Care Environmental Remediation Services, Inc.

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:I was more than patient with Ms*** during this entire process. My "cumbersome" emails were a constant reminder that this job needed to be completed and yet,all my pleas went ignored. I did whatever leg work was necessary to keep it moving forward and I am the one who followed up with the Technical Consultant in Trenton to obtain the final guidance Ms. *** needed. By March 15, Ms***'s had the direction she needed from Trenton to complete the file and in her own words to me regarding the completion of the report were "Yes, I have some work to do to get there. I hope to complete this by the end of next week". It took untilAugust before the paperwork was completed. I tried to get my file and move on to another company, but Ms*** would not release my reports (even though she was paid, up front, half of the $2,estimate I received for the job). I then had to hire an attorney who advised her to complete the job or hand over the reports needed. That letter is what finally helped me reach conclusion. The length of time it took to receive my final report as well as being hit with an invoice more than double what was estimated is why I am pursuing this. It is inconceivable that an estimate for a job is that far off as Ms***'s was, and that the only way to bring conclusion to the job was to hire an attorney. I stand by my complaint and request for reimbursement I thank the Revdex.com for listening to me and protecting the rights of a consumer
Regards,
*** ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
***:Thank you for forwarding Ms***'s response to my complaint. Here is my response as well as attachments: Answer: Four years after the report and documents were filed with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection; the variance for raising the health based concentration of lead at the site due to DAP and the lead background concentration was denied by the Case Manager. (This response time was not uncommon for the NJDEP due to the number of cases each case manager was handling.) C.E.R.Swas advised in by the new property owner’s attorney that the Notice of Deficiency letter was sent to Mrs***’s old home address in *** and went unanswered by Mrs*** After three years, the NJDEP submitted the NOD letter to the Property address in 2011. The NOD letter was clearly not forwarded to Mrs*** because no forwarding address was provided to the new owner, the NJDEP or to C.E.R.Sby Mrs*** . We were not advised that the case manager required additional investigations in order to further evaluate the variance. Perhaps if Mrs*** contacted C.E.R.Sto inquire on the status of the No Further Action letter then the NJDEP letter of deficiencies would have been resolved in a timely basis under the previous NJDEP Program. A four year response time from the DEP was NEVER relayed to me. And I did already state, that when I moved I had no idea the case was still under review, I thought it was settled. I hired Care Environmental because this was a field they were the experts in. I knew nothing about “environmental cleanup”. Therefore, I trusted Ms*** when she told me everything was taken care of As for "Care" not being notified of the Letter of Deficiency, I asked the Case Manager to forward me the letter they sent out. The attached copy of that letter clearly shows a copy was mailed to Care Environmental Remediation Services, Inc. Answer: NJDEP’s SRRA phaperiod was soon to be final at the time C.E.R.Swas contacted by the new owners attorney and subsequently by Mrs*** At that time, the new requirements and mandatory deadlines as needed for this project must be followed by the Responsible Party (Mrs***). C.E.R.Scompleted our investigation for Mrs*** as promised by May 2, 2012, however, we could not guarantee that the NJDEP would allow this project to remain with a case manager to obtain a No Further Action Letter. In fact, on May 2, 2012, C.E.R.S contacted the NJDEP case manager and he advised us that he was no longer allowed to accept cases for closureI explained this in detail to Mrs*** Now the project was assigned to the LSRP program. After May 7, and as a licensed LSRP, I have an obligation to fulfill every aspect of the Notice of Deficiency in order to close the project. Subsequently, C.E.R.Sprepared the draft report for Mrs***’s case on June 20, 2012. The report addressed all deficiencies except one notice of deficiency. This was the laboratory data from the buyers consultant in 2004. Later, we found out that this consultant went out of business, therefore, we