Response to Rebuttal for Revdex.com Complaint No [redacted] April 14, First, I would like to make it clear that we do not accept the rebuttal from the Wandering Donkey as a final statement on this complaintAlso, it is in no way and acknowledgment on our part that by cashing the check we received from Wandering Donkey that we accept that the complaint is resolvedThere was no supporting documentation, either separately or on the check itself, indicating that cashing the check would resolve the outstanding issue and ba***In [redacted] rebuttal, she stated that her decision to provide churros as part of the menu was based on a phone conversation with our marketing director, ***, who allegedly said "ok" to adding the churros with the reduction of the price based on the elimination of the dipping saucesOur marketing director has no record of this conversation and states firmly that she did not say that it was "ok" to add the churros to the menuIn fact, when [redacted] saw that the churros were being distributed, she immediately addressed this with [redacted] ***, the owner, stating they were not supposed to be part of the menuIt was also stated that the employees as a part of their supposed free meal consumed churros and that is not an accurate statementIt was also said in the rebuttal that [redacted] made a concerted effort to locate the marketing director and the administrator after the event, and that is also a very inaccurate statementThe administrator and marketing director were present and available throughout the entire event, and would have gladly met with ***There was not an effort made on ***'s part to make sure that either of those people were found and the final tally reportedThe obvious solution for [redacted] would have been to simply call ***'s cell phoneIn the rebuttal from [redacted] ***, she acknowledges that there was indeed a conversation with ***e [redacted] , our administrator, where middle ground regarding a final accounting involving a reduced refund back to the Arizona Eye Institute was established and agreed uponIn the spirit of that acknowledgment, both parties achieved a "win-win" solutionIt was a solution that served to cover the cost of the churros without dipping sauce, and allowed for a reduced refund of $to be returned to Arizona Eye InstituteIf this option would have been executed, or still could be executed, as it was intended and accepted in good faith by both parties, there would not have been a business to business complaint filed by Arizona Eye InstituteUnfortunately, that was not the case and Arizona Eye Institute considers this complaint to be active and unresolvedRespectfully Submitted, ***e [redacted] Administrator Arizona Eye Institute & Cosmetic Laser Center
Complaint # [redacted] Arizona Eye Institute / Wandering Donkey 3/4/EventWe too were very disappointed with the results of the day As Arizona Eye Institute representatives and their guests told us how great the food was and how happy they were with our service We negotiated a contract with Dr [redacted] (Az Eye Institute) through his employee [redacted] for an event on March 4, After some negotiations and changes a final and revised contract was agreed upon and signed(see attached document) We did receive an email from [redacted] (Feb2016) stating they did not want the Churros due to the mess it might cause on the carpets with the dipping sauce Instead of sending emails back and forth, I called her to let her know that we could leave out the dipping sauces, therefore, causing no mess She said "ok" I had the impression we would move on with the Churros and we did not get a request to revise the contract The day of the event we served their guests and employees (including ***e & ***) with meals and Churros, per the contract At the end of the event, [redacted] went to find ***e and/or [redacted] to let them know we were done and would be leaving He could not find either person, so he left the propertyGuests (approximately per ***e) and employees (approximately 30) all had meals and Churros At the end of the day they decided they are going to say something about how they didn't want Churros? After eating Churros themselves and watching all their guests with Churros, they then want to dispute the Churros? We had no intention of giving away free ChurrosOn approximately 3/7/or 3/8/16, ***e [redacted] called to discuss the total count of guests and the Churros issue After some discussion, I came to an agreement, but after discussing the situation with [redacted] we decided to stick with our original agreement We did exactly what our contract stated plus much more (accounting & money collection from their vendor reps etc- see below email copy sent to ***e [redacted] on 3/8/16) Dr [redacted] negotiated meals for his guests, we do not typically refund any amount for guests that do not show, but we know how particular he is about costs and we want to win his business back, so we accommodate him and gave him credit for guests that did not show
May 2, 2016: Complaint ID # [redacted] It’s apparent by their rebuttal to our response, Arizona Eye Institute (AEI) has no boundaries as to how low they will go to try and extract money from honest small business people for specifically bargained upon services and product being fully rendered to themThere is certainly ‘NO’ dispute Churros were served to the guests of AEI at an already discounted rateThey know very well their employee [redacted] had agreed to keep the Churros on the menu once her concerns of messiness had been satisfactorily addressedTo demand a deeper discount by leveraging the Revdex.com after the fact is not an acceptable business practice in our mindIn fact, we consider it to be shady and will not veer from the terms of the contract as was executed in fullThe Churros were a revision and became a defined part of the finalized/signed contractTherefore, they remained a part of the contract through the completion of our service to their guests, as no other revision