|
|
Review 9/5/2007
|
I called Inline Plumbing because they were a local company and I thought they would treat me right. But they didn't. To be honest, if this review had an option for "0" as a rating, that's what I would've picked.
We had a clogged toilet upstairs in our house. The plumber showed up and asked us what was wrong, and I told him that the upstairs toilet wouldn't flush if anything other than liquid was in the bowl. I also told him that I had tried to snake it with my own 6-foot snake, and it would get hung up.
He asked if I wouldn't mind if he used my snake, and I didn't want to be a jerk and tell him to use his own tools, so I let him use it. It hung up for him just like it hung up for me. No surprise there.
I told him that a child used to live there and that it was POSSIBLE that the child flushed something down the toilet.
Then he graciously said that he wouldn't charge the $150+ fee for snaking the toilet because the toilet would have to be removed. He had me sign a waiver stating that he had permission to remove the toilet and use a camera in the pipe under the toilet. The toilet removal and replacement was to be more than $200, and the camera would be another $330+, and if he couldn't get the obstruction out, he would have to go in through the ceiling downstairs. I had resolved that if it came to that, I wouldn't let him do that.
So he brought his camera up and removed the toilet and invited me in to watch as he ran the camera snake into the pipe. Remarkably, nothing was there. Absolutely nothing.
So then he decides to check the toilet, which was at that time not mounted. He looks under the toilet and finds the obstruction in the bottom of the toilet. He pulls it out, then remounts the toilet and everything works great.
The problem is that he still insisted on charging me the $330+ for the camera that wasn't needed in the first place. I gave him permission to use the camera if it was necessary, but he failed to check the toilet when he pulled it off of its mount. That's the first thing he should've done. The order should've been: 1) Remove the toilet 2) check the toilet 3) check the pipe under the toilet.
If he would've checked the toilet, he would've seen that the obstruction was in the toilet and he could've foregone the camera and saved us more than 300 unnecessary dollars.
I then talked to a lady that day from Inline Plumbing who asked how my experience was, and I said I wasn't satisfied, and I told her why. She said she would pass it on. I had to call back today (three business days later) to finally get someone on the phone, who then "looked into it" and determined that the plumber followed proper procedures and that we would not get a refund for the unnecessary pipe camera.
I would not recommend Inline Plumbing to anyone, and actually my wife's business uses Inline Plumbing and has decided to choose a different plumber because of this mistreatment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|