If your insurance company is paying for all your water damage then the following may not be…read moreimportant to you but if you are trying to get a third party insurance to pay for it or you are paying out of pocket then you might want to read on and find a more ethical company to work with given, as you will find out, the large amount of money at stake.
We called out AAA when water leaked into our condo from an upstairs neighbor. As is typical in such an emergency condition we ended up with what the legal profession calls a contract of adhesion meaning basically: you agree to pay them whatever number they come up with for their service and you won't know how much until you see the bill. We were at the beginning of a 3 month long ordeal to get the third party's insurer to admit liability and settle with us. We could hold off on remediation and reconstruction but had no choice but to act decisively to stop the current water damage (basically dry it out) or risk the mold getting worse and spreading. We figured that logically this part, abatement, should be the least of the expenses, especially given that damage was primarily limited to one wall and part of a ceiling of a small (less than 50 sqft) bathroom and an adjacent hallway closet. Basically AAA's abatement process consisted of assessing where moisture was present, cutting a small hole in drywall near moisture to allow air circulation behind the walls and ceiling then setting up some scrubbers and a dehumidifier to dry them out, along with installing some plastic curtains to prevent any mold from spreading to other rooms which they did. Not exactly brain surgery.
While the area was drying, we discussed next steps with AAA in anticipation of the insurance company settling. This is the first red flag we encountered. The condo was built in the 1970's and it turned out there was asbestos in the ceilings and drywall joint compound. However, it turns out the AAA is not licensed to remove asbestos and wanted to bring in another company to remove it for some huge additional amount on top of what we owed AAA. In fact we never got an honest quote up front as to what the remediation would cost. We were intially given one number that believed was the total ($17,710) but turned out not to include the asbestos part then another number presumably including the asbestos part but they would never commit to putting in writing that they would remove all the asbestos for a given price until we were far beyond the point of wanting to continue to deal with them.
At the month mark, the emergency was over and we were no longer interested in a contract of adhesion and so we decided to stop work with them at the abatement stage and hired another company, ARG Restoration who, in addition to being qualified to remove asbestos, were completely up front, transparent and reasonable in their cost and did a great job. As for AAA, It turned out that for simply doing the abatement steps listed above, on a 50 sqft area, the charge was $15,881, over three times what the mitigation work by ARG ended up costing us.
Fortunately, the bill was itemized so I was able to examine how the cost had ballooned so much given how little labor was involved. It turned out that the majority of it came from charging us for basically "renting" the two scrubbers and the dehumidifer for over a month. (Yes, during the entire time we were waiting to hear from the insurance company to get the money for next steps until we finally decided to cut them loose, AAA had kept the equipment at our condo, a period of 32 days). It turned out that AAA charged $275 per day for equipment that, for the same period of time, can be rented from home depot for a small fraction of what they charge but we had a contract of adhesion so that's the rate we were stuck paying their rate.
The outrageous part, however, is that the equipment had actually been turned off and moved into the foyer by the occupants after 15 days yet we were forced to pay $275 a day for 16 days when the equipment was not even plugged in! I did not have to take the occupants word for it, SoCalEdison provides a nice graph that shows daily electricity usage and clearly showed the 15 days when electricity usage was significantly higher than average starting with the day they set up the equipment and stopping at day 16. It is also necessary to point out that AAA made regular visits to check the moisture and so they had to know the equipment was sitting there unused and yet blithely continued charging us for it instead of taking it away or at a minimum informing us we would be charged for it while it was on our premises. In fact, their tech finally made me aware the equipment was unused some 8 days after it had been turned off (based on SCE graph) at which time I immediately responded and told them to remove the equipment. Despite this, it sat their for another 5 days for which we were charged an additional $1375 before they were removed