could not obtain the laboratory report needed to satisfy the final outstanding deficiency. And, without fulfilling the final deficiency, I personally could not close the case without jeopardizing my obligations to the NJDEP LSRP License of which I hold. Mrs*** did not understand this, however, over time I believed she understood the ramifications. I agree that I did not respond to Mrs***’s cumbersome e-mails, however, I answered all her phone calls and if I was not available, my project manager, Jon didI expressed to Mrs*** to call me by phone when she needed to speak to me. Thus I disagree with her complaint as Mrs*** failed to understand the responsibilities and obligations of a LSRP, such as myself, as associated with the LSRP program. I need to be 100% sure that closing this case was regulatory compliant. Ms*** and I were in contact regarding the importance of finding the original laboratory used. Time had continued to tick by without any work being done on my case so I volunteered to do the leg work and find the laboratory used by ***. I found a previous employee of *** and that was how I discovered the lab they used. Unfortunately, I learned from the lab that they had destroyed the file due to the age of the report. All this information was relayed back to Ms***. I understood the position we were in, but did not understand the "give up attitude" of Ms***. As for those "cumbersome emails", perhaps if promises were not made that the report "would be completed", or that somecommunication was received, I would not have continued to send them. My phone calls were not always answered either, but I have no proof of that, other than all my outgoing callsIn I spoke to the project Manager, ***, a couple of times, but he was limited on what he could do for me. All he could tell me was that they had the soil sample report and Ms*** had my file. Attached are a couple of the more important emails that show the broken promises over the years. I would have liked to attach more, but the file is too large(Please note the dates). Lastly, I understood Ms*** not wanting to put her license on the line. However, I was puzzled by her attitude since it was her firm that did the initial cleanup workI hired her firm because they were experts. In Ms*** finally stated she could go to Trenton to gain guidance. I encouraged her to go and even said I would pay whatever, just get this case closed. I have documented that that discussion took place on November 28, and we agreed on approximate $for her trip. Due to her schedule, Ms*** advised it would have to wait until after the holidays. The date was set for January 4, 2013. The trip never took place. January 30, Ms*** constructed an email seeking a Technical Consultation. There was no response from anyone to that email. As you can see by the attached copies, on March 10, I emailed all parties involved in the original email string asking for a status. Mr*** responded that he dropped the ball. Had I not sent my email in March would Ms*** had followed up? I suspect not. My file was not a priority for her. The consultation finally took place by March and Ms*** advised me I would have a report by the end of the following week (as written in her March 15, email attached). April I followed up, and again, no response. Answer: The LSRP program did not allow for an incomplete submittal to address an outstanding deficiency. I expressed this to Mrs*** and also let her know that we should sample and test in order to satisfy the requirement. I also cautioned her that if we found additional contamination, we would have to address it. Mrs*** did not want to sample or spend any more money. Mrs*** proceeded to try to find the consultant who did the work initially to obtain the data needed to satisfy the NODI told her that we if she found the data to satisfy the NOD, THEN WE WOULD BE DONE! She was not successful. In March 2013, I personally executed a technical consultation with the NJDEP in an attempt to gather information to close the case. The NJDEP technical consultant is a way for LSRP’s to obtain the NJDEP opinion on whether the project requirements are satisfied for a LSRP to issue a Response Action Outcome for the project. This was conducted and I obtained the information that I needed, however, I remained unsatisfied that this would protect my license and my obligations to the NJDEP. In the next months to come, I rewrote the report and consulted with colleagues and the NJDEP. I spoke to Mrs*** and expressed my concerns. Many of my comments above apply here. As for the part regarding the samples, of course I did not want to