Complaints

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:03/05/2025

  Type:Order 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.

  Recommended by insurance carrier as remediation provider. Left the structural wall in disrepair and me with a stop work order. I haven't heard from them since and continue to try to get my money back. Please see pictures for what this companies views as a structurally sound repair for a multistory condo structural wall. They should have their contractors license taken because they closed the wall when i complained the work wasn't to code.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/09/2025

   

  Below is a factual and professional High-Level summary of the events and actions taken by Paul Davis Restoration concerning Job #****** for Mrs. ********** *******, following the fire loss at her property, as well as the resolution of the matter:

  ---

  Timeline of Events

  1. Initial Authorization and Delayed Work Start
  • Date of Loss: July 1, 2024
  •  
  • Work Authorization Signed: August 8, 2024, by homeowner ********** *******.
  • Start Delay: The homeowner requested that work not begin until October 23, 2024, due to personal reasons.
  2.  
  3. Concerns Raised by Homeowner
  • On October 25, 2024, Mrs. ******* requested a supervisor to evaluate work she felt was "not up to the standard of ******."
  • On October 26, 2024, the Construction Project Director visited the site to review compliance with city ordinances, permits, and the approved scope of work per *********** Insurance. It was confirmed that all work was performed accurately per the approved estimate.
  4.  
  5. Communication and Work Delays
  • After the onsite visit between the Construction Project Director and Mrs. *******, multiple attempts were made to contact Mrs. ******* daily between October 26, 2024, and November 6, 2024, to coordinate work resumption of work. She responded on November 6, 2024 at 9:51am, and requested work to begin at 11:00 AM the same day.
  • After a brief resumption of work on November 6, 2024, Mrs. ******* requested the team leave due to a personal emergency. The team at this point had only been onsite for 3 hours and 24 minutes. She subsequently cancelled scheduled work on November 7, 2024, and requested rescheduling for November 8, 2024.
  • Despite further attempts to contact her daily, Mrs. ******* remained unresponsive until November 12, 2024, when she requested copies of permits, documentation, and scopes, which were promptly provided to her and her insurance carrier. She requested we remain offsite until she authorizes again as she was conducting her own online research. Paul Davis continued to reach out daily to continue to schedule and align with Mrs. *******, however, efforts remained unresponsive until November 15, 2024, when contact was made by ********* ******* to continue work. 
  6.  
  7. Cease Work Request and Insurance Involvement
  • Work continued under supervision from the Project Manager and Construction Project Director for a week with no additional concerns raised by Mrs. ******* or *********** Insurance.
  • On November 22, 2024, Mrs. ******* contacted *********** with the following complaints to which *********** shared those complaints with Paul Dais in transparency in the claims portal:
  • She believed "corners were cut" based on her own online research.
  1. Electrician used an outlet to test the power to which she did not authorize 
  2. She expressed line items within the permit pulled to complete approved estimated work did not match her researched information
  3. She was frustrated with perceived communication delays and the timeline and blamed Paul Davis for delays thus far.
  4. She wished to cease work and part ways with Paul Davis, requesting reimbursement for incomplete work to finish work with her contractor of her choosing.
  • A cease work order was issued on November 22, 2024, and Paul Davis immediately halted all work leaving the jobsite.
  8.  
  9. Resolution with Insurance Carrier and Homeowner
  • Paul Davis maintained regular communication with *********** from November 22, 2024, to December 17, 2024, while awaiting further direction while *********** communicated with Mrs. ******* to acquire photographs of her concerns and complaints.
  • On December 17, 2024, *********** received photos and a detailed list of via Excel of concerns from Mrs. *******. That Excel sheet was shared with Paul Davis in the claim's portal for review. Paul Davis reviewed her concerns collaboratively with ***********.
  • On December 23, 2024, after legal review though Paul Davis corporate, Paul Davis and *********** agreed to return funds for incomplete work and part ways with Mrs. ******* as requested.

