765 views
New Reviewer
0 comments
stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full stars-rating-full
1.4
Updated by user Jun 22, 2016

Noted in letter, they are deceptive in the estimating process which needs very high scrutiny if you use them, quantities are over estimated to inflate implied cost.

Original review posted by user Jun 21, 2016

Please find the following information for your use in working with Premier Pools and Spas.

I contacted premier Pools and spas, in the last few weeks of Feb., regarding a quote for a Pool, Spa and Decking at my home in Houston, Texas. I met with one of their representatives, Mr. Justin Ostrom, at their office in Pearland, Texas, just outside of Houston, on 25-Feb. at which time we laid out the pool, discussed the details, and generally worked out a deal on the pool. Note I had solicited 2 other bids from competitors, and was waiting on similar meetings with them, and was open in discussing this with Premier. I live in a town outside of Houston, called Seabrook, Texas, on a canal, and discussed this with Mr. Ostrom and was told that Premier was aware of the area and had built pools on the island. In this meeting, I indicated my budget, which was $70,000. Mr. Ostrom generated an estimate which was $84,000 for the pool from his estimating tool. He then told me he could do it for $76,000, then $74,000, at which time I indicated I would wait til the competitors got their quotes in make my decision. He then indicated he would go talk to his boss, and told me if I signed today, he would drop the price to $70,000. I agreed and he indicated he would work up the contract and meet at my house on Saturday, the 26th with for signature.

On 26-Feb., Mr. Ostrom met me at my house, and walked the yard, took various measurements, including elevation measurements, reworked his drawings that were the basis of the contract. I reiterated our discussion on construction pools in that area, as I was told they would need to be on piles or piers, due to the slope of the yard. Mr. Ostrom assured me had included piles in the estimate and was aware of that fact, and we signed the contact, attached. Also note, I indicated part of the reason I was agreeing to go with premier was that my daughterโ€™s graduation party was being targeted for 25-May and I wanted the pool to be ready for the event. Note at the time of signing the contact this was approximately 12 weeks away.

Please note I received an updated layout on 7-Mar., attached for review, which was followed by a meeting on the 12th of Mar., confirming what I believed would be the final drawings, in which I received an updated specifications sheet. In preparation for this meeting, I noted it appeared the decking was all the way to the property line on the east side of the yard, which I believed to be a violation of a deed restriction / easement, find my email attached which I noted should be a deduction in the price as the price was estimated based on the rendering tool, which had the east side of the pool in he easement. I noted this should be a deduct of approximately 8โ€™ x 20โ€™ of decking, if the pool remains the same size and it is moved. This will be discussed further in the email, as there are several instances in which Premier appears to generate estimated quantities from a software and associated layout tool, then after the price is agreed to they adjust the drawings but not the price.

On 16-Mar., Mr. Ostrom contacted me again, indicated he needed a land survey prior to submitting to the City of Seabrook, Mr. Ostrom indicated this was an adder to my contract price and I agreed to the addition to the contract price of $433, although I disagreed that it should be an adder, when he was told I did not have a survey, note I am attached screen shots of all text correspondence with Mr. Ostrom and eventually Mr. Steven Garcia, indicating my continuous requests for updates on status, which were not provided until requested.

On 18-April, note over 6 weeks after signing the contract, I received updated layout, denoting the changes required per the land survey and property easements. As noted above, this reduced the layout further as indicated above and no deduct in price was acknowledged. Also note during this time I started to see a trend in which estimates based on the initial layout were significantly changing the required quantities, so I reviewed the initial layout, and noted back to Mr. Ostrom and Mr. Garcia that the initial rendering and layout had decking on my slated patio and this needs to be corrected.

Also on 18-Apr. Mr. Ostrom the City of Seabrook was requiring a Professional Engineering stamp (PE) on the submittals. Mr. Ostrom indicated this was an adder of $1500, and I needed to pay it or Premier would walk away from the job. Note this is now $433 for the land survey and $1500 for the engineering PE stamp, and they have reduced the size of the decking by approximately 8โ€™ x 20โ€™ + removed the estimated decking on the Patio at approximately 10โ€™ x 20โ€™. I indicated they should adjust the quantities and associated cost down by the savings in decking and fill material due to easement adjustments and I would agree to pay ยฝ of the delta, which should have been a net saving to me. They indicated they had performed this calculation and my cost was increased by $700, which I agreed because I did not want them walking from the job for $700. Again, this will be elaborated later as this appears to be a tactic by the local Houston Premier organization that I believe is unethical. I also note that I am a degreed engineer and carried a professional engineering license in the State or Texas for over 20 years and it is my understanding that all products that the public is exposed to that requiring engineering are required to have a PE review and stamp, and either Premier is generally in violation of the requirement on a regular basis or they should be aware of this cost and include in the price. It is also my intent to present this information to the State Engineering board for further investigation.

On approximately 26-Apr., Mr. Ostrom indicated the Engineer was requiring a soil test, and that this would be additional cost to me. I was very adamant that this should be a normal part of any engineered pool and that no more adders would be accepted for this pool. Noting that it was my understanding that Premier was portraying themselves as a professional organization, that had worked in Seabrook, on this island and should be well aware of what is required to build pools.

Note Iโ€™m attaching several correspondences thru 20-May, in which I have continuous discussions with Mr. Steven Garcia on getting the soils investigation and test results status. Again, I reiterate and highlight the lack of communication with the customer in status of their investment and appears to be a lack of management of 3rd parties by Premier.

1-June, almost 13 weeks, after I signed the contract with Premier Pools, and 1 week beyond my original completion date, I received indication that the permit was apparently a few days from approval by the city. On 6-June, I received a note from Mr. Ostrom, indicating the city was requiring a layout drawing and he was working on it. Now 14 weeks after signing a contract, Premier is generating a layout drawing.

8-June, 14 weeks post contact signing, I received a message from Mr. Garcia that himself and the Owner were meeting the City at my house to review the layout and accomplish a preliminary permit walk. I was relieved that finally, 14 weeks after signing the contract, 2 weeks after my initial promise date, $1143 over the original contact price, we were proceeding with the pool.

On the afternoon of 8-June., Mr. Garcia left me a voice mail to call him. I returned the call, and Mr. Garcia indicated they had not realized that the pool needed a โ€œretentionโ€ wall, although it was apparently indicated in a land survey that I was requested to pay for, in engineered drawings that I partially paid for, in drawings submitted to the city, and after 14 weeks of effort as noted above, and after the yard was walked and measured by Mr. Ostrom, in addition to the surveyors. Mr. Garcia then proceeded, after all the above, and 14 weeks of my schedule, to indicate they wanted an additional approximately $25,000 to finish the effort.

I submitted a complaint to Premier Pools, which was forwarded to the Owner of the local company, Mr. Bill Unger, that essentially ignores the above. I demanded my deposit back, and they sent a partial approximately $4400 of my $7000 deposit, taking out their "cost", which they are not entitled to. I am currently seeking a lawyer to represent me against this company.

Reason of review: Poor customer service.

Monetary Loss: $2600.

Preferred solution: Full refund.

Premier Pools And Spas Pros: Unethitical business.

Premier Pools And Spas Cons: Unethical business, Wasted my time, Pressured contract closure.

Location: Seabrook, Texas

Do You Have Something To Say ?
Write a review

Comments

chat-icon

Please avoid publishing any personal information and promotional content

You will be automatically registered on our site. Username and password will be sent to you via email.
Post Comment

Premier Pools And Spas Reviews

  1. 32 reviews
  2. 5 reviews
  3. 4 reviews
  4. 0 reviews
  5. 1 review
Premier Pools And Spas reviews