Arbor Dental

Re: Oakmont Water Authority/Complaint ID # 11957452Dear MsPalmer-EdwardsThis law firm is the solicitor for the Municipal Authority of the Borough ofOakmont (the “Authority”)The above referenced Complaint has been referred to ouroffice for a replyThe Complainant purports to allege that he ignored a shut-off noticefor non-payment of his past-due account, which resulted in termination of his waterservice, because he was allegedly told by an unidentified Authority employee that he didnot need to make a payment on his past due account until his meter was changed.Please be advised that the allegations contained in the “Customer’s Statement of theProblem” are denied as they are fabricatedContrary to the allegations of theComplaint, the actual facts are as follows:In December, 2016, the Complainant’s account for the Authority’s water chargesand Penn Hills’ sewage rates (the Authority serves as the billing agent for Penn Hillssewer rates) was past due in the amount of $1,On December 21, 2016, theComplainant’s residence was posted with a notice advising that if paymentarrangements were not made by January 18, 2017, his water service would beterminated for non-payment of water and sewer chargesContrary to the falseallegations of the Complaint, the Authority received no communication whatsoever fromthe Complainant and therefore, on January 26, 2017, the Authority terminated theComplainant’s water service for non-payment.The Complainant telephoned the Authority’s office on the morning of January 26,and screamed obscenities at the female office employee who answered his call.The employee advised the Complainant that he would need to make a payment of $200to get the water turned back onHe again cursed at the office employee and threatenedto come to the Authority’s offices and “raise hell.” Later in the morning on January 26,2017, the Complainant called the Authority’s office a second time and spoke with theOffice Manager, once again shouting obscenities at herDuring the second call, theComplainant alleged that he “had a leak” and that an unnamed Authority employee toldhim that “an adjustment would be made” to his bill and that he therefore did not need tomake a paymentThis assertion is untrue.The Authority’s procedure for making adjustments on bill due to alleged leaks isto require a letter from the customer explaining the situation and providing a copy of arepair bill from a plumber establishing that there was in fact a leak and that it wasrepairedAt that time, a decision is made as to whether to provide an adjustment and ifso, the amount of the adjustmentThe Complainant had not previously contacted theAuthority about an alleged leak, nor was he promised an adjustment or told that he didnot need to make a payment on his billThe Complainant further advised the OfficeManager that he was unable to comply with this procedure because he had no repair billsince the alleged “leak” was a faulty flapper in his toilet tank and he had fixed it himself.When the Complainant continued to direct obscenities at the Authority’s Office Manager,she terminated the call.On the afternoon of January 26, 2017, the Complainant called the Authority’soffice a third timeThis time he spoke to the Office Manager in a calm and polite voice,saying that he had two children in the residence and that he promised to make therequested $payment on the account by February 2, if the Authority would turnthe water onThe Authority agreed to turn on the water, and further agreed to provide aone time adjustment of $235.43, if the Complainant would also agree to pay off theremaining balance in three monthly installments of $The Authority promptlyrestored the Complainant’s water service based on his promise to pay $by February2, As promised, the Complainant paid the initial $on February 1, 2017.The Complainant’s allegations that (i) he had come to the Authority’s office tomake a payment and was told that no payment was needed until his meter waschanged, (H) that he was promised an adjustment on his account “due to the leak”,(Hi) that he called the Authority “over a few months to speak with a manager” becauseadjustments had not been made to his account, and (iv) that he called the Authority’soffice when he received the shut-off notice in December, to see “if I needed tomake a payment” are all falseThe Complainant did not contact the Authority’s officeabout his past due bill until January 26, when his water service was terminated fornon-payment and at no time prior to said termination was he told that he did not need tomake an payment on his past due accountBecause he had not contacted theAuthority’s office prior to January 26, 2017, he obviously was not promised anadjustment to his bill based on an alleged leaking toiletTo the contrary, theComplainant’s water service was terminated because he failed to make any contact withthe Authority’s offices regarding his past due account or the shut-off noticeWe trust the above information sufficiently responds to the allegations containedin the Complaint.Very truly yours,TUCKER A [redacted] , P.C

