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:08/24/2022

  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.

  My HVAC had a leak somewhere in the system. I hired Logan Mechanical to diagnose and fix the problem. On 3/25, they recommended and performed a UV leak test with a follow up. Tech returned on 4/22 and passed the condenser and evaporator coils, indicating the leak was not in either unit. The lineset between the two units runs through the wall and tech suggested the leak is likely in the line if the units are not leaking. On 5/6 a different tech came out to inspect and recommended an additional follow on test. When I asked him why I should pay for additional tests if the UV leak test showed no leak in the units, he said "just to be sure". I requested a quote to run a new lineset and chose to not run an additional test without a stated reason. I suspect the business pushes customers to pay for additional tests. On 5/24 tech came out and stated that they had not performed the UV leak test and did not have results. He then tested the unit in the basement but did not go onto the roof to check the unit up there. He then documented the results of no leak on the condenser and evaporator coils, even though he did not inspect both units. I attempted to schedule a new lineset installation. In that time, Logan Mechanical raised the price they charge for refrigerant 33%. Via text message, I was told I could schedule the week of 6/13 with a signed contract and deposit. When a tech came to get the contract, I was informed that work could not be scheduled until the week of 6/20. Later that day the tech returned the contract and check and told me they could not perform the work because they "don't have the time or technicians" to do the work. After the refusal to perform the work, I contracted a new company to perform the repair. Based on the documented UV leak test results they installed a new lineset but the problem was not fixed because they found the leak in the unit. Now in addition to the tests already paid for and incorrectly performed, I have to buy and install a new unit.

  Business Response

  Date: 09/07/2022

  To Whom It May Concern:
  **** *****’s request for a refund was denied by our company because the series of events that took place where he felt a refund was necessary were not accurate. We originally visited the customer’s residence for a service call citing no AC. Based on findings (documented in the service ticket that **** uploaded, dated 3/25/2022) we performed a leak test to see if there was a leak in the unit(s). When a UV leak test is performed we inject dye into the system and return 2-3 weeks later to see if a leak was detected. When we returned to ****’s residence the findings indicated there was no leak detected in either the evaporator coil or condenser coil. This was documented in the service ticket uploaded by ****, dated 5/6/2022. Due to the fact that the lineset between the units was in the wall (and only a part of the lineset was exposed), we recommended doing the dry nitrogen test to determine where in the lineset the leak was. A quote was provided for that in the ticket dated 5/6 as well. In the documentation dated 5/24, it states that **** is the one who wanted a quote on installing a new lineset, not us. Our next recommendation was the dry nitrogen test (a $350 charge vs. a ~$4700 charge for a new lineset). **** also signed this service ticket with these details on it (including that the new lineset quote was requested by him). He wanted to move forward with installing the new lineset, so we moved forward with that option, per his request. 
  
  We drafted a contract and offered to pick up the deposit check and signed contract because he wanted to pay by check and our policy (documented in the contract) is that a signed contract and deposit must be received. Once received we confirm scheduling. **** was sending text messages to our administrative assistant that were rude all because we didn’t have immediate availability to do the work. Those messages are attached. ****’s indication that we were unwilling or unable to do the work is not accurate. The technician showed up to collect the deposit and contract and **** still proceeded to be rude about scheduling. The technician simply indicated that if he didn’t want to wait for our availability that he could take his deposit back and find another company. There was no mention of us not being willing to do the work, not having technicians to do it, etc. That was never said. We have a contract in place that clearly documents payment terms and he was well aware of that. 
  
  We did not find a leak in either coil/unit. If another company determined that the leak was in the coil (as he indicated in his write up) he wouldn’t have needed to replace his entire unit, they should have recommended just replacing the coil. He also should have provided that documentation that states the company found something different than we did. We never recommended replacing the entire lineset because we hadn’t done the test to determine where in the lineset the leak was. In our opinion, **** was upset that we didn’t have immediate availability to do his job (in the dead of summer where all HVAC companies are in their busiest times) and when he was rude to our team and we decided to return his deposit. What another company told him doesn’t mean our company was wrong in our findings and should refund his money. We did the work that he paid us for and documented our findings and recommendations.

