In recent days, according to live urban reports, ms. Zhang of jiangxi nanchang stated that she had booked toilet maintenance services through woodpeckers ' home maintenance platform, that the repairer had initially offered $156 and had eventually received $1780 to replace the new toilet, and that family members had found the same toilet on the internet only $550。
According to ms. Zhang's statement in the programme, on 12 may, she discovered a leak in the bottom of the smart toilet in her home and went online to search the toilet for maintenance, and a staff member of the woodpecker family maintenance team contacted her on her own initiative。
On the same day, after the maintenance master had come to the door, ms. Zhang asked about the cost and the other said that the failure should be checked before pricing. After the examination, the master offered 156, thinking that it was just a minor issue, and ms. Chang agreed。
The subsequent operation, however, deviated from the expectation that after removing the bottom of the toilet, the master had installed two gaskets and removed the electrical panels above the toilet, stating that the internal circuit boards needed to be replaced, at a price of approximately $1,000. Ms. Zhang felt that the maintenance costs were too high and said that it would be better to buy a new toilet。
The other party then indicated that the company had a new toilet to install, a nine-branch brand, which cost between five and six thousand dollars at a minimum of 2,200 dollars. Ms. Zhang said that she was not going to fix it, and that she had to let the maintenance masters pack it back。
See ms. Zhang's continued hesitation and master's further “preferential” marketing of the new toilet, eventually setting the price at us$ 1980 and proposing that the old toilet be offset by us$ 200 and that ms. Zhang actually pay us$ 1780。
Later the same day, after returning home, ms. Zhang's son was asked on the pedestal platform about the new toilet model and found that the total new sale price for the same nine pail was only $550. Ms. Zhang immediately contacted the repair master to make a statement, and the maintenance master was tough enough to say only that “the price was right, including installation costs”, and then hung up the phone and stopped listening. Ms. Zhang was outraged that the price was more than 1,000 different from the price shown on the internet, and that the so-called installation cost was more than twice the toilet itself。
Subsequently, according to ms. Zhang's feedback, media journalists called the call for the woodpecker home maintenance platform. The client service responded that the formal process was for the master to sweep the door, check out the malfunctions, receive a test report on the chance to repair the scavengers, indicate the corresponding price of the failure, and the client agreed to repair it only after seeing that the teacher who was working for ms. Zhang had not given the price sheet, which was an irregularity and indicated that the platform would intensify its processing and then call the customer back。
It is noteworthy that this is not the first time that a woodpecker platform has been caught in a dispute over maintenance fees. In 2025, the 3/15 event revealed the presence of a lot of things like "no disorderly repairs, minor repairs, daily rates."。
At that time, journalists were recruited to come to the woodpecker company for a covert survey, and the training manager had stated that the most important task for door-to-door maintenance staff was to do everything possible to raise fees in the service。
During the following days, journalists followed the maintenance master to the door and saw the “new set” on almost every occasion: one customer failed to open the water tap, resulting in the washing machine being unable to enter the water, the master came to the door and opened the washing machine's tap at more than 100 charges; the gas stove was out of power, the client did not remove the battery cap after replacing the battery, replaced the client with a light weapon at a cost of around $20, then removed the battery cap and charged more than 250 charges. The maintenance manager also revealed that the key to doing so came from pressure from the household electrical maintenance platform, and maintenance staff were often criticized by the company's superiors for the low price offered。
Following the exposure, woodpeckers published the rectification, and as of 17 march at 1800, the audit was completed and the confirmation was verified of 8,655 disputed orders for which refunds, cost optimization and compensation had been completed for unreasonable charges; 88 products and 6758 service items had been processed。
One month later, woodpeckers also announced the latest renovation programme, which included the optimization of the price presentation page, the online “query deepseek” ai to help with the price-seeking function, the completion of self-checking of spare parts and supply channels in the store, and the return of products that should be certified on a mandatory basis without authentication。
However, one year later, according to the red star capital bureau in march this year, a number of consumers responded that the platform continues to suffer from problems such as indiscriminate charges, high prices, incoherence between actual service content and billing items, which continue to be backed by high percentages of woodpeckers. According to a number of shopkeepers on the platform, the woodpeckers pay almost 60 per cent of the total amount for each single order and “the master can only offer a higher price for money”。
On 21 may, a query by an interface journalist found that the black cat complaints platform had in the past month made numerous complaints about excessive fees for woodpecker maintenance, with consumers claiming that the maintenance of air conditioning under the woodpecker platform had been done at a cost of 108, three times the cost of maintenance, and that the smart starter of the fridge had been replaced by a man on the woodpecker platform at a cost of $420 for the maintenance master, while the consumer claimed that the spare was the most expensive $22 on the internet platform and the cheapest $8。
According to app, in december 2014, the zhongqing woodpecker network technology company, inc., was established with legal representation of the kingdom, with a registered capital of approximately rmb 2. 4. 9 million, to operate in the areas of professional intermediation, repair of daily appliances, maintenance of residential utilities, installation of domestic appliances, etc., with joint shares of beijing peckers ' technology, royal hua and others. On several occasions, the company has been sued for repairing contractual disputes, contract disputes, contract disputes and so forth。
Woodpeckers claim to be operating in more than 300 cities in the country, with more than 100,000 service providers on-line。
Woodpecker maintenance submitted its book of offer in january 2024 and updated it in october of the same year to be listed on the main board of the dock. According to the equity book, woodpeckers received $400 million, $595 million and $1. 01 billion in 2021, 2022 and 2023 respectively; māori received $323 million, 484 million and 852 million respectively; and māori rates were 80. 5 per cent, 81. 4 per cent and 84. 2 per cent respectively。
Source: interface news, urban site
