Central Cascade Survey

Review: I hired [redacted] (owner of Central Cascade Surveying) to do various surveying tasks on an hourly basis.At the end of the work, I've received an invoice that included - charges for services that were neither requested nor necessary to complete the task- excessive time billed for 4 different tasks - "accounting" late fee on the very first invoice submitted to me[redacted] also did not honor his advertised [redacted] discount of 5%.The total amount of disputed charges is $1140 for a total billed (and fully paid) amount of $2550.I have reached out to [redacted] via phone, e-mails as well as certified mail outlining my dispute in detail and requesting to substantiate his invoices as well as to engage in a dialogue. He immediately threatened with collection activities and his lawyer, but so far has failed to answer the request and is not communicating otherwise.Desired Settlement: I am again requesting [redacted] to first engage in a factual and cooperative dialogue and secondly to substantiate his invoice.Unless a reasonable claim for the overcharged time can be produced, I am expecting the refund of all disputed hourly charges.I am also requesting a full refund of any charged "accounting" late fee as well as honoring his advertised 5% [redacted] discount.

Business

Response:

Please See Attached

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 9748864, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

Central Cascade Surveying made no offer at all on this dispute.

Below is my response and compromise offer to Central Cascade Surveying based on the provided documentation.

Regards,

Dear [redacted],

in response to your letter with attachments to the Revdex.com from October 28thm 2013, I would like to follow up from my side by concentrating on the dispute and lay out facts on the following topics:

1. work performed in March

The March work performed by Central Cascade Surveying is not under dispute at all and was paid in full within 2 days of receiving the invoice. The invoice is dated 4/3/2013, was received by me for the first time on 4/3/2013 at 11:15pm via email and the payment check was sent out on 4/5/2013, but not cashed until 4/12/2013. See attached proof from my bank. I even had sent [redacted] an email on 3/26/2013 asking him for payment details, but that email went unanswered (see attached proof of my email that I sent to him).

Nobody forced Central Cascade Surveying to release anything against their will. I strongly repulse any accusations of “cheating” or similar acts. [redacted] was in full control of his actions at all times and there was no fraudulent or even unethical activity from my side at all.

2. contract and tasks requested

The contract is between “Central Cascade Survey” and “[redacted]” and not anybody else. Any direction that might have been received from [redacted] should have been at an absolute minimum communicated and double checked with me as the customer and responsible billing party to make sure that I was aware of it and agree with it. This did not occur and there was no communication at all from Central Cascade Surveying to me until I received the two disputed invoices.

For example, I had never seen the “Contractor request for survey” sheet with the defined Survey Tasks until Central Cascade Surveying’s response to the Revdex.com complaint.

The 5 hours in question were spent on 8/10 and 8/11, with the document not signed by Lou Lincoln of [redacted] until the morning of 8/12 before the start of the field work.

The sheet also states “Is overtime authorized?” “No” as well as “Will overtime be required?” “No”, however the actual time spent on task 4. was then charged at 4 hours above the stated 3 hours - that's 233% of the estimated time.

There was no ambiguity around staking the corners of the house as it is completely independent on the alleged vertical elevation uncertainties and should have been completed within the estimated time or slightly above.

3. creation of new drawings for "45 degree rule"

The information about the 45 degree rule from the City of Bellevue as well as all vertical measurements of the house were included in the provided plans (as shown by Central Cascade Surveying themselves in the Revdex.com response attachment), so no time was necessary at all to recreate the new drawing in order to perform the requested task.

4. onsite discussions

The discussion on the morning of 8/12 was solely caused by Central Cascade Surveying due to introducing the newly created drawings and confusing everybody unnecessarily. The driveway elevations were absolutely irrelevant for the requested work and are completely unrelated to the dispute.

The intended elevations of the house were known already since they were submitted on the site plans to the City of Bellevue in May (see attached). After the unnecessary discussion, nothing had changed from the original request to stake the corners and set the elevation per plan at 410 feet.

5. invoices

Central Cascade Surveying never sent me an invoice until 9/11/2013 with the email (attached), which I responded to via email on the same day and immediately issued a check with partial payment pending the outcome of the response to my dispute.

To suggest that I left the site to avoid receiving an invoice is completely unfounded and unreasonable. I’ve left the site in the early afternoon to attend work at my employer as I had missed multiple hours already in the morning. Central Cascade Surveying gave no indications at all about its intend to issue an invoice at the end of the day and that I have to stay on site until then. There is no requirement for a customer to stick around for the whole work to be finalized to “accept the invoice”.

Central Cascade Surveying made no effort at all to send the invoices to me via e-mail or even mail any sooner. How should a customer pay Central Cascade Surveying without knowing how much to pay? I was waiting to receive an invoice once all work was finalized, just like it is common with all the other contractors I was working with on this project so far.

I never got a chance to even pay one of the invoices before it became overdue in the eyes of Central Cascade Surveying.

6. "money owed” statement

I would like to firmly point out that I do not owe any money to Central Cascade Surveying at all. All invoices, including the disputed ones, have been paid in full.

I was basically forced to fully pay the invoices in order to avoid any threatened collection activity against me and then seek repayment on the disputed amount.

I have reviewed the submitted substantiations of the bills from Central Cascade in detail and hereby would like to adjust my claim as follows:

a.) I was not aware of the “contractor request for survey” signed by my general contractor. It would have been helpful to see this document myself for signature prior to the work starting, as I would have been able to address any issues beforehand.

It is difficult to assess who should have provided or requested this beforehand or which task should have taken how long and therefore, while I continue to stand by my position that I have not authorized the additional 5 hours of work and that 2.5 hours of the 10 hours for the field work were excessive, I am willing to offer a compromise by accepting 11 of the total 15 hours total for invoice #359A. This compromise offer is effectively reducing the number of disputed hours by more then half from 7.5 to 3. 5 hours ($350)

b.) I was not aware of the apparent hand delivery of affidavits to the City of Bellevue. I apologize for this and definitely appreciate that extra service. Based on this information I completely drop my claim on the affidavit hours on invoice #366a as well as reduce the claim for the field work from 2 to 1 hours for the 6 hours charged ($100).

c.) I fully uphold my claim on the charged accounting/rebilling charge ($50) as I continue to see full responsibility with Central Cascade Surveying to provide its customers directly with invoices for its services. If I would have received the invoice earlier, I would have made payments, just like I did when I received the invoices on 9/11/13.

d.) I never really had the chance to pay either of the disputed invoices on time due to the late delivery, and while I still firmly believe that it is unfair practice to not grant the [redacted] discount, I am willing to forgo this discount as a sign of cooperation and commitment to resolve this dispute amicably.

In summary, I am offering a compromise that reduces my claim to a total of $500.

I am doing this to show that I am listening to the arguments that were submitted and that I am willing to compromise on the remaining dispute.

I am extending this offer in good faith that Central Cascade Survey considers my point of view in this matter as well and will accept to put the issue to rest.

However, unless Central Cascade Surveying agrees to this compromise and submits payment by November 31st, I fully intend to make this dispute known to the Attorney General as well as the Department of Licensing and to file a lawsuit in small claims court.

This statement is not intended as a threat and instead should be seen as my full commitment to pursue any available path to get a fair and reasonable treatment in this matter.

Sincerely

Consumer

Response:

I find arbitration the most objective way to potentially close out this dispute in a legally binding way without having to go through the legal system and would like to go ahead if [redacted] agrees to the same.

sincerely