  Business Response

  Date: 09/17/2022

  Hello, 

  1. Attached is the e-mail correspondence that clearly states a cleared deposit and signed contract are required before ordering of any materials and confirmation of scheduling. The customer was aware of this when he received the contract via e-mail, as it was stated in the body of the e-mail, and then confirmed when he asked for clarification. 
  2. We are not required to update all of our customers every time a price change / increase occurs. That is why we provide an estimate, so that customers are aware of the costs of things and can make a decision on whether or not they want to move forward with those costs. We again clarified the refrigerant increase when asked by the customer. If he did not like the increase he didn’t have to move forward. The cost of everything has been going up in all industries.
  3. As customer indicated, the scheduling and return of deposit check is a he said/she said matter. If we did not want to do the job or were not capable, it doesn’t make sense that we would proceed with sending a contract, try to speed up the deposit requirement by offering to pick up the check instead of have it in the mail (see this in attached correspondence as well) just to turn around and say we can’t perform the job. We offered to pick up the deposit check to help get the customer scheduled quickly. Scheduling is done on a first come first serve basis. We may have availability one day and that slot could get taken if another customer pays a deposit electronically and gets all signed paperwork back quicker than another customer. Not to mention availability and purchasing of any required material / equipment that might be required and a lead time on that. We offered our next available appointment and the customer did not like it. When he became nasty, we decided to just return his deposit and tell him he could find someone else who may be able to do the work sooner.
  4. Customer paid for a leak test and a leak test was performed and it was performed correctly. It’s a TEST, so it is to determine if a leak is present or not. The test was completed and there was no leak found in the unit, which we documented. The second test was our recommendation based on what we saw, and again, an estimate was provided so that the customer could determine if they wanted to move forward with the recommendation. They did not want to move forward with it and wanted the entire lineset replaced. To continue to say that we performed a test incorrectly is not accurate. If we perform a test to see if a leak is present in a unit, it does make sense to perform another test that will allow us to confirm if/where the leak is in the lineset. Either way, the customer didn’t want to move forward with that option, so we didn’t. 
  5. The unprofessional is that the customer mentions regarding ladders, timely responses, etc. was never brought to our attention by him as a concern. We responded to his requests/ questions in a timely manner and if he wasn’t happy with it since March, again, he did not have to move forward with working with us. We cannot attempt to rectify anything such as response time if we do not know there is an issue. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 09/29/2022

  [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
  
   Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  
  

  I am willing to put aside the continued unprofessionalism Logan Mechanical exhibits (not knowing what is on their contracts, name calling, accusations, pushing responsibility to hold their employees accountable onto the customer), their spin on the events by posing rhetorical questions instead of sticking to the facts(the tech returning the signed check and contract and saying they couldn't perform the work), and focus on the core of my complaint: the incorrectly performed leak test.  

  
  

  Logan Mechanical has not and cannot provide technical justification for their actions.  In the most recent response, they even stated the purpose of the test it is to determine if a leak is present or not. The test was completed and there was no leak found in the unit, which we documented.  The fact remains, they performed the test but couldn't find the leak, even though it was present on the sections they tested.  After charging me for the test, they then tried to upsell me on an additional test that they have not and cannot provide any technical justification for.  Additionally, and most egregiously, Logan Mechanical has not refuted the fact that the second technician ever went on the roof to perform the test.  To summarize the facts:

  
  

         Logan Mechanical claims that the test to determine if a leak is present or not was performed correctly

         The second technician, who documented the results, never went on the roof to inspect the unit

         After not actually performing the first test, Logan Mechanical attempted to upsell me with an additional test without providing technical justification for the expense

         The leak was later determined to be on the sections inspected and documented as not leaking

         Logan Mechanical refuses to take any responsibility and maintains that I should be charged for this work that was incorrectly performed. 

   

  The test, if properly performed as claimed, would have clearly shown there was a leak.  The technician never tested the unit on the roof but documented that the unit passed.  It is not the customers responsibility to make sure Logan Mechanicals technicians perform their work correctly, come to the job site prepared, document their work correctly.  All of these things were not done and that responsibility falls squarely and unequivocally on Logan Mechanical.  The fact that none of them were and I was still charged is not for debate and is the root of my complaint.

  
  Regards,
  
  *******************