was requested to the contraryBased upon every other change that was made to the food/service in advance, Dr [redacted] through ***, required a ‘change’ to the contract be executedHowever, when it came to the deletion of Churros [redacted] did not request, let alone require a new contract or addendum to reflect thisWhy not this time??? Furthermore, [redacted] didn’t bring this to our attention until the end of service after ‘ALL’ the Churros had been disbursedRegardless of what they claim many of their employees did eat them How convenient to wait until some were passed out starting with their first guest to the last! It is not even realistic to believe the marketing director nor did the administrator not notice hundreds of Churros were being served throughout, right up to the end of the dayDoes AEI, or will anyone, honestly think we would have served Churros for ‘free’ if we were not contractually bound monetarily to do so??? Any reasonable business person will see the true intent of AEI here!In respect to their statement “ [redacted] did not make a concerted effort to locate the marketing director and the administrator after the event” is not relevantThe contracted service had been fully completed in the allotted time as agreedNevertheless, he did try and locate them amongst the 300+ people present with no availFor them to claim this shows their ability to try and falsely skew the facts against us simply because they say so! How could they know if [redacted] did or didn’t seek them out? Furthermore, they knew we had served all their guests on time and we were onsite an additional 45-minutes from that point doing clean-upIf it was imperative for them to speak with [redacted] before his departure they should’ve made the effort themselves to see himThey knew exactly where to find himThe lack of internal coordination and timely communication regarding the Churros on the part of AEI is not the fault of the Wandering Donkey period! We will not negotiate based upon their bad faith to be reimbursed at even deeper discount for service and product rendered per the “Signed Contract”In business the contract ‘ALWAYS’ takes precedence and if changes are to be made, the party seeking the change must do their own diligence that the instrument reflects the changeEverything else in their argument is not relevant without an executed change to the original contract based upon this precedence they themselves set with all other changes negotiated in advance with the Wandering DonkeyShame on Arizona Eye Institute for this unethical practiceWe will be certain to share this experience with our fellow food truckers who know us only as fair and ethical business people within our communityWe strongly encourage AEI to withdraw this frivolous complaint as it will only serve to tarnish their reputation and ability to contract other truckers in the future
Background:The homeowner is in the military, and being transferred in SeptemberHe has spent money on some remodeling at his rental unitsHe had vacancies, and was very anxious to begin and complete the project so the tenants would have a fenced in yardHe had not been able to fill the vacancies
Offering a fenced yard would be an added benefit to showing prospective tenants.It was a very smart decision to remove the asphalt on the West side of his property, fill in with topsoil, plant grass, and provide a fenced in yardThis would completely change the property and provide the needed incentives for his tenants.Our initial contact with the homeowner was over the phoneHe was so anxious that I could hardly understand him, talking so fastIt was quite difficult to understand what he was talking about, and his willingness to provide information so that an offer could be provided.Several hours later, after looking at his property, we provided a price quote for $5,300.00, which he told me was $1,less than another company he had been planning to go withI wanted to have one half down, and the balance on completionThe homeowner agreedLater, I asked the homeowner if it was possible to get an additional $1,paymentHe said it would be fine, and gave the check to an employee on siteInspection of the yard where the asphalt would be removed.Inspection of the area where the fence would be installedInspection of the yard to determine property lines, easements, and required setbacksThree day delay due to required utility locates during regular business hoursAdded delay waiting for locates to be completed due to a weekendDelay due to municipal zoning code clarification from the city on any special requirements for building a fence near an ally wayAll of this information and clarification took over a week, which could have been provided by the home owner, prior to our contactHowever, they were a necessary delay that would benefit the homeownerWe could not start the project until the utility locates were done, and clarification from the city planning and zoning department had been providedIt also rained steady for a couple of days, which delayed the project.MrHomeowner became angry with any delayHe threatened to have his lawyer call meThe three day completion date was the result of threats from the homeownerIn reality, it was not possible to complete the project in three daysAs progress continued, he said he was happy as long as he could see progress being madeOur main project leader's hand swelled up, and was no longer able to work, due to unrelated work issues with his handI had to find another project leader, which caused a delayAgain, the homeowner stated he was happy as long as he could see progress being made.MrHomeowner stated that because there had been delays, he expected us to fix the outside water faucet on his house as part of the dealHe needed it fixed in order to water the lawn on the North sideI agreedOnce the fence and landscaping was complete, I tried to fix the faucet for close to hours, but was unable to do it, since his main water valve had a problem and would not shut the water off.He