spend more money. I no longer owned this property, I was under the impression all work was completed in and was frustrated with the process. I advised Ms*** to do what she had to do, I wanted this to be over. As to her broken promises on completing the report, no communication was granted to me. Just silence with no explanation as to why we could not come to a conclusionAgain, my file was not a priority to her. If Ms*** was no comfortable with her report, why then did she not convey this to me and allow me to hire another firm to complete it. I never asked her to do something she was not comfortable with. When my pleas for an answer were never responded to and I contacted the project manager to get my soil sample reports (because Ms*** would not return my calls) and allow me to move on with another company, I did not even get a response from Ms*** on that. Why didn't she turn over the documents and allow me to proceed with another firm? Answer: As far as I am concerned with this complaint, Mrs*** failed to understand the complexities of the LSRP Program, however, the attorney she hired didI did finally wrap up the projectsolely because of a NJDEP representative that assisted me in my decision making. As far as billing is concerned, the actual time and materials invoiced to Mrs*** at courtesy rates totaled $7,772.50of which I knew she would not pay nor agree to. I credited the invoice $3,by “No Charge” LINE ITEMS in the invoice detail so that her balance would be closer to $4,as originally discussed since the project was assigned to the LSRP program. I personally performed many hours on the project and on her behalf as gratis. Her bill was $4,Personally, I believe I was very fair to her, especially because she did not understand the program. In fact, after I provided her with the Response Action Outcome to complete the project, she still asked the NJDEP for their letterI expressed that my RAO replaced the NJDEP NFA. By the way, I finished the project on August 14, and e-mailed her all the documents and invoice. I gave her an additional credit of $495.00, so that her remaining balance was $She did not pay her invoice until September 9, 2014. I totally understood the complexities of the ProgramMy complaint is based upon the fact that no report should take years to complete. The additional soil samples were taken in May 2012, by October I advised Ms*** that the report from the original lab was destroyed. Why did it take until January to request the technical consult? Why was there no follow up to her request for the consult? Why did I have to reach out to Trenton and get things back on track? Why did it take from March 14, until August 14, (date report was written) to find that assistance from NJDEP and close this file? In Ms***’s eyes, my file was not a priority. Ms*** gained the knowledge she needed from the March consultation and yet it still took over a year and a half to write the report. That is unreasonable. Also, no professional should ignore their client’s request for communication and updates on a job her company was hired to do. No professional should be forced into action through the hiring of an attorney -- but that action is what brought about a conclusion I have attached a copy of Ms***'s estimate. How could she have been so far off on how much she anticipated her expense would be? Again, she did the initial clean up in 2004. I know the LSRP program was new but imagine you are me and expect a final bill to be close to $2,and then be handed a bill for over $4,400. NEVER was it communicated to me that Ms*** felt her estimate was inaccurate. As for why I asked the NJDEP for their sign off, my answer should be obvious, it was because at that point I lost all confidence in Ms***'s ability and needed to ensure the State of New Jersey’s records reflected the case as closed. Ms*** states the project was finished on August 14, 2014, however, she neglected to tell you that there was additional dialogue regarding fees and her inability to file with the State until all fees were settled. It was not until AFTER the September 23, email from NJDEP that the case could move forward for review and ultimately closed, so Care was paid prior to my file being complete. I will adjust my request regarding settlement and ask Ms*** to refund my attorney fees in the amount of $(I should not have had to hire an attorney to reach conclusion) and I want her to honor her $2,quoted contract price and refund my $1,overpayment.Thank you again, ***, for your attention to my complaint and I am hopeful we can reach some resolution.Regards,*** ***
Regards,
*** ***

