Lido Pools & Aquatic Services

Established since 1968, Lido Pools has secured a reputation within the industry for quality construction, innovative concepts and creative designs. We have won many national awards and the vast majority of our clients are very satisfied, so much so that we are 95% referral. We have done no advertising for over 15 years and sell out to capacity every year. We deliver a value added quality product, stand behind it vehemently and relish an opportunity to correct any shortfall.

In 2000, the principals entered into an agreement of sale and licensed the “Lido” trade entity to a purchaser for a 2 year trial period. During this period Lido Pools was a registered trade name that was operated by that purchaser, “Lido Industries Inc.” after which time it was to be re-negotiated pending the new entities ability to maintain the integrity that Lido had build up since their inception. I was an employee under contract for the “hand over” period and could not provide direction usurping the new owners. September 2000 to February 2002 is the timeframe involved, which in essence included the 2001 building season. The principals of this new regime opted to expand at a rate greater than they had the ability to maintain and the result was there were some issues. When it had become evident that “Lido Industries Inc” had these issues, the “Lido” trade entity licence was relinquished, resulting in the new regime deciding to dissolve their corporation. No other entity other than “Lido Industries Inc” has owned or controlled the Lido building company before or since that specific time frame. For the past 47 years, this 17 month period was the only time that the founding family did not have control of the entity.
Most all of these issues were minor with a couple that were moderate. The dissolution design included provisions for all of the clients to retain approximately double the amount of funds required to complete any outstanding issues. There were also provisions prohibiting the “Lido” trade entity from contacting the clients of “Lido Industries Inc” directly so unless they came to us after the re-acquisition was established we hadn't the ability to look after them. An unfortunate excerpt in our history but a valuable lesson learned.
Regarding Joel of Thornhill, we have not had one account of contact from him since 2001 until he had posted the review in Nov 09’. The review had contained inaccurate and incomplete information that in our opinion was libelous. We had contacted him firstly to enlighten him to our finding and to extend the opportunity for an evaluation to explore the possibility that there was in fact a bona fide complaint. He was quick to rewrite his original review excluding certain comments and declined our offer of evaluation. Certain important facts that Joel had neglected to include in his review:
• This pool was built in spring 2001 & was at the time of the review posting almost 9 years old, a few years old as initially described Joel claims that he wrote this review “only after a few years”. A few years, nine years, there is a difference & it is misleading.
• Joel had neglected to note that he never paid approx $7,400 remaining on the contract according to our records. Perhaps this outstanding balance was part of the reasoning as to why there was no contact from him over the past 9 years.
• Joel is not a pool professional & has only gathered snippets of comments made by what I can assume are the people that have worked on it over the past 9 years. This pool is located on Arnold Ave & is well known for being a low lying area susceptible to water. We have built many others in this neighbourhood, notably 2 just across & down the street that have their whole backyards underwater during heavy rain falls.
• Joel notes how we didn’t anchor the spa. It’s a fiberglass shell with expanding foam on the bottom; there are no hooks to anchor to. Installation includes putting it on a base. It’s simple physics, if the hydrostatic (water) pressure beneath the spa exceeds the counter balance of water contained within the spa itself, it will float. The manufacturer’s winterizing instructions note to empty the spa. We have developed a technique for winterizing these spas that includes refilling them over a membrane after the pipes have been prepared to provide the necessary counter balance. It is common knowledge within the industry that concrete and fiberglass pools should never be left empty and this spa is the same. It is our opinion that whoever winterized his spa did not provide for this factor and that lead to the lifting, not improper installation. If it had water in it, it never would have lifted. Even a heavy rain can lift them if overall conditions are not favourable and the spa water level is lower than ideal.
• Chips of cement beneath the liner; it is common in high water table areas that the liners can float in early spring time when the pool water level is low and the ground water high. This can lead to tiny particles migrating and this may have been the case here. The remedy is to remove the liner, clean and reset, not puncture holes and silicone. I know the difference and I would never authorize a fix as that. There were over 30 employees of the company and sales occupied 95% of my time. If the serviceman or other had elected to do that, I find that hard to believe but not having firsthand knowledge of that cannot affirm or deny.
• As for burying a backwash pipe; there was a phalanx of 50’ + trees boarding the entire east side where the pipe was instructed to be run. The attempt to minimize trauma to the root system resulted in the pipes not being as deep as he would have liked. With the tree protection laws in place currently, this would not be allowed at all.
• As for the plumbing on the filtration in the cabana; I’ll give him that, it had been redone because it was not the best but he also had us squeeze it into an area that was too tight so that he could maintain his cabana floor-plan.
• As for his pool slope, it’s NSPI code, so nothing wrong there.
• As for the pool cleaner, they were $400, they work on degree of randomness & get most places. They don’t guarantee that they clean everywhere perfectly. Even the $2500 ones don’t claim 100% success, they do what they do & that’s it. If there was an issue with the cleaner itself, it would be under warranty directly from the manufacturer.
• As for the interlock patio, we weren't even contracted to do it. Joel contracted this out to another source. Besides, it’s common knowledge that settling can occur over time, as well this case certainly could have been compromised by the existing water table.
• As for the payment schedule, the deposit is 15%, always has been, not 30% as Joel claims. Our contract is completely in line with all of the major players & in fact allows for a hold-back in excess of some of the biggest companies.
In conclusion, we had never heard back from him so how would we know he had any problems. He had a money amount withheld that surpassed what he claimed he paid out. Some of his problems are a result of uncontrolled water and age of the pool. Certainly we’d like to see this pool operating properly despite the circumstances and elapsed time. All he had to do is place one call to me to apprise me of his concerns & be reasonable as to solutions. Instead, there is no trial, only a conviction. As for percentages, there are 40 reviews, 3 negative, 1 relating to service that is completely erroneous, another that we took the fall for a referred landscaper. As far as a new build this review is the only one relating directly to us and it isn't us as pre 2000 & post 2002, it was us specifically the year 2001 when we did not own or control the company, the only excerpt in our history of over 47 years that we did not. To evaluate in an accurate context negative response is not 17%, it’s 2.5%. The reality of it is here the same as with any contractor, there are people that deserve to post negative reviews that haven’t and others that should post positive reviews that have yet to. It’s a matter of motivation and awareness. All of our responses are organic, we don’t instruct, they do on their own decision.

