BUY PELLA AT YOUR PERIL

I have written before about customer service. How every business today will claim that “the customer comes first” and how few put their money where their mouth is.

Case in point Pella Corporation. On its web-site Pella claims to be putting customers first. It proclaims: “Pella is a family-owned and professionally managed privately held company. Because of this, we have a proud tradition of putting our customers first.”

Lip service! Let me share with you my experience with Pella.

In 2001 we built a new home to accommodate us in our upcoming retirement. A comfortable ranch, with lots of natural light coming in through 19 windows. The builder’s standard offering was Windsor or Andersen windows, but gave us an option to “upgrade” to Pella at an additional charge. We chose Pella thinking that it would offer us the highest quality product. Knowing of Pella’s Dutch origins, we were charmed by the thought that we would be supporting our own brand.

Our builder installed 19 Pella windows, of Pella’s ProLine Casement type.

Pella now knows – and so do we – that these windows were defective. In 2006 Pella has re-engineered the product to eliminate the flaws and ProLine windows installed after that changeover don’t seem to present the same problem.

The problem, in layman’s terms, is that the casement protecting the wooden window frame is found to separate from the glass, allowing water to penetrate the unit. Over time moisture will build up inside the unit and corrupt the wood frame. Pella offers a ten year warranty on these windows.

When Pella discovered the problem and re-engineered the product it did not notify existing customers who had bought its ProLine Casement windows. But it could not hide the problem entirely and its was confronted with a class action suit, Saltzman v. Pella Corporation, Case No. 06-cv-4481. The suit was settled in 2012 and approved by the court in March of 2013. This settlement is highly unsatisfactory and probably the result of Pella having much deeper pockets than the plaintiffs.

In the settlement agreement Pella did not acknowledge that the product they had supplied was defective. On the contrary, Pella CEO Pat Meyer declared in a statement issued in 2012 upon reaching the settlement agreement: “In the overwhelming majority of cases, our Pella windows performed extremely well and as designed”. She continued: “The settlement is designed to address the relatively small number that may have experienced a problem.”

This is a typical case where the company is more concerned about its short term financial performance than about the customer. Long term I don’t think that Pella can get away with duping its customers.

All of my 19 windows are defective. It took me a long time to get Pella to send out a technician to assess the damage, but when he finally came out he found that of the 19 windows 6 had to be replaced and the other 13 had to have the cladding and joiners replaced.You would think that Pella would come out and do the work at no charge, but think again!It will cost me $3,642.31 to have Pella repair the damage.

Pella is hiding behind the court sanctioned settlement agreement and offers only a 40% discount on the purchase price of replacement product. That is a deal I can get when I go to Andersen for replacement windows!

Pella should accept the court sanctioned settlement agreement as a minimum compensation for the cost incurred by its customers for ProLine Casement windows. If Pat Meyer is correct in her statement that only “a relatively small number of customers may have experienced a problem”, Pella should stand behind its product and hold the customers who do experience a problem with its windows completely harmless.

I am not alone in this situation. All you have to do is Google “Saltzman v. Pella” or “Pella ProLine Casement” and you will get to read a litany of duped Pella customers. 

One of my fellow victims left a highly illustrative comment in a web posting on June 4, 2013:

”I beg to disagree with Ms. Krafka-Harkeema (Pella spokesperson) when she says that the Pella windows in question have performed extremely well. I also beg to differ in her claim to addressing customer service needs. Our first window we had to replace at full cost. The remaining windows had started to rot out but it was not visible from the exterior. The local dealer did not even have the courtesy to make a site visit or direct our concerns to Pella Corporate. Instead of advocating on our behalf, it was basically “so sad, too bad” new windows will cost you X. It took over a year to get someone from Pella Corp to come and look at how bad the windows were and even then new ones were offered at a limited discount when the company admitted to defective products. Unacceptable when our initial purchase was a substantial investment with over 22 large windows.
Manufacturing defects occur, but not to stand behind your product at the Dealer level and or to be nonresponsive at the corporate level just reflects on the company as a whole.”

This echoes in detail my experience and I fully underwrite the closing comment.

What really gets me in this case is that Pella’s executive management has steadfastly refused to deal with me and my complaint. All my efforts to get management’s attention have been fended off and tossed in the lap of “Customer Support Specialists”. If Pella’s executive management does not own the function of customer relations, it cannot legitimately claim that it puts customers first.My case painfully brings to light that Pella just pays lip service with it’s “customers first” proclamation.

Caveat emptor! Buy Pella product at your own peril. I have found out to my detriment that you cannot rely on the expectation that Pella will stand behind its product.