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:  I do not see a response to my comments.  The only documents I can view is the invoice and the report orginally sent by the company.  I see no written response from Ms. [redacted] directly answering my complaint.  Is there a document I am missing?  
Regards,
[redacted]

[redacted],
12.8000001907349px; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"> 
The Revdex.com response does not allow for attachments or text box “cites”.  Please accept this information as my response to Mrs. [redacted]
 
 
·         Complaint Comment #1: As a referral by my attorney I hired "CARE" 07/2004, the job was completed and I was assured everything was finished.
·         Answer: C.E.R.S. was contracted by [redacted] to remediate a leaking Waste Oil Above Ground Storage Tank that was discovered by the potential purchasers environmental consultant in August 2004. C.E.R.S. completed the remediation/investigation required by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection offering the Department’s Case Manager to accept a variance to the health based soil remediation standards for lead due to background lead contamination caused by Diffused Anthropogenic Pollution (DAP) . A Memorandum of Agreement was executed by the client and certified by the client;  The report was submitted to the NJDEP for approval and issuance of a No Further Action on October 27, 2004.
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
·         Complaint Comment #2: The property was sold and in 2005 I relocated out of the state. Feb 2012 I rec'd a letter from the buyers attorney that my case was not closed. In 2008 a Notice of Deficiency was sent to my old address in NJ as well as a copy to Care. Unfortunately, the firm I hired and who assured me my case was completed never responded to the Notice, nor did they even try to contact me regarding it. I contacted Ms. [redacted] and was told the state disagreed with her findings.
 
·         Answer: Four years after the report and documents were filed with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection; the variance for raising the health based concentration of lead at the site due to DAP and the lead background concentration was denied by the Case Manager.  (This response time was not uncommon for the NJDEP due to the number of cases each case manager was handling.) C.E.R.S. was advised in 2012 by the new property owner’s attorney that the Notice of Deficiency letter was sent to Mrs. [redacted]’s old home address in [redacted] and went unanswered by Mrs. [redacted]  After three years, the NJDEP submitted the NOD letter to the Property address in 2011.  The NOD letter was clearly not forwarded to Mrs. [redacted] because no forwarding address was provided to the new owner, the NJDEP or to C.E.R.S. by Mrs. [redacted] .  We were not advised that the case manager required additional investigations in order to further evaluate the variance.  Perhaps if Mrs. [redacted] contacted C.E.R.S. to inquire on the status of the No Further Action letter then the 2008 NJDEP letter of deficiencies would have been resolved in a timely basis under the previous NJDEP Program. 
 
·         Complaint Comment #3: We then filed a Receptor Eval Form 2/29/2012 and $500.April 2012 I signed another contract with Care for $2,200 and paid 50% down pymt. Ms. [redacted] assured me it would not be an issue and we would get through it quickly. 5/2012 more soil samples were taken and the labs were run. This was the beginning of emails and phone calls (which I have documented) going without a response by Ms. [redacted].
 
·         Answer:  NJDEP’s SRRA phase-in period was soon to be final at the time C.E.R.S. was contacted by the new owners attorney and subsequently by Mrs. [redacted]  At that time, the new requirements and mandatory deadlines as needed for this project must be followed by the Responsible Party (Mrs. [redacted]).  C.E.R.S. completed our investigation for Mrs. [redacted] as promised by May 2, 2012, however, we could not guarantee that the NJDEP would allow this project to remain with a case manager to obtain a No Further Action Letter.  In fact, on May 2, 2012, C.E.R.S contacted the NJDEP case manager and he advised us that he was no longer allowed to accept cases for closure. I explained this in detail to Mrs. [redacted] Now the project was assigned to the LSRP program.  After May 7, 2012 and as a  licensed LSRP, I have an obligation to fulfill every aspect of the Notice of Deficiency in order to close the project.  Subsequently, C.E.R.S. prepared the draft report for Mrs. [redacted]’s case on June 20, 2012.  The report addressed all deficiencies except one notice of deficiency.  This was the laboratory data from the buyers consultant in 2004.  Later, we found out that this consultant went out of business, therefore, we could not obtain the laboratory report needed to satisfy the final outstanding deficiency.  And, without fulfilling the final deficiency, I personally could not close the case without jeopardizing my obligations to the NJDEP LSRP License of which I hold.  Mrs. [redacted] did not understand this, however, over time I believed she understood the ramifications.  I agree that I did not respond to Mrs. [redacted]’s cumbersome e-mails, however, I answered all her phone calls and if I was not available, my project manager, [redacted] did. I expressed to Mrs. [redacted] to call me by phone when she needed to speak to me.  Thus I disagree with her complaint as Mrs. [redacted] failed to understand the responsibilities and obligations of a LSRP, such as myself, as associated with the LSRP program.  I need to be 100% sure that closing this case was regulatory compliant.
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
·         Complaint Comment #4: By 7/24 I was advised she was "having difficulties" with the LSRP Program and that "the report of our investigation has been drafted". By March 15, 2013 I asked Ms [redacted] if we were finally reaching an end. Her response to me was "Yes, I have some work to do to get there; I hope to complete this by the end of next week".
Answer:  The LSRP program did not allow for an incomplete submittal to address an outstanding deficiency.  I expressed this to Mrs. [redacted] and also let her know that we should sample and test in order to satisfy the requirement.  I also cautioned her that if we found additional contamination, we would have to address it.  Mrs. [redacted] did not want to sample or spend any more money.  Mrs. [redacted] proceeded to try to find the consultant who did the work initially to obtain the data needed to satisfy the NOD. I told her that we if she found the data to satisfy the NOD, THEN WE WOULD BE DONE!  She was not successful.  In March 2013, I personally executed a technical consultation with the NJDEP in an attempt to gather information to close the case.  The NJDEP technical consultant is a way for LSRP’s to obtain the NJDEP opinion on whether the project requirements are satisfied for a LSRP to issue a Response Action Outcome for the project.  This was conducted and I obtained the information that I needed, however, I remained unsatisfied that this would protect my license and my obligations to the NJDEP.  In the next months to come, I rewrote the report and consulted with colleagues and the NJDEP.  I spoke to Mrs. [redacted] and expressed my concerns.
 