A “0” rating, we did absolutely nothing right? If the service was so bad why did this homeowner continue with us throughout the entire summer & even asked us to close the pool? From the onset, our service foreman, John, attended to this house in Bayview Hill, he had assessed the pool, equipment & surroundings & had discussed with the homeowner the procedures that were required to put the pool in proper working condition. The homeowner went on to tell John that he was unable to find a service company that could take care of this pool to his standards throughout the past many years, had specifically named approximately 5 of the most long established premier pool companies in the city & hoped that we would be the first.

John had informed me that this back yard is completely overgrown and un-kept. The vegetation has been left unchecked and more closely resembles a “jungle”. The interlock decking was old, un-level & had dirt & weeds growing up between the cracks. The pool needed to be drained, acid washed, re-plastered or at the very least painted. The stone coping was dislodged with few intact areas of grout where required. The tile work was in need of repair, or more appropriately replacement. The homeowner went on emphasize that only his wife swims in it & at that perhaps once or twice per year and that is why he neglected it & furthermore did not want to spend any money on it other than to nurse it along. He only approved the bare necessity of an acid wash & a pump as it too was in disrepair. It is most certainly true that there had existed an algae problem with the pool specifically in two main areas. This was a direct result from the garden soil running beneath the stone coping after any precipitation, bringing with it enough organic matter to cause more than just algae. This was brought to the homeowners’ attention & he was told that this problem would persist until the proper & needed reparation to the stone coping had been done. He was given a price & we were told that it was simply not in the budget. Despite the conditions that we had to endure, we had continued on faithfully every week throughout the summer with each visit requiring more than twice the effort to clean this pool. The client was advised in June that we would need to double the rate to continue on as the procedures took over twice the time.

Upon presentation of the final bill at the end of the season (as was customary with our regular clients), the homeowner basically offered half & then decided that it was a good time to complain about the service he had received for the past four months. At this point we had decided to fire the client, however, as a measure of goodwill in the send off we had told the homeowner that if he contacted us in the springtime, we would extend our cost price on the two items which he wanted replaced, I believe was the filter dial valve & the heater, both of which had been disconnected. He was told that we were not interested in doing any more work for him & that he could find someone else to install the items. We felt that he did not deserve this offer of value but opted to take the high road anyway.

