Harris Fence

After discovering my review (of 2 years ago, mind you), the company posted an O’Reilly-esque harangue worthy of the Bush diaries (even giving themselves 5 stars!) Unilocal removed the post. Go figure.
Whatever the case, and since the best defense against libel is truth, I’ve added a few fact checks and a special bonus section for my fellow Unilocalers: PHOTOS! These pics show what they considered an acceptable finished product.
The company claims I was elated when work was done, yet refused to pay. Truth is: Several problems were noted during construction and were pointed out early on. I was told not to worry, let things resume with the assurance of, «Everything is fixable. we’ll tear it down and start over if we have to».
When construction ended and the issues were not only still there, but now compounded, the owner not only tried his best to minimize them, but expected me to make concessions for which repairs should be done. Like the infamous crooked area, which they’ve never really been able to explain, other than to accuse me of asking for. For the record, it was never about where the line started and ended, it was everything IN BETWEEN. Then again, what would you expect from someone who’d argue with a level? Yup, really happened.
Though true they were willing to perform some repairs, it was all about which ones were most cost effective for them. And when they finally grew hostile, I got a lawyer.
The attorney’s role was too hammer out an agreement which would’ve addressed the repairs needed, and a warranty stipulation, whilst ensuring the company would be paid in full when repairs were done. When greed grew impatient, they whipped up a lawsuit. I countered.
For those of you not familiar with small claims, here’s a quick run down: Judges have ZERO power to do anything more than award money from one party to another. In other words, they can’t tell somone to return an item or perform a repair. So in my case, and because I was countersuing for removal of the fence and a refund, the judge couldn’t vie in my favor. She instead used a formula which calculated defects vs. the amount of fence considered acceptable. In the end, she acknowledged the defects, proclaiming «The court doubts anyone would ask for a fence to be installed crooked, or without gates. Those posts don’t even line up».
She reduced the award they sought nearly 70%. So if that’s not sending a message … spin it.
In business, it’s fact that you can’t please everyone. But if you do a customer wrong, the responsibility lies with YOU to make it right, not shirk the blame. The biggest obstacle for these types is the indignant, self-​righteous inability to accept any suggestion they might’ve actually screwed up. Which, as you can see, they did quite effectively.
Instead, they resort to projecting. For some, repeating fiction long enough eventually becomes truth. In the end, they felt pretty good about walking off with $ 4k of my hard earned dollars, and nil accountability for the mess they left behind. And while that court ruling could’ve easily been appealed, frankly, any chance of them being ordered back for corrective work was sure as hell not worth it. It took a skilled contractor to fix that mess via complete tear down and reconstruction. The fence looks great now, no credit to them.
So really. If the customers objective was to get «something for nothing» (as they purport), then getting the damn thing fixed/​paying twice certainly didn’t make much sense, did it?
Enjoy the photos, Unilocalers.