SC
Samuel Cooper
4 days ago
My experience with Moody Heating & Air Conditioning began with a $30,733.82 agreement signed December 19, 2025, for a Carrier dual-fuel system installed January 2, 2026. The proposal included “No subcontractors,” a one-year 100% satisfaction guarantee, a financed three-year Gold Service Plan, and labor/workmanship coverage.
Within two weeks, the new system repeatedly failed to provide heat. Ecobee alerts documented failures on January 12, 13, and 15. During these incidents, my home was left without heat and fell below 50°F in the middle of the night three times. Other documented problems included a dehumidifier installed backward and an incompatible thermostat originally installed with it.
This began months of service and corrective work involving multiple technicians, senior technical personnel, and manufacturer representatives. Approximately 16 visits occurred before the first municipal inspection.
Although installation occurred January 2, the permit was not issued until March 23. The March 26 inspection identified eight correction items. I also obtained an independent Ragsdale inspection documenting gas, drainage, wiring, flue, airflow, conductor-sizing, sediment-trap, and other installation concerns. Its documentation stated that complete removal and reinstallation would be required to guarantee performance and included a $1,728 corrective-work estimate.
In April, after approximately 16 service visits and continuing problems, I invoked the satisfaction guarantee, requested cancellation and a refund, and disputed the financed transaction with Wells Fargo.
Moody offered to address the municipal list, but I repeatedly explained in writing that it did not encompass all independent findings. Moody also proposed involving Matthews Electric despite the “No subcontractors” term. After the system failures and numerous corrective visits, I no longer trusted Moody to continue working on the system.
A July 17 reinspection still identified three repeated items: unsupported crawlspace electrical work, missing cover plates, and condensate draining into plumbing. Moody eventually obtained municipal approval August 4 after approximately 18 service and corrective visits. That approval did not resolve findings outside the limited reinspection, earlier operational failures, delayed permitting, or my warranty and service concerns.
Another serious issue arose in records Moody provided from July 31. One invoice displayed two signatures in fields bearing my name; I did not make or authorize either signature. Another invoice from the same date stated “No signature” in both fields. When I asked about this, I was told Wells Fargo had said Moody could sign my name because the invoice totaled $0. I submitted the invoice and that explanation to Wells Fargo, which told me to file a police report. I do not claim to know who entered the signatures or how they were created; I am describing the documents and explanation I received.
Moody later told the Better Business Bureau the matter had been “resolved with the customer.” I never agreed it was resolved, accepted the outcome, or withdrew my requested resolution. Wells Fargo has again instructed me to resume payments while the dispute remains unresolved from my perspective.
After this history—including approximately 18 visits, three heating failures, eight inspection corrections, repeated reinspection items, independent findings, contract concerns, and disputed signatures—I have lost confidence in Moody’s workmanship and do not trust the company to service or warranty this system in my home.
My requested resolution remains cancellation and refund, reversal of the financed charge and amounts paid, and removal of Moody’s equipment at Moody’s expense with reasonable property restoration.
This review is based on my firsthand experience and records in my possession.