Botched Installation of vanity counter top. Unsatisfactory follow up of complaint.
We found Countertop Solution via the internet.
At the time of the order it was explained that we would not install a back splash.
-The measurement for the counter top was taken by the installer personally, which we paid for.
- It was stressed again that no back splash was to be installed.
To our dismay the installer was in a great rush to install the top, ignoring the fact that the top was 3/4 of an inch oversized. Instead of taking it back to the shop to correct his error, he cut into the drywall to force the counter top into the vanity, therefore bowing the front of the vanity.
End result, the top is off by a 1/4 inch and the drywall is damaged.
The installer offered to patch up the damaged wall, but after observing the sloppy installation, we did not want him to do any other work in our house.
We now have no choice but to install a back splash.
We are basically told that this is a normal way to install a top even though the top was was oversized by 3/4 on an inch.
We are very disappointed that no effort was made by Countertop Solution to drop by and have a look at the botched installation.
The total bill was reduced by $ 50.--., but to this day no effort was made by the owner to contact us.
Buyer beware! Bottom line, total customer dissatisfaction due to a lack of follow up.
H in Ottawa
- Approximate cost of services:
- $847.00
- Company Response
I am sorry for the way the install turned. However the product ordered was delivered and installed as ordered. However the experience was not pleasant for the customer. We always want our customer to have a good experience with their renovation projects. We did take provide the customer with credit to try to facilitate good will and assuage his concerns over the installation method but unfortunately that did not occur. So to balance the review here is our side of the project:
-The customer was contacted promptly over every issue. The ‘lack of follow up’ that Mr. Buser refers to is the fact that the owner did not call personally to explain what had already been explained by our employees and did not make an appointment to see the job in person.
-The installation was not ‘botched’. Mr. Buser implies that the installation was not successful, where the job was finished with no complications that could not have been solved, by the installer, at the time of installation. Mr. Buser did not allow the installer to finish the process. The final product was still exactly what the customer had paid for and the satisfaction with the product itself was admitted by the customer. The customer was only disappointed in the process by which the finial product was installed and did not believe that the methods were efficient.
-Mr. Buser did not agree with cutting into the wall to fit the top, although this is a common practice in stone countertop installation, even with template.
-Mr. Buser complained about the gouges in the wall above the cut out, but would not allow the installer to repair them. These gouges would never be seen or pose a problem once filled and/or covered with caulking. The installer was not allowed to finish this process. Tiling the wall would not be necessary.
-When the installer removed the plywood top that was on the cabinet prior to stone installation, he discovered that the front of the box had two boards in its face construction rather than just one. Because of the nature of the sink requested, the wall had to be cut and the inner board had to be cut on an angle to fit the bow of the sink. Cutting ¾” off of the back of the top was not a viable option as the equipment needed to do it would also damage the sink.
-Bowing of the front of the cabinet was not initially brought up in the customer’s complaint and there was no picture given showing any bowing of the front of the cabinet in the group of photos sent to Countertop Solutions.
-Pictures of the alleged problems were provided to Countertop Solutions by the customer and showed no need for a home inspection to solve the issues. If the installer had been allowed to patch the small gouges and apply caulking to the edges, any idea of them and the fact that the wall had been cut would be undetectable, even with just a painted back and no tile. This was explained to Mr. Buser. His concern was not the finished product, but the manner in which it would be reached.
-But even though the final product would have conformed with the look that Mr. Buser had requested, We did take $50.00 off of the final bill to try to facilitate good will and assuage his concerns over the installation method.