Complaints

This profile includes complaints for EcoWater of Central California's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

EcoWater of Central California has 3 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

• 

  EcoWater of Central California

  287 W Fallbrook Ave Ste 101 Fresno, CA 93711-6149

  
• 

  EcoWater of Central California

  10463 Grant Line Rd Ste G106 Elk Grove, CA 95624

  
• 

  EcoWater of Central California

  1241 Johnson Ave PMB 116 Sn Luis Obisp, CA 93401

  

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:03/20/2025

  Type:Service or Repair 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.

  To Whom It May Concern,

  
  

  I respectfully disagree with the companys response and wish to clarify the following:

  
  

  At no point prior to the technicians visit was I made aware that I would be charged a $150 diagnostic fee regardless of the warranty status. My understanding, based on the conversation with the representative when I scheduled the appointment, was that if the issue was determined to be under warranty, it would be covered in full. There was no clear disclosure that a fee would still apply even if the part was under warranty.

  
  

  Furthermore, I was not presented with any written documentationeither electronically or in personstating this policy before or during the visit. If this is a standard company policy, it should be clearly communicated and documented prior to scheduling service.

  
  

  To say that I agreed to the $150 charge is misleading. You cannot obtain agreement on terms that were never fully disclosed. Had I known that the service call would incur a charge regardless of warranty coverage, I may have chosen a different course of action.

  
  

  I am simply asking for transparency and fairness in the handling of this matter. I believe I was misled due to the lack of full disclosure and, therefore, should not be held responsible for a fee I was unaware of.

  
  

  Sincerely,

  ******** *****

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/28/2025

  All our installs are completed by qualified installers who plumb each of our units according to the California Plumbers Code.  Mr. ****** whole home unit was installed April 30, 2018 and has been verified numerous times that it was in working order.  When a customer requests a diagnostic visit, the fee charged to show up at the house is $150.  At that visit, the technician evaluates the situation and if the part is not under warranty, they are charged for the part, in addition to the diagnostic charge.
  In this case, the parts were under warranty and Mr. ***** was not charged for them.  He was only charged for the visit.  *********** policy is before any new service is scheduled, any outstanding balances owed must be paid.  This policy is common in any service-based business.
  Mr. ***** requested a diagnostic service call.  He was aware of the charge before we arrived at his home.  The service was completed and Mr. ***** was not charged for any parts (the replacement wire for the unit) because the power cord was under warranty.  Mr. ***** refused to pay what he agreed to pay for the service call.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/14/2025

  On October 11, 2024, our customer service rep *** received a telephone call from Mr. ***** requesting service.  A service appointment was scheduled specifically for a diagnostic on his water softener.  At 9:27am the pricing for $150 was confirmed for a diagnostic inspection of the unit.  Further conversation regarding the warranty was explained.  There was a clear understanding should there be a part requiring replacement, and covered under warranty, an additional cost of $68 would be incurred for the labor of replacing the part, but the part would be covered under warranty at no charge.  The unit has been installed since April 30, 2018 and Mr. ***** has been receiving annual service every year, with the pricing always being confirmed at the time of the appointment set..

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/17/2025

  Thank you for the response regarding the October 11, 2024 service call. I would like to clarify my position based on my recollection of the conversation with your representative.
  
  I was told there would be a $150 diagnostic fee, which I understood would apply only if the issue was not covered under warranty. I was explicitly told that if the unit was found to be under warranty, it would be taken care ofmeaning both the parts and associated service. At no point was I informed that I would still be responsible for the $150 fee regardless of warranty coverage, nor was I told about any additional $68 labor charge.
  
  Had it been clearly communicated that I would be charged the $150 diagnostic fee even if the part was under warranty, I would have questioned the purpose of having a warranty at all, and likely would not have moved forward with the appointment.
  
  I believe there was a miscommunication or lack of transparency during the scheduling of this service. I was not given any documentation or written confirmation of these charges ahead of time, and no such paperwork was presented during or after the technicians visit.
  
  I respectfully request a review of this matter and consideration for a resolution based on the lack of full disclosure prior to service

• Initial Complaint

  Date:08/22/2024

  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.

