Becker Dalton Wong

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/02) */
The law firm does not cancel the client's monthly payments to third parties. That means we do not cancel client's monthly condo fees, monthly property tax payments, telephone lines, internet lines, television lines, etc. We do not cancel these...

payments as most of these third parties only allow the customer to make changes to their account. With respect to condo fees and property taxes, we do adjust the numbers between the buyers and sellers but we DO NOT cancel any account. If there is a problem, our firm will try our best to assist our client as is what is happening on this file.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/11/04) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
This response is evasive to offering a solution to the problem. In hindsight, it's understandable that the law firm can't cancel third party withdrawals. However, when the lawyer overseeing the document signing advises PRIOR to closing that the law firm WILL cancel the withdrawals, I am obliged to believe him and take no action in that respect. Hence, the cause for the property tax overpayment in the first place. And now, the only way for me to receive credit for the property tax overpayment is to rely on the law firm to take action, which they are either not doing or failing to communicate with me on requested updates to the situation. The irony is that this law firm has no profitable interest to pursue this on my behalf because fees for legal services have all been paid, and yet they are my only route to receiving credit aside from additional legal action.
Secondly, it's stated that "our firm will try our best to assist our client". If failing to communicate entirely with a client when updates are requested within a reasonable time frame constitutes "trying our best", then the level of commitment to customer service from the law firm certainly speaks for itself. Not being able to obtain only one month's property tax (