·         Complaint Comment #5: That was the last time I heard from Ms. [redacted]. 04/2014 I sent an email to Ms [redacted] pleading with her to please finish my file and close out my case. Again, no response. At this point I knew my fees with the State of NJ were increasing . I tried to hire another company to finish the job, but was advised my lab results from 05/2012 were needed. I requested the finished report or the lab results from Care -no response. I hired an attorney & received a call from Ms [redacted] who commented "I just didn't know how to wrap this up, so I just kept putting it off". The report was completed and I was handed a bill for $4,100. I paid the "ransom" and 3 years later we're done.
Answer:  As far as I am concerned with this complaint, Mrs. [redacted] failed to understand the complexities of the LSRP Program, however, the attorney she hired did. I did finally wrap up the project solely because of a NJDEP representative that assisted me in my decision making.  As far as billing is concerned, the actual time and materials invoiced to Mrs. [redacted] at courtesy rates totaled $7,772.50 of which I knew she would not pay nor agree to.  I credited the invoice $3,177.50 by “No Charge” LINE ITEMS in the invoice detail so that her balance would be closer to $4,595.00 as originally discussed since the project was assigned to the LSRP program.  I personally performed many hours on the project and on her behalf as gratis.  Her bill was $4,595.00. Personally, I believe I was very fair to her, especially because she did not understand the program.  In fact, after I provided her with the Response Action Outcome to complete the project, she still asked the NJDEP for their letter. I expressed that my RAO replaced the NJDEP NFA.  By the way, I finished the project on August 14, 2014 and e-mailed her all the documents and invoice.  I gave her an additional credit of $495.00, so that her remaining balance was $3000.00. She did not pay her invoice until September 9, 2014.
 
In summary, her total credits amounted to $3,672.50.  As such, I am confident that you (Revdex.com) will understand and agree that I was more than fair and reasonable to Mrs. [redacted]  Mrs. [redacted] paid C.E.R.S. $ 4100.00 accepting the credits of $3,672.50 of a total invoice amount of $7,772.50.
 
Attachments:        [redacted] Invoice 8/13/14
                                Remedial Investigation Report – documentation of the work performed
 
Prepared by [redacted]
 
[redacted], CPG, CHMM, LSRP
President
Care Environmental Remediation Services, Inc.

