Complaint Rating:

Company information:
Dependable Locks, Inc.
United States

Warning...Do Not Use Dependable Locks, Inc. Little Rock, Arkansas

This past Sunday I contacted this office in the Little Rock, Arkansas area. I spoke with a very polite representative named Dante. I informed Dante that I lived 20 minutes outside of the metro area and wanted a quote before initiating a service call to my home which needed to be unlocked.

Dante told me that the rate was: $39.00 for the service call and an additional $15.00 for the basic unlocking fee. However, he stated that if the lock was more troublesome, the technician may have to try additional unlocking techniques which would result in additional fees. Dante explained that these additional fees would be detailed by the technician BEFORE unlocking the door. I agreed to this and submitted an order.

When the arab-american technician arrived, he never introduced himself nor said anything other than “which door?”. My husband quickly directed him to the door which he prompted unlocked without much hassle, turned back to his vehicle and wrote out an invoice for $149.00. This guy seemed totally aggrevated to be there to perform a service call. Zero personality or sympathy for our unfortunate situation.

Before my husband realized what the charges meant he immediately called the debit card number to the 1-800 payment verification center and drove away... scribbled together a joke of an invoice and asked for a signature (Total time spent at my home was less than 10 minutes). Seemed way too "scam-like" to me. Obviously he had done this deal many times before.

Today, I spoke with Ron in “customer service” about the price difference between the quote and the actual bill. Ron’s response was, “our technicians are able to charge a maximum of $110.00”. When I questioned him about Dante’s explanation of the fee basis, again he said: “our technicians are able to charge a maximum of $110.00”.

I think it is DISGRACEFUL that anyone is doing business this way. Taking advantage of a consumer in distress is totally wrong!