PuroClean of Syracuse North

Jim dominates the positive reviews. Reviewers describe him arriving within hours of a call, sometimes at 5 AM or close to midnight. Tiffany said Jim worked directly with her insurance company after ice dam damage. Zen LaPointe noted Jim recommended options that worked better for her situation rather than upselling. Chaw Chaw used PuroClean twice and praised Jim both times. Dennis C came back after a second basement flood specifically because he trusted them from the first. Keith Davidson praised Jim's crew for efficient duct work cleaning at competitive pricing. Amy Zalla used them three times for two water backups and a vent cleaning. Edward Pack named Tony for a great initial phone call and Jim for arriving within 30 minutes with a 4-person crew. Maura Comerford named Luis and Ana for carpet cleaning that removed stains completely. Sam Lennon named both Kay and Jim, calling them calming and sensitive during a stressful situation. Multiple reviewers mention the crew leaving the workspace clean.

2 found across 67 total reviews at 4.8★. Mizz Ladi described a mold remediation job that turned into a two-month ordeal. She says James insisted there was no problem despite unhealthy conditions, and staff members were untruthful about claims of mistreatment, which she says she has video proof of. The owner responded with a detailed account: a third-party NYS licensed mold assessor handled identification, the company recommended the tenant not stay in the home during remediation, and post-remediation air samples came back excellent. The disagreement centers on whether the initial assessment was adequate and whether staff conduct was acceptable. Jeffrey Pellet, a Local Guide with 32 reviews, says he paid in advance for work Jim promised but never delivered, with weeks of unreturned calls. The owner responded nearly a year later saying the inspection work was completed and documentation provided, but the customer wanted additional photos. The gap between payment and the owner response, plus the delayed reply, raises questions about communication follow-through.

Both negative reviews share a common thread: the customer and the company disagree on what was promised versus what was delivered, with no resolution reached. The owner responds to both with detailed factual accounts that contradict the customer's version but does not offer to make things right or invite further discussion beyond a phone number. This suggest-and-deflect pattern contrasts with the overwhelmingly positive reviews where Jim is praised for clear upfront communication. The disconnect may reflect different experiences between the initial sales interaction (which reviewers love) and follow-through when a job hits complications.

Jim (GM/primary contact — overwhelmingly positive across 30+ reviews for fast response, clear communication, insurance coordination, and honest recommendations; named negatively by jeffrey pellet for unreturned calls and undelivered work). Kay Patel (owner — positive, named by Sam Lennon for being calming and professional during a stressful situation). Tony (phone intake — positive, named by Edward Pack for a great initial call). Luis (field technician — positive, named by Maura Comerford for carpet cleaning). Ana (field technician — positive, named by Maura Comerford for carpet cleaning). James (named negatively by Mizz Ladi for insisting there was no mold problem during a remediation job; likely the same person as Jim the GM).

Ask for Jim by name and get a written scope of work with specific deliverables before paying. Jim's track record across 30+ positive reviews is the strongest signal this company has. The two complaints both involve disputes over what was promised, so pin down exactly what you are getting in writing. If you need mold work, confirm the third-party assessor arrangement and get their name and license number before remediation begins.