My response to Ms. [redacted]’s response is that “ I stand by my initial response to the complaint both individually and collectively”.  In respect to the amount of money that Ms [redacted] requests, I already provided her courtesy discounts and money credit to avoid this type of situation.  I am surprised that she did not appreciate my generosity. And, I wasn’t in a stronghold to credit her invoice; I did this on my own accord. I will not provide her with additional credits or reimbursement.  I do not understand why Ms. [redacted] continues to pursue this, however,  I strongly believe that she simply does not understand the Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP) responsibilities to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.  I am a very conservative LSRP and I follow the regulations and guidance for all my clients and do not make exceptions as Ms [redacted] wanted.   This work is not as simple as Ms [redacted] presents it to be.   Please accept this as my counterstatement to Ms. [redacted]’s.    Thank you in advance for your considerations.   [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
[redacted]:
Thank you for forwarding Ms. [redacted]'s response to my complaint.  Here is my response as well as attachments:
 
 
 
Answer: Four years after the report and documents were filed with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection; the variance for raising the health based concentration of lead at the site due to DAP and the lead background concentration was denied by the Case Manager.  (This response time was not uncommon for the NJDEP due to the number of cases each case manager was handling.) C.E.R.S. was advised in 2012 by the new property owner’s attorney that the Notice of Deficiency letter was sent to Mrs. [redacted]’s old home address in [redacted] and went unanswered by Mrs. [redacted]  After three years, the NJDEP submitted the NOD letter to the Property address in 2011.  The NOD letter was clearly not forwarded to Mrs. [redacted] because no forwarding address was provided to the new owner, the NJDEP or to C.E.R.S. by Mrs. [redacted] .  We were not advised that the case manager required additional investigations in order to further evaluate the variance.  Perhaps if Mrs. [redacted] contacted C.E.R.S. to inquire on the status of the No Further Action letter then the 2008 NJDEP letter of deficiencies would have been resolved in a timely basis under the previous NJDEP Program. 
A four year response time from the DEP was NEVER relayed to me.  And I did already state, that when I moved I had no idea the case was still under review, I thought it was settled.  I hired Care Environmental because this was a field they were the experts in.  I knew nothing about “environmental cleanup”.  Therefore, I trusted Ms. [redacted] when she told me everything was taken care of.   As for "Care" not being notified of the Letter of Deficiency, I asked the Case Manager to forward me the letter they sent out.  The attached copy of that letter clearly shows a copy was mailed to Care Environmental Remediation Services, Inc.
 
 
Answer:  NJDEP’s SRRA phase-in period was soon to be final at the time C.E.R.S. was contacted by the new owners attorney and subsequently by Mrs. [redacted]  At that time, the new requirements and mandatory deadlines as needed for this project must be followed by the Responsible Party (Mrs. [redacted]).  C.E.R.S. completed our investigation for Mrs. [redacted] as promised by May 2, 2012, however, we could not guarantee that the NJDEP would allow this project to remain with a case manager to obtain a No Further Action Letter.  In fact, on May 2, 2012, C.E.R.S contacted the NJDEP case manager and he advised us that he was no longer allowed to accept cases for closure. I explained this in detail to Mrs. [redacted] Now the project was assigned to the LSRP program.  After May 7, 2012 and as a  licensed LSRP, I have an obligation to fulfill every aspect of the Notice of Deficiency in order to close the project.  Subsequently, C.E.R.S. prepared the draft report for Mrs. [redacted]’s case on June 20, 2012.  The report addressed all deficiencies except one notice of deficiency.  This was the laboratory data from the buyers consultant in 2004.  Later, we found out that this consultant went out of business, therefore, we could not obtain the laboratory report needed to satisfy the final outstanding deficiency.  And, without fulfilling the final deficiency, I personally could not close the case without jeopardizing my obligations to the NJDEP LSRP License of which I hold.  Mrs. [redacted] did not understand this, however, over time I believed she understood the ramifications.  I agree that I did not respond to Mrs. [redacted]’s cumbersome e-mails, however, I answered all her phone calls and if I was not available, my project manager, Jon did. I expressed to Mrs. [redacted] to call me by phone when she needed to speak to me.  Thus I disagree with her complaint as Mrs. [redacted] failed to understand the responsibilities and obligations of a LSRP, such as myself, as associated with the LSRP program.  I need to be 100% sure that closing this case was regulatory compliant.
 