ended up calling a plumber to fix the outside faucetAbout a week after the project was completed, I received a call from the homeowner complaining that we had the worst service of anyone, and he was extremely dissatisfied with our service, and he was going to spend the rest of his time in Alaska making sure that everyone knows what a crappy service we offer, and to make sure we don't do business with anyone in this townHe wanted a receiptHe said the back yard was not even, and some of the lawn seed had washed awayHe also said he wanted a support board at the top of one of his gates boards like the other gateI asked him why he was so angry? I told him he did not have to be so angryHe said he can be angry if he wants to and it's his right.We went to his house, re-raked his back yard, planted new lawn seed again, and fertilizedHe seemed happy with the resultHe told us his, (father-in-law, or brother-in-law) is a contractor, and he said we should have killed the weeds in the yard before we put in the new topsoilHe said it is an understandable given that does not need to be in writingI told him that was one person's opinion, and it was not mineI told him that appying weed killer on an area where new lawn was going to be planted would contaminate the soil and effect the new lawn seed germinationThe weeds can be killed after the new lawn has come up.Followup:AWe have installed the support board on the other fence gate boards.BWe re-raked, seeded and fertilized the back yardThis is the 3rd time we have added lawn seed.DWe inspected the yard for weeds, bald spots, and overall appearance.EWe picked up our hoses, but Mrhomeowner still has one of our timers.FOn Saturday, July 8, 2017.aI told the homeowner, in response to another angry outburst that I was in Valdez.bI would be by on Monday to put the support board on, which we did.cI would check on the lawn seed, and add more seed if necessary, which we did.dI would add more fertilizer if needed,, it did not need any.eI told him I would mail his receipt, not put it on his truck as requested, had not done.GOn Sunday, July 9, 2017.aEven after I told the home owner that I was in Valdez, I would be by to look at his property on Monday, he was on a rant again, claiming that we did not complete our contract because we did not kill the weeds, trying to link his weeds as part of our landscaping contractwhich it is not, and because the weeds had not been killed the project is not complete.bI told him to quit trying to link his weeds to the project because they are not a part of it.cHe wrote back and insisted that they are.dEven though I had already told him I would be by on Monday, he continued to try and provoke a written response.eI had to remind him again that I was not going to argue with him over text and I would be by on Monday.On Monday, July 10, 2017.aThree of us went by and inspected his yard(Pictures enclosed)Our inspection showed some dandelion leaves poking up through the new grass on the North side of the house, near the East end of the strip of lawn.bLong grass and dandelions on approximately 3'x10' section of grass along the South side of the yard, near the gate(Pictures enclosed)After careful inspection, we could see some very small bald spots inside the tall grass and dandelions(Pictures enclosed).cA small bald spot near the sidewalk and the gate(Pictures enclosed)dThe rest of the lawn was a beautiful deep green color, covering the entire yard, edge to edge.eA thin spot in the middle of the lawn where the homeowner had placed the sprinkler.Response:aChugach Yard Care was hired to provide a serviceSome of the delays were administrative requirements that we had no control over, such as utility locates, and easement notifications.bSome of the actual work delay was caused by the time it took to go and pickup supplies, wait for the topsoil to be delivered, and the time it takes to go to the dump, hauling away the debris.cOne of my guys cut some of the fence boards shorter, and those boards had to be removed, and new ones installed.dMrhomeowner stats that I continue to want to argue and justify our subpar performanceI have never wanted to argue with MrhomeownerHe has never called me up and said, 'hey Harold, can you come over and take a look at my yard and see if you can make some suggestions, or see what you think'? Instead, he calls up with a very hostile combative attitude, telling me what a rotten service we have, how angry he is, how disgruntled he his, and how his objective is to put me out of business, called the JAG office, filed a complaint, make sure I never do business againEach time he has contacted me has been him trying to provoke an argument, trying to provoke a response, trying to link something to something.eIn this complaint letter, he has changed the weed killing issue from his father or brothlaw, now its other landscapers.eThe fact is, I will not kill weeds prior to planting new lawnThe weed killer will contaminate the soil and effect germination and seed development.eI did not include a price quote, or discuss or suggest killing any weeds at any time.eI do not have a license to kill weeds and would not have done soThe other landscapers were not on this project, and did not see the project, and don't understand the scope of the project, so it does not matter what they have to say about it.eThe North side of the property has a natural sloped drainage away from the houseI did not promise to level that area, it has never come up before, so this claim is just another attempt to argue or find something to complain about.eOn July 10, 2017, after inspecting his property, making an assessment of our findings, I sent a text and picturesSometime later, in an attempt to continue to argue and provoke some kind of response from me, he called me on the phone, again, trying to make the weeds growing in a small area of his yard our faultInstead of taking a weed eater, and cutting the grass and weeds down, he let them grow so tall that water could not get