  ---

   

  Financial Reconciliation

  • December 23, 2024, 2:20 PM: The insurance carrier agreed to issue payment to Paul Davis for completed work and authorized Paul Davis to refund Mrs. ******* for the difference in incomplete work. Paul Davis was instructed to revise the original estimate for peer review to reflect the work actually completed, which included only exterior siding materials and electrician service fees.
  • December 23, 2024 - January 22, 2025: Negotiations occurred between the carrier and Mrs. ******* regarding several items in the original estimate. Paul Davis did not participate in these discussions as they awaited approval of the revised estimate.
  • January 22, 2025, 5:46 PM: The new estimate for the completed work was approved.
  • February 10, 2025, 1:31 PM: Paul Davis was informed that estimate finalizations were starting and that Mrs. ******* had hired another contractor who was now on the job site.
  • February 21, 2025: Paul Davis was directed to issue a refund of the customer’s deductible amount of $3,000, which was processed back to the customer’s credit card within an hour of the carrier's request.
  • February 12, 2025 - March 2, 2025: The *********** adjuster handling the claim went on vacation, during which time no updates were provided in the insurance claim portal regarding the revised estimate approval or claim direction for Paul Davis.
  • March 5, 2025, 9:58 AM: A different claim adjuster reviewed the file and asked clarifying questions to finalize payment and refund status.
  • March 7, 2025, 10:58 AM: The carrier's peer review was completed, and direction was given to issue a refund to Mrs. ******* for the difference of work not completed, amounting to $1,492.93.
  • March 10, 2025, 8:01 AM: The claim entered customer refund status with Paul Davis accounting.
  • March 14, 2025: Check number **** for $1,492.93 was issued to Mrs. *******, sent via certified mail for next-day delivery.
  • Outcome: Both the credit card refund of $3,000 and the check refund of $1,492.93 were successfully processed and received by Mrs. *******.

   

   

  1. Refund Details
  • $3,000 Deductible Refund: Issued on February 21, 2025, directly to Mrs. *******' credit card.
  • $1,492.93 Refund for Incomplete Work:
  • Approved on March 7, 2025, after ***********’s peer review.
  • Check #**** for $1,492.93 was sent via certified mail on March 14, 2025, and cleared on March 18, 2025.
  2. Total Refunded to Homeowner: $4,492.93

  ---

  Conclusion

  Paul Davis Restoration followed all necessary protocols to ensure work was completed in compliance with city ordinances and the approved insurance estimate. Despite the challenges and delays caused by communication and coordination with the homeowner, we worked diligently with *********** Insurance to reach a resolution. All refunds were processed promptly and confirmed as received by Mrs. *******.

   

   

  Summary of Delays and Communication Challenges

  •  
  • Customer Communication Delays: Mrs. ********** ******* experienced delays due to unresponsive communication, including canceled appointments and unreturned calls after initially postponing work until October 23, 2024 from date of signed work authorization of  August 8, 2024. 
  •  
  • Lack of Involvement in Negotiations: Extensive discussions between Mrs. ******* and her insurance carrier, ***********, occurred without Paul Davis Restoration's involvement, further delaying the project timeline.
  •  
  • Impact on Project Timeline: The combination of customer communication gaps and negotiations with *********** led to significant delays in the restoration process, which were outside of Paul Davis's control.
  •  
  • Commitment to Resolution: Despite the challenges, Paul Davis Restoration adhered to protocols, complied with city ordinances, and collaborated with *********** to finalize the project and process refunds for incomplete work.
  •  
  • Delay Conclusion: Overall, the delays stemmed largely from the customer’s communication issues and external negotiations with the insurance carrier, which Paul Davis Restoration could not directly influence.

   

   

  Complaint Details

  Date Filed: 3/4/2025 Date Opened: 03/05/2025 Date Closed: N/A Nature of the Complaint: Contract Issues

  Consumer’s Original Complaint: Recommended by insurance carrier as remediation provider. Left the structural wall in disrepair and me with a stop work order. I haven't heard from them since and continue to try to get my money back. Please see pictures for what this companies views as a structurally sound repair for a multistory condo structural wall. They should have their contractors license taken because they closed the wall when i complained the work wasn't to code.

