Provider profile

911 Restoration of Fayetteville

Fayetteville, NC / 4.7 rating / 148 reviews / Water damage restoration service

9R

Provider snapshot

What this listing says

Fayetteville homeowners and commercial property owners dealing with water damage or mold that need a 24/7 franchise operation with insurance claim coordination built into the process.

24/7 emergency responseIn-house mold testingInsurance claim supportCommercial restoration
Base location Fayetteville, NC
Provider type Restoration company
Public reviews 4.7 from 148 reviews

Best for

  • Fayetteville and Cumberland County homeowners who need mold remediation tied to a water damage event, since 911 Restoration can handle both the water mitigation and the mold work in one engagement.
  • Commercial property owners near Fort Liberty or Hope Mills who need after-hours emergency response with insurance coordination included.
  • Homeowners who want a single company to manage the full restoration process from mitigation through rebuild, rather than hiring separate contractors.
  • Renters or landlords dealing with mold from plumbing failures who need someone to interface directly with the insurance adjuster.

About this company

911 Restoration of Fayetteville is a franchise location of the national 911 Restoration brand, headquartered on Wilkes Road in Fayetteville, North Carolina. Mold removal is one of several services they offer alongside water damage restoration, fire damage cleanup, sewage backup, sanitization, biohazard cleanup, and commercial property restoration. Their primary identity is a general restoration company, not a mold specialist.

Their mold removal page describes a six-step process: inspection, containment, removal of contaminated materials, cleaning with HEPA filtration, damage repair, and prevention measures addressing the root moisture source. They claim IICRC certification and advertise a 45-minute response time with 24/7 availability. One detail that stands out in reviews is their willingness to coordinate directly with insurance carriers and walk homeowners through the claims process.

The company describes itself as locally owned and operated, serving Fayetteville, Cumberland County, East Over, Fort Liberty, Hope Mills, and Stedman. Multiple reviews reference Ryan Strickland in what appears to be an ownership or management role, with Colby Porter running field operations and a rotating crew of technicians.

148 Google reviews at 4.7 stars is a strong showing for a restoration company in this market. The volume suggests steady work across water, fire, and mold jobs rather than a seasonal spike.

Services

Mold removalmold testingwater damage restorationwater extractionfire damage restorationsmoke damage cleanupsewage backup cleanupsanitizationbiohazard cleanupcommercial property restorationcarpet cleaninginsurance claim coordination

Service area

Headquartered at 168 Wilkes Road in Fayetteville, North Carolina. They list specific service areas including Fayetteville, Cumberland County, East Over, Fort Liberty, Hope Mills, and Stedman. Reviews confirm work across the Fayetteville metro area, with at least one review referencing a commercial job in Cumberland County.

Review consensus

What reviewers praise

Fast response time is the most consistent theme. Multiple reviewers describe same-day or next-day arrivals, including a Friday evening call that resulted in equipment setup within hours. Colby Porter is the most frequently named technician, praised for communication, patience, and follow-through across mold, water, and flooring jobs. Ryan Strickland is referenced as a manager or owner who personally handles larger claims and guides homeowners through insurance processes. Cameron, Blake, and Rodriguez are praised as a reliable field crew. Mary Katherine (also spelled Mary Catherine) gets credit for office coordination. Brittany is noted for communication. Several reviewers specifically highlight the company's willingness to work directly with insurance companies and explain the claims process step by step.

What low reviews reveal

3 found across 148 total reviews at 4.7★. (3 found across 148 total reviews at 4.7 stars) One 1-star review from a Local Guide with 42 reviews describes a project that started well but deteriorated. She reports that the original contact stopped returning calls, a different person was given access to her home without her knowledge, and the company charged nearly $5,100 for fans and a small section of sheetrock removal. She alleges the company was more focused on accessing her insurance carrier than completing repairs. A 2-star review from a landlord with 120 reviews describes a water damage job where the estimate called for 4 days of equipment but the company pulled equipment early while still billing for the full estimate. After he pushed back with two phone calls, the bill dropped from roughly $1,600 to $250. The owner responded acknowledging the billing miscommunication and explaining the project manager and billing office were not in sync. A third negative is a 2-star with no text.

Pattern worth noting

The two detailed negative reviews both center on billing practices and handoff failures between the field team and the office. The positive reviews overwhelmingly praise the field technicians by name, suggesting the disconnect may be structural: strong field crews operating under a billing and project management layer that does not always follow through. The owner responded to only 1 of 3 recent negatives (33% response rate), and that response was personalized and engaged with specifics rather than a template.

Named staff

Colby Porter (technician/field lead — consistently praised across dozens of reviews for communication, mold work, and water damage). Ryan Strickland (manager/owner — praised for insurance guidance and overall project oversight). Cameron (technician — praised for attentiveness and quality work). Blake (technician — praised for responsiveness and assessments). Patrick (technician — praised for carpet estimates and on-site work). Mekhizah (technician — praised in one review). Devin/Devon (technician — praised for knowledge, honesty, and insurance coordination). Mary Katherine/Mary Catherine (office coordinator — praised for scheduling and communication). Rodriguez/Rod (technician — praised for efficient work). Chris (technician — mentioned positively). Keith (technician — praised for customer service and process explanation). Tommy (technician — praised for mold work). Cain (technician — praised for promptness). Nick (technician — praised for remodeling work). Brittany (office/coordinator — praised for communication).

Bottom line

Ask for Colby Porter or Ryan Strickland if your job involves mold or a complex insurance claim. Request an itemized invoice before making any payment, and get written confirmation of what the repair phase will include before signing the mitigation work authorization. The field crews are the strength here; the billing office is where problems have surfaced.

Keep in mind

  • They both test for and remediate mold, which is a conflict of interest. The same company that tells you whether you have a mold problem also profits from fixing it. Consider getting an independent mold assessment before committing to their remediation work.
  • Billing has been flagged in recent reviews. One reviewer found that his bill dropped from $1,600 to $250 after requesting an itemized invoice and asking questions. Always request a detailed line-item breakdown before paying.
  • The mitigation and repair phases are billed as separate projects with separate work authorizations. One recent reviewer was left with a hole in his ceiling for months because the company never followed up on the repair estimate after completing mitigation.
  • This is a franchise operation. National brand standards may differ from local execution, and staff turnover means the technician who shows up may not be the person you spoke with on the phone.