In recent days, ms. Hu, a citizen, informed the newspaper that she had encountered a “maintenance assassin”: because of a toilet block, she spent $10 on a “shelter-proofing” service on a certain platform, and before she came to the door, the on-call repairer had been enthusiastically promising that “thousands of dollars would be fixed”, but in fact the offer kept “twirling” behind the door and finally charged her $4,700。
According to ms. Hu, the cost of this “nominal price” toilet is far too high. A number of citizens also expressed the hope that there would be greater regulation of the home maintenance industry. Journalists have recently interviewed professionals in this regard。
In recent days, ms. Hu's toilet pipe had been blocked, and she had spent $10 on a platform to find a co-town plumbing company, which had subsequently served ms. Hu to contact specific maintenance staff via twitter。
Shortly afterwards, a man in civilian clothes came to ms. Hu's house with two bags of tools. After entering the bathroom, he opened the toilet with an electric clinker, but without effect he sold ms. Hu a “nap concentrate solution” for plumbing. Ms. Hu stated that the other party had taken out a barrel of liquids without a trademark and offered an offer of “$380 per pound”, which ms. Hu had agreed to because she had cut the toilet。
Immediately thereafter, in front of ms. Hu, the master weighed the weight of the barrel before it was used and stated that “the sum of the pounds fell”. Subsequently, he asked ms. Hu to go to the living room and burn a pot of fresh water. When ms. Hu returned to the bathroom, the other party had already poured a large amount of solution into the toilet, amounting to 9. 7 pounds, requiring a payment of $3686. But even so, the toilet pipe was still unconnected. “he also recommended to me a ‘import of a liquid nitrogen gun’ and promised ‘a shot will work’, but it would cost almost $1,000, and i was trying to fix it quickly, so there was no trouble.”
As a result of the other party's re-operation, ms. Hu's toilet pipe was finally unblocked, and the final repairer reported a total price of $4,700 and requested a direct transfer instead of the platform. Ms. Hu stated that, while alarmed by the maintenance costs, the transfer had been completed。
After the other party left, ms. Hu sought a manual service through the platform and wished to complain about the “sky price maintenance”. However, since she did not pay for the repairs through the platform, the platform returned only the $10 that it paid when she filed the order. Subsequently, ms. Hu contacted the merchants, but the customer's uniforms indicated that the company was responsible only for billing and “uninformed and without the right to interfere” in the transactions of the maintenance staff with the customers. After the complaint was unsuccessful, ms. Hu went to the nearby police station for help. The police officer on duty made a call from the maintenance manager, who claimed that she had obtained ms. Hu's consent for the use of the various facilitation tools during the maintenance process, that there was a recording of the entire trip and that there was no “sitting price”. Finally, the civilian police found the matter to be a private dispute。
Journalists then contacted the guest services of a particular platform for information. According to the client service, the $4,700 charged by the maintenance master to the toilet was based on “a mutually agreed deal” and therefore did not meet the conditions for refund。
The journalist interviewed master xu, who had been involved in plumbing for 30 years. “it is likely that the so-called solution is that the hardware store can buy a whole bottle of hydrochloric acid or sulphuric acid for dozens of dollars, and that the principle of liquid nitrogen guns is simply to push the alien into the pipe.” master xu described the toiletization as generally supported by physical tools and downscaling. He stated that some maintenance staff would receive a high maintenance fee “to the point”. “consumers are required to determine a good price with their master before any maintenance is performed, and care is taken whether or not they are caught in a maintenance scam once the repair is re-priced or other payment instruments are recommended.”
(oceans)