through, then trying to say that we have performed an unprofessional serviceWith his words and attitude, full of his traditional anger provoking attitude, he finally got to meHe again, he wanted to blame us for weeds in a small portion of his yard, but it is not our responsibilityWe are not going to correct the weedsTo futher illistrate his intent of provocation, he began using profanity against me, and was obtaining an illegal recording of my responseI was not aware I was being recorded and I did not agree to be recordedNever-the-less, he again vowed to put me out of business, file a complain against me, and contacted the base JAG office, and make sure I never worked on base againI swore at himI told him to take some responsibility for his yard and cut the weeds down.Scope of the Work:Remove old wire fence on the North side of the property, cut back the brush so a new wood fence could be installedIntall new wood fence, with pressure treated posts, pressure treated rail boards, posts cemented into the groundScrew the fence together with painted wood screws to prevent rustingHaul and dispose of the debris. Remove the asphalt from the yardCut and remove a portion of the concreteInstall topsoil on the North side of the house, and the West side of the property, inside the newly formed fenceRake and install Alaska Lawn Mix(R) lawn seedInstall self timers to turn the water on and off several times a day, to keep the seeds moist for germination.AFence Preparation:Use a power auger to drill fence post holes feet deep, at least inches in diameterMost fence post spacing shall be feetClean excess dirt from each post hole.BFence Installation:The fence shall be foot wood fenceThe fence shall be constructed with the following materials:4x4xpressure treated posts, cut off for a stepped down appearance2xpressure treated rail boards, attached with Simpson clips in a verticle position1x5xCedar dog eared fence boardsEach post will be cemeted in the groundFence boards will be screwed on, making potential repairs easier without damage.CLandscaping:Utilizing our compact Volvo loader, break and remove the asphalt driveway on the West side of the propertyUtilizing our Stihl cut off saw, cut and remove excess portions of the sidewalkBring in, spread and rake the topsoilPlant lawn seed, and rake into the soilFertilize the newly planted grassGive the homeowner instructions for watering.Pricing: $5,300.00Payment Terms: Half down, balance on completion.Customer Signature:_____________________________________Date:_______________________ ______________________________________________Title:____________________________...⇄ Print Name _______________________________________________________Organization Name Contractor Signature:_____________________________________________Date:_______________Harol...⇄ Echols______________________________Title_____Owner______________________ Print Name
Response to Rebuttal for Revdex.com Complaint No. [redacted] April 14, 2016 First, I would like to make it clear that we do not accept the rebuttal from the Wandering Donkey as a final statement on this complaint. Also, it is in no way and acknowledgment on our part that by cashing the check we received from Wandering Donkey that we accept that the complaint is resolved. There was no supporting documentation, either separately or on the check itself, indicating that cashing the check would resolve the outstanding issue and ba[redacted]. In [redacted] rebuttal, she stated that her decision to provide churros as part of the menu was based on a phone conversation with our marketing director, [redacted], who allegedly said "ok" to adding the churros with the reduction of the price based on the elimination of the dipping sauces. Our marketing director has no record of this conversation and states firmly that she did not say that it was "ok" to add the churros to the menu. In fact, when [redacted] saw that the churros were being distributed, she immediately addressed this with [redacted], the owner, stating they were not supposed to be part of the menu. It was also stated that the employees as a part of their supposed free meal consumed churros and that is not an accurate statement. It was also said in the rebuttal that [redacted] made a concerted effort to locate the marketing director and the administrator after the event, and that is also a very inaccurate statement. The administrator and marketing director were present and available throughout the entire event, and would have gladly met with [redacted]. There was not an effort made on [redacted]'s part to make sure that either of those people were found and the final tally reported. The obvious solution for [redacted] would have been to simply call [redacted]'s cell phone. In the rebuttal from [redacted], she acknowledges that there was indeed a conversation with [redacted]e [redacted], our administrator, where middle ground regarding a final accounting involving a reduced refund back to the Arizona Eye Institute was established and agreed upon. In the spirit of that acknowledgment, both parties achieved a "win-win" solution. It was a solution that served to cover the cost of the churros without dipping sauce, and allowed for a reduced refund of $360 to be returned to Arizona Eye Institute. If this option would have been executed, or still could be executed, as it was intended and accepted in good faith by both parties, there would not have been a business to business complaint filed by Arizona Eye Institute. Unfortunately, that was not the case and Arizona Eye Institute considers this complaint to be active and unresolved. Respectfully Submitted, [redacted]e [redacted] Administrator Arizona Eye Institute & Cosmetic Laser Center
Complaint #[redacted]Arizona Eye Institute / Wandering Donkey 3/4/16 EventWe too were very disappointed with the results of the day. As Arizona Eye Institute representatives and their guests told us how great the food was and how happy they were with our service. We negotiated a...
