This is the story of Pearl, a permanently disabled single mother who contracted with The Master Craftsman to reupholster her couch and armchairs.
Having learned about The Master Craftsman through a display at a local mall, she decided to have her furniture made over after many years of enjoyment. She talked to a sales representative who came to her house to give her an appraisal of her furniture's potential worth and an estimate for its restoration.
After viewing her couch and chairs, The Master Craftsman's sales rep told Pearl that the "best replacement" furniture would cost her $14, 000; certainly motivating her to chose the reupholstery option that he estimated at the relatively small amount of $5737.92 (relative, that is, to the highly inflated and dubious $14, 000 figure).
Now, it is important to know that Pearl, having been disabled at work a number of years before, lives on a long-term disability pension a pension she had to fight for in the face of an employer who wanted nothing more than to cut her loose after two years on long-term disability. That means that Pearl lives on a budget, and does not have the luxury of a discretionary fund with which to live "high on the hog."
Pearl made it clear that as a disabled person living on a limited disability pension, she likely could not find financing and could not afford the interest payments in any case. She proposed to the Master Craftsmans sales rep to pay $200 monthly. The sales rep assured her that that would be absolutely fine.
With that assurance, Pearl signed on for what was to become not the Tunnel of Love, but the House of Horrors.
After having signed up for a renewal of her furniture, Pearl found out that several additional expenses that had not been mentioned in the initial estimate were recommended.
First, while the furniture was in the shop, Pearl was informed by phone that there would be an additional $1350 added to the cost of the job to add new springs and backing. She was led to understand at the time of the in-home estimate process that this cost was included in the initial estimate.
Second came a phone call from The Master Craftsman service representative "Jeff" asking for additional $450 for Scotchcguard, She declined this because she had not been previously informed and could not afford this addition to the bill.
This was not enough. When the couch and two chairs were delivered, Pearl would not accept return because the job had not been done right. No piping had been included in the seams, and the cushions were not symmetrical. They were returned for completion.
Then, while the furniture was still in The Master Craftsman's shop, and weeks after her proposal to pay in instalments was accepted by TMC's sales rep, in the process of negotiating the contract, Pearl received a phone call from a Mr. Bernard Burke, stating that the $200 per month "budget plan" would not be acceptable to The Master Craftsman and a further payment of $1500 would be required to complete the work on her furniture, forcing Pearl to seek financing with interest. Until financing was confirmed, Pearl's furniture was at the shop. Pearl had to turn to friends for loans as she could not find institutional financing.
After months of this dance routine, Pearl's furniture was finally delivered to her home. When she woke up the next morning, she began to notice poor quality extremely poor quality.
Pearl notified a Mr. Shaun Wellburn of TMC that the sofa had been damaged, very poorly repaired and cushions not acceptably done. A rear leg of the couch, a "lion's paw" carving, had been broken completely off and nailed back in place off-centre, and with the nail sticking out of the wood. The couch would not sit level on the floor, as it had for several decades. Mr. Wellburn suggested that Pearl had caused the damage herself. As a disabled person, Pearl could not handle, lift, and move the furniture herself; making it impossible for her to have caused the damage.
Pearl wrote a letter of complaint to Mr. Wellburn regarding the vast difference in the in-home estimate and the final billing of $7087.92; the lack of good faith in negotiating the job; the coercive manner of adding costs; and the lies used by the sales rep regarding Pearl's ability to pay through a $200 per month "budget plan." TMC's Mr. Wellburn called to admit that the damage to the sofa must have occurred at the TMC shop, but he offered no help to have it repaired properly.
Pearl wrote to Mr. Norman McBride, CEO of The Master Craftsman, with a complete review of the situation including photographs of the damaged and poorly re-done furniture. In that letter, Pearl indicated that she had not been satisfied with TMC's effort to repair the poor quality re-upholstery of her furniture, and requested a refund of 100% of her costs, and indicated a 30-day response deadline.
Pearl received a phone call from a Ms. Kathy Smith from TMC, denying her request for a refund and offering only further repair.
Pearl wrote to Mr. Norman McBride, CEO, rejecting further work on her furniture by TMC, and reiterating her demand for a complete refund.
Having received a call from Mr. McBride, wherein he blamed internal problems with personnel at TMC, Pearl wrote, offering to reconsider having TMC refinish the poorly done reupholstery and repair the damage to her furniture, subject to three conditions:
1.I would want a senior person with your company to come to my home and discuss with me the state of the furniture repairs and how this situation developed;
2. I would consider having The Master Craftsman view my furniture the repairs necessary at no further cost to me; and then complete the repairs to set the situation right; and
3. I am willing to recognize our efforts to make good on your guarantee by accepting approximately one-half of the total cost to me, about $3500.
The ;Master Craftsman would not honour their guarantee of customer satisfaction by agreeing to this.
As a result, Pearl is making a formal complaint to the Toronto regional Better Business Bureau, after which she will be making a formal report to the Ontario Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, Consumer Protection Branch.
Pearl is also now asking for a complete refund of her money due to The Master Craftsman's refusal to honour their guarantee and due to their shabby treatment of her.
If there develops a class-action suit against The Master Craftsman, Pearl would love to join it. It is totally unacceptable that a vulnerable citizen should be subjected to such predatory practices as Pearl has been forced to live with.
Joseph
North York, Ontario
Canada
0 comments