Skip to main content

Outcome data

Foundation Repair: what 17 recorded interviews report

17 people recorded an interview about Foundation Repair. 6 described clearer systems and processes. 1 put their change in the over a year range. Each figure counts interviews where the person said it themselves.

Interviews recorded 2024-12-09 to 2026-06-04. 1 of 17 interviews included a timeframe. Read the method.

Outcomes described

OutcomeInterviewsShare
clearer systems and processes6 of 1735%
feeling heard and supported by the provider3 of 1718%
improved movement or mobility1 of 176%
weight change1 of 176%
team, hiring or delegation wins1 of 176%
better family or relationship life1 of 176%

Timeframes people described

  • Over a year1

Source interviews

Browse all 17 stories in Foundation RepairSee the data tables →

Counter-points people raised

  • According to Hubert Garvey, the Geobear solution was significantly more affordable, costing in the region of one-third of what a traditional method would have cost. He found it to be a better solution that was also less invasive to his property. Hubert Garvey
  • It quick to carry out the repairs and it was very cost effective. Tony Blaza
  • Phil Butcher's biggest concern was 'ignorance' and the assumption that repairs would cost tens of thousands based on 'bad stories' about traditional underpinning. He found Geobear's process easy to understand and less overwhelming than expected after research… Phil Butcher
  • According to Simon Bethell, Geobear was the most competitive on price after he compared quotes from two different companies offering similar resin injection processes. Simon Bethell
  • A lot of those are much more disruptive and take a very long time, and are more expensive than the injection method that GeoBear use. Chris George Dowdall