Provider profile
Rare Restoration
Provider snapshot
What this listing says
Colorado Springs homeowners dealing with water damage who want a locally owned restoration company that handles mitigation through full reconstruction under one roof.
Best for
- Colorado Springs homeowners who need water damage mitigation and full reconstruction handled by a single local company.
- Property owners dealing with mold after water intrusion who want a company equipped with dry ice blasting and HEPA air scrubbing.
- Commercial property owners along the Front Range who need 24/7 emergency response with same-day arrival.
- Homeowners navigating insurance claims who want a restoration company that documents damage and communicates directly with their insurer.
- Landlords and property managers in the Monument-to-Fountain corridor who need a company that handles both mitigation and rebuild.
About this company
Rare Restoration is a family-owned restoration company in Colorado Springs, founded by Robert Yockel and Doug Weatherman. They handle the full cycle: emergency mitigation, drying, mold removal, and reconstruction. Their Google category is water damage restoration, but mold remediation and fire damage are core services too. They serve both residential and commercial properties.
Their mold page describes a six-step process: inspection with moisture meters and infrared cameras, containment with negative air pressure and HEPA filtration, removal with antimicrobial treatments, air scrubbing with HEPA systems and dehumidification, reconstruction of damaged materials, and post-remediation verification. They also list dry ice blasting for structural mold removal, which is uncommon for a general restoration company. They work directly with insurance companies on claims documentation.
The company claims 10-plus years in business and over 2,500 completed projects. Yockel and Weatherman run the operation and both names show up in reviews. They sponsor local events and coordinate emergency response with local authorities in the Colorado Springs area.
At 4.7 stars across 140 Google reviews, the rating is solid. The volume of 5-star reviews naming specific crew members suggests a company where field teams consistently deliver. The handful of complaints center on communication gaps after the initial emergency response, not on the quality of the restoration work itself.
Services
Service area
Headquartered in Colorado Springs, Colorado at 4655 Park Vista Blvd. They claim a 50-plus-mile service radius covering the Front Range from Pueblo West to South Denver. Specific communities listed include Monument, Castle Rock, Fountain, Security-Widefield, Black Forest, Briargate, Broadmoor, and dozens of Colorado Springs neighborhoods. The claim is broad but plausible given their staff size and 24/7 availability.
Review consensus
Jesus is the most frequently named employee, praised across at least eight reviews for restoration and rebuild work. Reviewers describe him as communicative, detail-oriented, and someone who treats homes with care. Kassie appears in five reviews as a front-facing representative who reviewers say genuinely cares and follows through. Earl shows up as a project manager who communicates next steps clearly and manages timelines well. Chris is praised repeatedly for fast emergency response, sometimes arriving within an hour and working late into the evening. Doug draws praise as a project leader who stays in contact via text and phone. Kenny earned multiple mentions for treating homes like his own during mitigation. Multiple reviewers highlight same-day or next-day arrival, often within one to two hours of calling. Several mention the company stayed in daily contact during the drying phase.
4 found across 140 total reviews at 4.7★. Mistie Pruitt, a Local Guide with 16 reviews, described a 2022 swamp cooler installation that was never properly secured and left unsealed roof penetrations. The resulting hidden water intrusion caused damage she estimates in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, requiring asbestos remediation, hardwood floor replacement, vinyl siding replacement, and nine months in a hotel. No owner response was posted. Katherine Williams, a Local Guide with 312 reviews, gave 2 stars after a flooded basement job. She praised the initial mitigation response but described scheduling failures during repairs: no arrival windows as promised, wrong materials delivered due to incorrect photos, and an unreturned deposit after she declined carpet repair. Darell Smith posted a 1-star review calling them the worst company ever. The owner responded that they have no record of this person as a customer and flagged the review as fake. The reviewer has only 3 total reviews. One additional 1-star review from a single-review account has no text.
The negative reviews reveal a split between emergency response and follow-through. Both substantive complaints acknowledge that the initial mitigation was fast and capable, but describe breakdowns in the reconstruction phase: poor scheduling communication, wrong materials, and in one case, workmanship that caused long-term structural damage. This mirrors a common pattern in full-service restoration companies where the emergency crew and the rebuild crew operate as separate teams with different accountability standards. The 25 percent owner response rate on negatives is low, and the single response disputes the reviewer's legitimacy rather than engaging with a complaint.
Jesus (restoration/rebuild tech — praised repeatedly for detail and communication). Kassie/Cassie (office representative — praised for genuine care and follow-through). Earl (project manager — praised for clear communication and managing timelines). Chris (mitigation tech — praised for fast emergency response and late-hour availability). Doug Weatherman (owner/project leader — praised for staying in contact and coordinating rebuilds). Kenny (mitigation tech — praised for treating homes like his own). Charles (restoration tech — praised for quality work on multiple jobs). Nelson (crew member — praised alongside Jesus). Zack/Zach (crew member — praised for rebuild and insulation work). Daniel (crew member — praised for responsiveness). Connor/Conor (mitigation tech — praised for water damage response). Derek/Derrick (rebuild tech — praised for talent and attention to detail). Sal (mitigation crew — praised for efficiency). Jyllisa/Jylissa (mitigation crew — praised for hard work on sewage cleanup). Tracy (reconstruction — praised for going above and beyond). Robert Yockel (owner — praised for integrity and honest recommendations). Kayla Miller (rebuild coordinator — praised for helpfulness and availability). Jacob (mitigation tech — praised for treating home with care). Josh (mitigation tech — praised for friendliness). Jose (floor work — praised for quality). Ray (mitigation — praised for being pleasant to work with). Phil (mitigation — praised). Freddy (rebuild — praised for quick turnaround).
Ask for Earl or Doug as your project manager and request a written schedule for the rebuild phase before mitigation starts. The emergency crews, especially Jesus and Chris, consistently earn praise for fast, careful work. Watch the handoff to reconstruction closely and get arrival windows in writing, since that transition is where the two substantive complaints originated.
Keep in mind
- Rare Restoration does both mold testing and mold remediation. A company that finds the mold and then sells you the fix has a financial incentive to find problems. Ask whether they will accept a third-party inspection report or if they require their own.
- Two of the four recent complaints describe poor communication and scheduling during the repair phase, even though the initial emergency response was fast. The pattern suggests the handoff from mitigation to reconstruction can slip.
- They claim a 50-plus-mile service radius from Colorado Springs, reaching Castle Rock and Pueblo West. For jobs at the edges of that range, confirm response times and whether trip charges apply.
- The owner response rate on recent negative reviews is 25 percent. Only one of four complaints received a reply, and that response disputed the reviewer's identity rather than addressing a service issue.