Ms. [redacted] and I were in contact regarding the importance of finding the original laboratory used.  Time had continued to tick by without any work being done on my case so I volunteered to do the leg work and find the laboratory used by [redacted].  I found a previous employee of [redacted] and that was how I discovered the lab they used.  Unfortunately, I learned from the lab that they had destroyed the file due to the age of the report.  All this information was relayed back to Ms. [redacted].  I understood the position we were in, but did not understand the "give up attitude" of Ms. [redacted].  As for those "cumbersome emails", perhaps if promises were not made that the report "would be completed", or that somecommunication was received, I would not have continued to send them.  My phone calls were not always answered either, but I have no proof of that, other than all my outgoing calls. In 2014 I spoke to the project Manager, [redacted], a couple of times, but he was limited on what he could do for me.  All he could tell me was that they had the 2012 soil sample report and Ms. [redacted] had my file.  Attached are a couple of the more important emails that show the broken promises over the years.  I would have liked to attach more, but the file is too large. (Please note the dates).  Lastly, I understood Ms. [redacted] not wanting to put her license on the line.  However, I was puzzled by her attitude since it was her firm that did the initial cleanup work. I hired her firm because they were experts.  In 2012 Ms. [redacted] finally stated she could go to Trenton to gain guidance.  I encouraged her to go and even said I would pay whatever, just get this case closed.  I have documented that that discussion took place on November 28, 2012 and we agreed on approximate $300 for her trip.  Due to her schedule, Ms. [redacted] advised it would have to wait until after the holidays.  The date was set for January 4, 2013.  The trip never took place.  January 30, 2013 Ms. [redacted] constructed an email seeking a Technical Consultation.   There was no response from anyone to that email.  As you can see by the attached copies, on March 10, 2013 I emailed all parties involved in the original email string asking for a status.  Mr. [redacted] responded that he dropped the ball.  Had I not sent my email in March would Ms. [redacted] had followed up?  I suspect not.  My file was not a priority for her.  The consultation finally took place by March 14 and Ms. [redacted] advised me I would have a report by the end of the following week (as written in her March 15, 2013 email attached).  April 1 I followed up, and again, no response.
 
 
Answer:  The LSRP program did not allow for an incomplete submittal to address an outstanding deficiency.  I expressed this to Mrs. [redacted] and also let her know that we should sample and test in order to satisfy the requirement.  I also cautioned her that if we found additional contamination, we would have to address it.  Mrs. [redacted] did not want to sample or spend any more money.  Mrs. [redacted] proceeded to try to find the consultant who did the work initially to obtain the data needed to satisfy the NOD. I told her that we if she found the data to satisfy the NOD, THEN WE WOULD BE DONE!  She was not successful.  In March 2013, I personally executed a technical consultation with the NJDEP in an attempt to gather information to close the case.  The NJDEP technical consultant is a way for LSRP’s to obtain the NJDEP opinion on whether the project requirements are satisfied for a LSRP to issue a Response Action Outcome for the project.  This was conducted and I obtained the information that I needed, however, I remained unsatisfied that this would protect my license and my obligations to the NJDEP.  In the next months to come, I rewrote the report and consulted with colleagues and the NJDEP.  I spoke to Mrs. [redacted] and expressed my concerns.
 