  Consumer’s Desired Resolution: Refund

   

  Clarification of Cease Work Order and Responsibility

  Paul Davis Restoration is not responsible for any construction or work completed at Mrs. *******' property after the cease work order was issued on November 22, 2024. Upon receiving the cease work order, our team immediately halted all work on the property and vacated the job site within 30 minutes. Following the cease work order, Mrs. ******* hired another contractor, as confirmed by *********** Insurance on February 10, 2025. Any work completed after the cease work order was performed by this contractor and is not related to or associated with Paul Davis

   

  1. Structural Wall Concerns:
  • The claim regarding a "structural wall in disrepair" and that Paul Davis Restoration performed work "not to code" does not align with the documented facts. Prior to the cease work order, all work performed by Paul Davis Restoration was completed in compliance with city ordinances and the approved scope of work provided by *********** Insurance.
  • Our Construction Project Director personally ensured that all required permits were obtained, and the work adhered to all applicable codes. This was confirmed during on-site evaluations and in communication with *********** Insurance and shared with Mrs. *******. 
  2. Lack of Communication:
  • (Addressed above) Mrs. ******* asserts that she "hasn't heard from Paul Davis" since the cease work order. However, our records and communication logs indicate that we maintained consistent contact with *********** Insurance and the customer regarding resolution and refund processing.

  Delays in the resolution process were primarily caused by prolonged negotiations between Mrs. ******* and ***********, which Paul Davis was not involved in, as well as periods where Mrs. ******* was unresponsive to our outreach efforts.

  3. Desired Resolution (Refund):
  • (Addressed Above) Mrs. *******' desired resolution is a refund, which has already been issued by Paul Davis Restoration, as documented in both our internal records and ***********'s claim portal. At the time of her complaint filed with BBB on 3/4/25, negotiations of the remining balance owed to Mrs. ******* were still occurring between Paul Davis and *********** as noted above. 

   

   

  At the time of the complaint, Paul Davis Restoration was undergoing significant changes due to new corporate ownership and management. This transition included shifts in our office structure and the implementation of new leadership aimed at better aligning our operations with the brand's vision and values. As a result, our BBB response times were affected, and we appreciate your understanding as we navigated these changes.

   

  Paul Davis Restoration has acted in good faith throughout the entirety of this project. We complied with all city ordinances, adhered to the approved scope of work, and promptly issued refunds to Mrs. ******* once the cease work order was initiated. The delays and challenges cited in Mrs. *******' complaint were largely caused by communication gaps on her end and extensive negotiations with *********** Insurance, which Paul Davis was not involved in. Furthermore, any claims of improper or incomplete work after the cease work order are unrelated to Paul Davis, as another contractor was hired by Mrs. ******* to complete the project. We take every customer feedback seriously and strive to resolve any concerns promptly and professionally. In this particular case, we believe that the complaint lacks validity, as we have fulfilled our obligations and adhered to all necessary protocols throughout the process. With the refunds totaling $4,492.93 already issued and confirmed as received, Paul Davis Restoration considers this matter resolved. 

   

  We appreciate the opportunity to clarify our position. We value our relationship with the BBB and are committed to maintaining open lines of communication with both our customers and respected organizations like yours. Thank you for your understanding and support during this transitional phase. We appreciate your patience and look forward to continuing our commitment to customer satisfaction and quality service. 

   

  Once again, thank you for your attention to this matter. Please let me know if anything further is needed. 

   

   

  Hannah J*******

  ********* General Manager

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

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/16/2025

  Please see evidence of permit not being pulled by Paul Davis and they never called daily, I actually had to chase them for my refund and dispute with my credit card company. I was never refunded a deductible because I never paid one these people are certified crooks. I have kids living above and below me and this wall is the exterior wall to my BALCONY.  Ignorance is one thing but this is borderline criminally negligent. I will pursue other means or following up to ensure they don't screw people and get paid for it. They still have not given a full refund and the materials they cited were not delivered to the work site and the electrician they hired was ultimately fire from his company because he wasn't qualified and the electrician actually reignited the site of the fire by plugging back in a heater covered in caution tape with a fire Marshall letter not to disturb it into the outlet on the balcony to test it... And the foreman was never on site to supervise any of this because he moonlights as a real estate agent. These people are ridiculous and need to be held accountable. I am also disappointed in how quickly BBB has closed this given the lengthy and factually incorrect response. At least BBB got my name right.