We did not receive any further correspondence from this client until the following spring when this review was posted. In his review he noted that we had not contacted him, nor fixed the said items, the reality was that there was never a promise or otherwise from us to do anymore work there and he was to call us if he wanted the discounted items In retrospect we wish now that we did not extend that offer of value and instead just moved on cleanly in the fall time. No good deed goes unpunished.

Without doubt, this customers caption is not in perspective of the reality that had existed. Any reasonable person realizes that contracting in general can and does have issues from time to time. Often there can be extenuating circumstances, we rely on others outside of our direct control, suppliers, sub contractors, inclement weather, changes in work ordered, unforeseen/ unexpected problems that arise etc. It’s not the issues per se that become the problem, it’s how the company reacts to the problem. Certainly we want everything to run as smoothly as possible all of the time and furthermore realize the superior value in every client having the best experience along the way. It is for this reason that we exercise due diligence and strive to provide what we ourselves would want if the tables were turned.
The facts are as follows:
• The manufacturer made an error with the vinyl liner and had fabricated it to fit an 11' step as opposed to the 10 ft step that was ordered and built. They admitted 100% fault, supplied a written admission of fault and rectified the situation without cost. It was the busiest part of the season and with all of our efforts it did take over 2 weeks. The reality of this delay was in the end inconsequential to the homeowner as they had instructed us to not install the liner and fill the pool until the fence was installed around it because they have 4 children under 7 years old & 2 dogs, 1 elderly. This replacement liner was delivered and sat in the box for around a week waiting for them to install the fence. They didn't have the fence installed despite us arranging a top notch installer which they declined, and decided to do it themselves. We had arranged for them to buy the fence directly from the manufacturer at our cost. They had experienced a delay in getting the fence perhaps complicated by the fact that the homeowner managed to offend the owner of the fence manufacturer. We've not experienced that after working with this manufacturer for over 25 years. In the end, the homeowner instructed us to install the liner despite the fence not being installed and it had been weeks beyond that before they had completed it. It was a 20 acre parcel with other natural perils but still not a good idea.
• Regarding her comment on lack of communication, certainly we realize the value in meaningful communication as it is integral to the overall efficiency, accuracy and success of the project. She was apprised of all progressions along the way. At the point that the liner had to be remade she had decided to berate me incessantly, multiple times per day despite being given all the information that we had at that time. It was to the point of unrealistic expectation and became a substantial burden cutting into productive time. If you have the answer of the day, multiple more calls won’t change that.
• Regarding the landscaping component; we offer full service and also work with other subcontractors as hired directly by the homeowner. In this case we had referred a reputable landscaper that we had dealt with over the previous 5 years. The homeowner had contracted with them directly to install a modest surround including interlock decking and an Armour stone retaining wall. Unbeknownst to us, this landscaper had merged with another landscaper over the previous winter that turned out to be less than ethical and decided to bury the remaining unused interlock, approx 30 sq. ft. They were caught, and have been banished from our referral list. The homeowner had withheld $5,000 from him, many times more the cost of the damages.
• The homeowner had stated that "Every part of this project has had cost overruns or problems so far". The reality was that there was not one cost overrun, everything came in exactly within budget that was stipulated within the contract. They had ordered an increase in deck size, approximately 30% and their billing from the landscaper had reflected that. From the onset, we had provided a detailed drawing that clearly indicated the size, shape and position of the pool. On site meetings established the desired grade and the retaining wall was based upon that position & elevation. Upon commencement of the stake out before the pool excavation, the homeowner moved the pool location some 30 feet plus away where the grade drops off substantially thus requiring a taller retaining wall. They were aware of the costs involved for the change in volume to the wall.
• As for payments, she followed our standard contract which contains progress draws that reflect most of our competitors within this industry. The 4th installment for 10% of the contract amount is due upon the coping or the liner installation, whichever comes first. The coping had been done back in the fall & we did not request that draw until the springtime when we had resumed work. The liner issue subsequently followed, however the 4th draw was due regardless and we weren't aware of the liner issue until we had been instructed to install it despite the arrangement for the fence to be in place first.
In conclusion, we had followed up with written letters to her telling her that we wish to maintain amicable & ongoing relations. That we are committed to stand behind our product & for her to feel absolutely welcome in calling for any pool needs.