Many of my comments above apply here.  As for the part regarding the samples, of course I did not want to spend more money.  I no longer owned this property, I was under the impression all work was completed in 2004 and was frustrated with the process.  I advised Ms. [redacted] to do what she had to do, I wanted this to be over.  As to her broken promises on completing the report, no communication was granted to me.  Just silence with no explanation as to why we could not come to a conclusion. Again, my file was not a priority to her.   If Ms. [redacted] was no comfortable with her report, why then did she not convey this to me and allow me to hire another firm to complete it.  I never asked her to do something she was not comfortable with.  When my pleas for an answer were never responded to and I contacted the project manager to get my soil sample reports (because Ms. [redacted] would not return my calls) and allow me to move on with another company, I did not even get a response from Ms. [redacted] on that.  Why didn't she turn over the documents and allow me to proceed with another firm? 
 
 
Answer:  As far as I am concerned with this complaint, Mrs. [redacted] failed to understand the complexities of the LSRP Program, however, the attorney she hired did. I did finally wrap up the projectsolely because of a NJDEP representative that assisted me in my decision making.  As far as billing is concerned, the actual time and materials invoiced to Mrs. [redacted] at courtesy rates totaled $7,772.50of which I knew she would not pay nor agree to.  I credited the invoice $3,177.50 by “No Charge” LINE ITEMS in the invoice detail so that her balance would be closer to $4,595.00 as originally discussed since the project was assigned to the LSRP program.  I personally performed many hours on the project and on her behalf as gratis.  Her bill was $4,595.00. Personally, I believe I was very fair to her, especially because she did not understand the program.  In fact, after I provided her with the Response Action Outcome to complete the project, she still asked the NJDEP for their letter. I expressed that my RAO replaced the NJDEP NFA.  By the way, I finished the project on August 14, 2014 and e-mailed her all the documents and invoice.  I gave her an additional credit of $495.00, so that her remaining balance was $3000.00. She did not pay her invoice until September 9, 2014.
 
I totally understood the complexities of the Program. My complaint is based upon the fact that no report should take years to complete.  The additional soil samples were taken in May 2012, by October 2012 I advised Ms. [redacted] that the report from the original lab was destroyed.  Why did it take until January 2013 to request the technical consult?  Why was there no follow up to her request for the consult?  Why did I have to reach out to Trenton and get things back on track?  Why did it take from March 14, 2013 until August 14, 2014 (date report was written) to find that assistance from NJDEP and close this file?  In Ms. [redacted]’s eyes, my file was not a priority.  Ms. [redacted] gained the knowledge she needed from the March 2013 consultation and yet it still took over a year and a half to write the report.  That is unreasonable.   Also, no professional should ignore their client’s request for communication and updates on a job her company was hired to do.  No professional should be forced into action through the hiring of an attorney -- but that action is what brought about a conclusion.   I have attached a copy of Ms. [redacted]'s estimate.  How could she have been so far off on how much she anticipated her expense would be?  Again, she did the initial clean up in 2004.  I know the LSRP program was new but imagine you are me and expect a final bill to be close to $2,200 and then be handed a bill for over $4,400.  NEVER was it communicated to me that Ms. [redacted] felt her estimate was inaccurate.  As for why I asked the NJDEP for their sign off, my answer should be obvious, it was because at that point I lost all confidence in Ms. [redacted]'s ability and needed to ensure the State of New Jersey’s records reflected the case as closed.  Ms. [redacted] states the project was finished on August 14, 2014, however, she neglected to tell you that there was additional dialogue regarding fees and her inability to file with the State until all fees were settled.  It was not until AFTER the September 23, 2014 email from NJDEP that the case could move forward for review and ultimately closed, so Care was paid prior to my file being complete.  I will adjust my request regarding settlement and ask Ms. [redacted] to refund my attorney fees in the amount of $500 (I should not have had to hire an attorney to reach conclusion) and I want her to honor her $2,200 quoted contract price and refund my $1,900 overpayment.
Thank you again, [redacted], for your attention to my complaint and I am hopeful we can reach some resolution.
Regards,
[redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]