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:05/28/2025

  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.

  They were reccomennded by Any Hour.They came to dry out my carpets. They wanted close to five thousand dollars of work which I declined. i accepted their offer of 700 dollars and they went to work. The fans were left in our house for four days with occasional visits;no other work was done but just the fans running all the time. I asked another about the $700 and they ignored my comment. I thought that was wierd. They eventually picked up the fans and left-no mention of the stated $700. a week later I received a bill for $1800. I just feel scammed and taken advantage of. It is a curious case of bait and switch. I was told today that i will be receiving calls from collection services. This procedure is definetly wrong.

  Business Response

  Date: 06/04/2025

  We appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint and clarify the facts surrounding this service visit.

  Our technician, ****, initially visited the customer’s property and provided a comprehensive estimate for full mitigation services totaling approximately $5,900. The customer declined that scope of work and requested a minimal service option. **** explained that our minimum charge for water removal and flushing of surfaces—using our truck-mounted vacuum system and pressure sprayers—would be $750. That amount covered only the extraction and flush service and did not include equipment rental.

  The customer declined the extraction and flush and said he only wanted to rent drying equipment. **** informed him that the equipment rental—along with required monitoring visits—would cost more than $750. The customer did not object to proceeding, nor did he stop the work. To document the limited scope of service, the customer signed a Release of Liability (ROL) stating that no mitigation would be performed and that equipment would be placed solely to attempt drying without removing or disturbing materials.

  On the second visit, John Twomey personally inspected the site and found that materials were still wet, likely due to not having performed the extraction and flushing service. The customer stated he did not wish to spend more money on the loss and asked the team to remove the equipment. John informed the customer there would be no additional charge for his visit. Due to limited space in his vehicle, **** returned the following day to complete the equipment pickup.

  At no point during John’s visit did the customer mention a $700 agreement. **** also did not contact John to approve any special pricing.
  The customer signed the original $5,900 estimate and two separate ROL forms. None of these documents reference a $700 agreement. The Work Authorization does not list any pricing. The final invoice reflected a reduced total: although equipment remained on-site for four days, the customer was only billed for three days and charged two monitoring fees instead of four. These discounts were clearly itemized on the invoice.

  There is no documentation—from our technicians or the four signed documents—indicating any agreement for a $700 flat rate. The first time this amount was mentioned was after the customer received the final invoice.

  We are transparent and fair in our billing practices and believe the charges applied reflect that. Based on the documentation and events, the invoice was already reduced appropriately and in good faith.