Reviews by janew884

This review is for Brown Gouge Dry Cleaning, The Glen, Glen Waverley, Glen Waverley VIC

verified email - 12 Jul 2021

MY Jacket is returned from “dry cleaning” in EXACTLY the same condition: i.e.
The spot pointed out to the dry cleaner for particular attention is totally untouched, as is the rest of the garment!

SAVE YOUR MONEY !!
GO SOMEWHERE ELSE WHERE THEY MAY ACTUALLY CLEAN !!

This review is for Brown Gouge , Maribyrnong VIC

verified email - 12 Jul 2021

My Jacket is returned from “dry cleaning” at Brown Gouge, The Glen, Glen Waverley, in EXACTLY the same condition: i.e.
The spot pointed out to the dry cleaner for particular attention is totally untouched, as is the rest of the garment.

SAVE YOUR MONEY !!
GO SOMEWHERE ELSE WHERE THEY MIGHT ACTUALLY CLEAN !!

This review is for JIMS ROOFING, VICTORIA, License Numbers VIC 49543, Melbourne VIC

verified email - 15 Apr 2021

Australian Consumer Law says that goods and services must be fit for purpose.
The service I paid for was not received and is not fit for purpose.

Jims Roofing make quick easy $$$$$$: He said I must pay almost $600 “to pin-point the leak ingress, allegedly necessary before two obvious, small leaks in a well maintained tile roof can be fixed.

I had already showed the roofer the excellent, detailed Building Inspector Roof Report with photos, listing what needs to be done.
There was a very good roof restoration done 10 years ago; and now at the front of the house are visibly loose raised tiles at the top of a valley, with two leaks on internal walls under and beside this valley.

Pin-pointing of leak:
He hosed a small patch of roof at the back of house (nowhere near front of house valley) for approx 29 mins., but only on the other far side of the house (far side of the main ridge cap).
He then stated he could "not find the leak source": almost $600.

He 'offered', for almost $5000, to do a bit of flashing generally onto that roof area (obviously a major disincentive cost to fix two minor leaks), and stated this flashing is "unlikely to fix it" as he does "not know where the leak is from".
From the ground he pointed his torch generally at the middle (back of house roof) and said it ‘might' be around there but as he "did not know, it is unlikely to fix the leak", so he will give "no warranty".

He clearly did not want to bother, and suggested I get another roof firm, after first checking over his shoulder if his offsider could hear that.

I rang Jims Customer Service with concern that I had paid $600 for the leak “pin-pointing”. I had been told it was essential. And it was not done.
It was not done, even though he had previously seen the roof, the obvious leaks on the wall, and the detailed Building Inspector Roof Report.

I was blindsided to be told by Customer Service that he had now, instead, reported to Jims that he "did" find the leak ingress (despite only ever being on the other far side of the house).
He apparently told Jims the water ingress is now supposedly generally from ‘west’, 'when there is wind'. Unsurprisingly, no specifics were given. This is provably false.
He claimed he also hosed (same small patch) from the east: This is provably false.

Jim's Customer Service had the roofer ring me: A futile exercise in slippery sidestepping, and ‘re-read’ to me what he had now put in his report to Jim’s / me: an altered, rationalised version.
Again he said that almost $5000 of flashing would not fix it, because as previous, he did not know where the leak was from.

At no time did he attempt to look at the front of the house valley with obvious raised and loose tiles, with the leaks under and beside that. When I had asked him to look at the front of the roof valley area, he declined (was more interested in leaving).
This phone call was a futile, circular, disingenuous fob-off discussion.

He had seen the leaks, seen the roof, seen the Building Inspector Report, BEFORE insisting I need to pay almost $600 to “pin-point” leak source. And then did not.

I am a low income, elderly person.
This is a shameful rip off of the vulnerable in society.

Australian Consumer Law says that goods and services must be fit for purpose.
The service I paid for was not received and was not fit for purpose.
I have security camera verifications of the above.

Jim's has ignored my request for discussion or mediation.
I need a full refund.

Beware, lest you be 'Jim scammed' as well.