  On August 10th, 2024, I signed a contract to install an eco water softener at my home for a purchase price of $8,690.00 before rebate. The agreement included a soap subscription and rebate of 15%($1,303.50) to be issued after installation. Installation occurred on August 17th.I have requested the paperwork for the soap subscription multiple times, and the representative (*****************************) has canceled the appointment multiple times.I have been provided false, inaccurate information as well. ***************************** stated my desired installation location should be no prob. On installation day the installer said it would not be possible. ***************************** also stated the rebate takes 14 days; however, the billing department told me 6-8 weeks.As of today, August 22nd, 2024, I am still waiting to receive the soap subscription paperwork or information about when I should receive the rebate check of $1,303.50. I asked ***************************** about the initial system settings, and he said they are set by the installer based on the initial water testing at my home. Water testing was never conducted. Screenshots of text messages with ***************************** have been provided as evidence of conversations and false statements he made.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 09/03/2024

  We reached out to ******************** on Thursday, August 29th and was requested to make arrangements to deliver rebate check, test the water and inpect the unit on Tuesday, September 3rd due to the Labor Day holiday.  All terms of the contract will be fulfilled by Ecowater of Central California.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:11/29/2023

  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.

  EcoWater of Central California ************************************************************* Phone ************ Invoice 95548A Approximately a year ago, I had my system serviced due to filling up with water. At that time the venturi was not working correctly, (even though it had all been serviced a short time before). At that time I was told that the face plate was not working but it is under warranty. I called EcoWater to inquire about the faceplate and asked if I was going to have to pay another service call for them to come out and fix it. *** said she would call me back. I never received a call back and found that the tank was again filling with water. I used the bypass valve and shut the system off, thinking that I would hear from EcoWater and they would take care of it.Now, nearly a year later, I get a call from ***** at EcoWater and it is again time for service of my system. I explained to ***** about the faceplate, and that I had never been called about it and that because it was not working correctly, that I put it in by-pass mode. She said she would make sure that the correct part came out. *** came to do the service, 11-13-23 m which included 375 membrane, annual R/O service which I then received and additional bill for $68 to pay for the warranty work. I emailed twice requesting and explanation why I am being billed for something that is under warranty. I never received and explanation, but I did receive another invoice for $68. I called, and again spoke with ***, I never received an explanation. The exchange of the faceplate amounted to unplugging the old one and plugging in the new one. I was presented with a bill for $388.45, which I paid on the spot. Unless I receive and explanation why I am being billed additional money for warranty work, I do not intend to pay this additional bill. An explanation would include that the company charges EcoWater for this service, or does not pay for this service in writing

  

  Business Response

  Date: 11/30/2023

  The customer was incorrectly being billed for the service rendered and the accounting adjustment has been made.  EcoWater of Central California has removed the service charge of $68 attached to the warranty part for the service call on November 13, 2023.  Any future service calls that include warranty parts will have a service charge attached.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/13/2023

  Type:Service or Repair 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.

   I am rejecting this response because:
  
  
  When I spoke with the first caller I mentioned I never signed up for anything and there was no “****”. She mentioned that she mis-dialed and stated the number she meant to call ended in 6606 not my number. Once I mentioned that it was the wrong number she then asked if I was interested in their product. I currently reside in an apartment but I am a homeowner. Nevertheless, I will be seeking legal assistance as I received another call after requesting to be removed. My husband received the same calls as well from the same number asking for “****”.

  ********, the lady stated she was calling from EcoWater and asked to speak to "****" regarding water testing. I told her she had the wrong number and requested that they remove my phone number. She apologized and stated she would.
  
  Again, today on 04/13/23 at 12:30pm I received a missed call. At this point, this is harassment and a wrong number TCPA violation. At this point I want to be removed from their call list and I am requesting to be paid $1,500.00. I will seek legal counsel if this cannot be resolved.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/19/2023

  Our records show J. ******, our lead generator at the Clovis Costco Store received the name "****" and the phone number (**** ******** on March 1, 2023.  On April 6, 2023, our appointment setter finally made contact with the complainant.   Ms. Carrillo told our office we had a wrong number.  The number was taken off our list.

  Our appointment setter will call each lead signed up at a Costco Warehouse each day for 14 days.  Those who have not responded will be called over a period of a couple of months, or until the lead sets an appointment, or states they are no longer interested in water treatment.

  When a message is left for a prospect, or he/she calls the office to not call anymore, our staff will not call that number again.

  The complainant appears to live in an apartment.  Our appointment setter would have never called a "non-homeowner" if she would have known.  No appointment is ever set with individuals who do not own their home.

  The TCPA (Telephone Consumer Protection Act) does not apply here.  The name and phone number was given to a lead generator.  Staff called the number given to them.

  Once the appointment setter found out the complainant was a renter, the number was marked off and would not be called again, just as we do with all leads who are not homeowners.

  Based on our investigation, the complainant did not receive an unsolicited phone call; once the appointment setter found out she was a renter, no further contact was made; and the facts show no TCPA violation occurred.