFORMATION IN THESE VERSIONS, THAT ARE UNMATCHING OUR TECHNICIAN VERSION OF THE CASE. 
  
  SINCE THE CUSTOMER APPROVED THE QUOTE, WE DID NOTHING WRONG AND WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE THE COST WE SELL THE PARTS. 
  
  MY QUESTION TO BBB NOW. MUST BETTER CARE SHOW PROOF OF PURCHASE BY LAW?  IF A NOT, I WILL SINCERELY  ASK THAT THIS COMPLAINT BE REMOVED SINCE YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE WITHOUT  PROOF OF WHAT HAPPENED AT THE WORK SITE. 

   

  THANK YOU

  Customer Answer

  Date: 23/05/2023

  Good morning BBB,
  
  As you can see in Better Care’s latest “response” (more of an unhinged rant), the company has once again a) uploaded ZERO written evidence and b) failed to disprove ANY of my WRITTEN EVIDENCE-BACKED positions.

  
  In a stark contrast to Better Care, I have uploaded WRITTEN EVIDENCE (emails, invoices, payment confirmations, etc.) to the BBB web portal since I originally filed the complaint. My WRITTEN EVIDENCE disproves 100% of the company's false claims - please see below for summary.

  
  A formal legal process would disclose - to the courts,  the public, and the media - that Better Care violated contractual reps & warranties and falsely charged an elderly citizen on ********** representations. This approach would be excellent because I, unlike Better Care, have nothing to hide. Whereas I have uploaded plenty of WRITTEN EVIDENCE, Better Care has made baseless claims with ZERO written evidence. This would be immediately clear to any member of the BC judiciary (judge, jury, or arbitrator).
  

  Under the legal procedure known as "discovery process", Better Care would be legally obligated to disclose its original cost, along with all relevant documents. Is Better Care ready for the public of this province to see just how much the company actually paid for the replacement parts?

  
  This case is particularly confounding, since the company’s own employee (a person called Itamar) self-confessed IN WRITING over email on April 28. Itamar confirmed Better Care’s contractual reps & warranties for this project IN WRITING (i.e. the replacement parts were quoted and sold to me “at cost”). However, Better Care continues to refuse to provide proof of original cost: what is the company trying to hide?

  
  (Note: The company’s/Itamar’s WRITTEN SELF-CONFESSION over email has already been PDFed and uploaded to this portal as documented proof.)

  
  The only party in this dispute “without proof” right now is Better Care, whose fictitious claims are backed by ZERO written evidence. In a feeble act of desperation, the company decided to respond with an incoherent rant to try to shut down this complaint (again, zero written evidence uploaded): perhaps this is how Better Care typically talks to their customers? When the time comes, Better Care's unhinged rant may also be submitted as evidence to the BC legal system (at which point it will be publicly available to the public/media - the good citizens of BC will see with their own eyes what type of people work at Better Care).

  
  For your consideration, here is a summary of key facts (all of which are supported by WRITTEN EVIDENCE that I have uploaded):

  
  1) Better Care claimed that I did not pay. This has been 100% proven false with screenshots of payment confirmations & invoices (written evidence already uploaded).

  
  2) Better Care claimed that they never used the words “at cost”. This has been 100% proven false with email evidence, where a company employee called Itamar confessed IN WRITING that the parts were quoted and sold “at cost” (written evidence already uploaded).

  
  3) Better Care claimed that the definition of “at cost” is Better Care’s resell price. This has been 100% proven false by *************** and every other English dictionary on this planet (written evidence copy & already pasted in my last response).

  
  It is now legally beyond a reasonable doubt that Better Care violated contractual reps & warranties and overcharged me on a ********** basis. The company/Itamar confirmed IN WRITING that the replacement parts were quoted and sold “at cost”, but the company has continued to refuse to provide proof of original cost. Again, one must now wonder: what is the company trying to hide?

  
  I proposed a very simple solution to the company weeks ago via email: honour the original contractual reps & warranties, provide proof of original cost, and issue a partial refund so the final charge is actually “at cost”. Itamar and the company have continued to refuse to provide proof of the replacement part's original cost. Over the past few weeks, Itamar of Better Care has dug the company into a deep legal hole with self-incriminating emails (PDF of the email has already been uploaded to BBB). You would think that a reasonable honest business would own up at this point and honour the original contractual reps & warranties.

  In essence, a fair solution had already been proposed, but Itamar/the company has failed to embrace it (despite the fact that we have Itamar’s WRITTEN SELF-CONFESSION in writing).
  

  The only “bullying” here is that of myself, an elderly citizen who was ************ charged by the company’s false contractural reps & warranties.
  

  Business Response

  Date: 21/11/2024

  Hello, 
  
  Unfortunately, we were unable to reach a resolution with this client, as he declined our refund offer. The information he provided is partially true; however, he was not present when our technicians performed the service, but his parents were present during the service.
  
  We reserve the right to set our prices as we see fit, especially since we provide a warranty in case of failure. Additionally, we do not force clients to proceed with the work. We clearly present the recommended course of action before moving forward with any service.
  
  
  
  Thank you,
  
  Itamar