Re: Oakmont Water Authority/Complaint ID # 11957452Dear Ms. Palmer-EdwardsThis law firm is the solicitor for the Municipal Authority of the Borough ofOakmont (the “Authority”). The above referenced Complaint has been referred to ouroffice for a reply. The Complainant purports to allege that he...

ignored a shut-off noticefor non-payment of his past-due account, which resulted in termination of his waterservice, because he was allegedly told by an unidentified Authority employee that he didnot need to make a payment on his past due account until his meter was changed.Please be advised that the allegations contained in the “Customer’s Statement of theProblem” are denied as they are fabricated. Contrary to the allegations of theComplaint, the actual facts are as follows:In December, 2016, the Complainant’s account for the Authority’s water chargesand Penn Hills’ sewage rates (the Authority serves as the billing agent for Penn Hillssewer rates) was past due in the amount of $1,143.59. On December 21, 2016, theComplainant’s residence was posted with a notice advising that if paymentarrangements were not made by January 18, 2017, his water service would beterminated for non-payment of water and sewer charges. Contrary to the falseallegations of the Complaint, the Authority received no communication whatsoever fromthe Complainant and therefore, on January 26, 2017, the Authority terminated theComplainant’s water service for non-payment.The Complainant telephoned the Authority’s office on the morning of January 26,2017 and screamed obscenities at the female office employee who answered his call.The employee advised the Complainant that he would need to make a payment of $200to get the water turned back on. He again cursed at the office employee and threatenedto come to the Authority’s offices and “raise hell.” Later in the morning on January 26,2017, the Complainant called the Authority’s office a second time and spoke with theOffice Manager, once again shouting obscenities at her. During the second call, theComplainant alleged that he “had a leak” and that an unnamed Authority employee toldhim that “an adjustment would be made” to his bill and that he therefore did not need tomake a payment. This assertion is untrue.The Authority’s procedure for making adjustments on bill due to alleged leaks isto require a letter from the customer explaining the situation and providing a copy of arepair bill from a plumber establishing that there was in fact a leak and that it wasrepaired. At that time, a decision is made as to whether to provide an adjustment and ifso, the amount of the adjustment. The Complainant had not previously contacted theAuthority about an alleged leak, nor was he promised an adjustment or told that he didnot need to make a payment on his bill. The Complainant further advised the OfficeManager that he was unable to comply with this procedure because he had no repair billsince the alleged “leak” was a faulty flapper in his toilet tank and he had fixed it himself.When the Complainant continued to direct obscenities at the Authority’s Office Manager,she terminated the call.On the afternoon of January 26, 2017, the Complainant called the Authority’soffice a third time. This time he spoke to the Office Manager in a calm and polite voice,saying that he had two children in the residence and that he promised to make therequested $200 payment on the account by February 2, 2017 if the Authority would turnthe water on. The Authority agreed to turn on the water, and further agreed to provide aone time adjustment of $235.43, if the Complainant would also agree to pay off theremaining balance in three monthly installments of $240.00. The Authority promptlyrestored the Complainant’s water service based on his promise to pay $200 by February2, 2017 As promised, the Complainant paid the initial $200 on February 1, 2017.The Complainant’s allegations that (i) he had come to the Authority’s office tomake a payment and was told that no payment was needed until his meter waschanged, (H) that he was promised an adjustment on his account “due to the leak”,(Hi) that he called the Authority “over a few months to speak with a manager” becauseadjustments had not been made to his account, and (iv) that he called the Authority’soffice when he received the shut-off notice in December, 2016 to see “if I needed tomake a payment” are all false. The Complainant did not contact the Authority’s officeabout his past due bill until January 26, 2017 when his water service was terminated fornon-payment and at no time prior to said termination was he told that he did not need tomake an payment on his past due account. Because he had not contacted theAuthority’s office prior to January 26, 2017, he obviously was not promised anadjustment to his bill based on an alleged leaking toilet. To the contrary, theComplainant’s water service was terminated because he failed to make any contact withthe Authority’s offices regarding his past due account or the shut-off noticeWe trust the above information sufficiently responds to the allegations containedin the Complaint.Very truly yours,TUCKER A[redacted], P.C.