contract with Dr. [redacted] (Az Eye Institute) through his employee [redacted] for an event on March 4, 2016. After some negotiations and changes a final and revised contract was agreed upon and signed. (see attached document). We did receive an email from [redacted] (Feb. 2016) stating they did not want the Churros due to the mess it might cause on the carpets with the dipping sauce. Instead of sending emails back and forth, I called her to let her know that we could leave out the dipping sauces, therefore, causing no mess. She said "ok". I had the impression we would move on with the Churros and we did not get a request to revise the contract. The day of the event we served their guests and employees (including [redacted]e & [redacted]) with meals and Churros, per the contract. At the end of the event, [redacted] went to find [redacted]e and/or [redacted] to let them know we were done and would be leaving. He could not find either person, so he left the property. Guests (approximately 348 per [redacted]e) and employees (approximately 30) all had meals and Churros. At the end of the day they decided they are going to say something about how they didn't want Churros? After eating Churros themselves and watching all their guests with Churros, they then want to dispute the Churros? We had no intention of giving away free Churros. On approximately 3/7/16 or 3/8/16, [redacted] called to discuss the total count of guests and the Churros issue. After some discussion, I came to an agreement, but after discussing the situation with [redacted] we decided to stick with our original agreement. We did exactly what our contract stated plus much more (accounting & money collection from their vendor reps etc... - see below email copy sent to [redacted] on 3/8/16) Dr. [redacted] negotiated 350 meals for his guests, we do not typically refund any amount for guests that do not show, but we know how particular he is about costs and we want to win his business back, so we accommodate him and gave him credit for 2 guests that did not show.
May 2, 2016: Complaint ID # [redacted]It’s apparent by their rebuttal to our response, Arizona Eye Institute (AEI) has no boundaries as to how low they will go to try and extract money from honest small business people for specifically bargained upon services and product being fully rendered to them. There is certainly ‘NO’ dispute 300 Churros were served to the guests of AEI at an already discounted rate. They know very well their employee [redacted] had agreed to keep the Churros on the menu once her concerns of messiness had been satisfactorily addressed. To demand a deeper discount by leveraging the Revdex.com after the fact is not an acceptable business practice in our mind. In fact, we consider it to be shady and will not veer from the terms of the contract as was executed in full. The Churros were a revision and became a defined part of the finalized/signed contract. Therefore, they remained a part of the contract through the completion of our service to their guests, as no other revision was requested to the contrary. Based upon every other change that was made to the food/service in advance, Dr. [redacted] through [redacted], required a ‘change’ to the contract be executed. However, when it came to the deletion of Churros [redacted] did not request, let alone require a new contract or addendum to reflect this. Why not this time??? Furthermore, [redacted] didn’t bring this to our attention until the end of service after ‘ALL’ the Churros had been disbursed. Regardless of what they claim many of their employees did eat them. How convenient to wait until some 300 were passed out starting with their first guest to the last! It is not even realistic to believe the marketing director nor did the administrator not notice hundreds of Churros were being served throughout, right up to the end of the day. Does AEI, or will anyone, honestly think we would have served Churros for ‘free’ if we were not contractually bound monetarily to do so??? Any reasonable business person will see the true intent of AEI here!In respect to their statement “[redacted] did not make a concerted effort to locate the marketing director and the administrator after the event” is not relevant. The contracted service had been fully completed in the allotted time as agreed. Nevertheless, he did try and locate them amongst the 300+ people present with no avail. For them to claim this shows their ability to try and falsely skew the facts against us… simply because they say so! How could they know if [redacted] did or didn’t seek them out? Furthermore, they knew we had served all their guests on time and we were onsite an additional 45-minutes from that point doing clean-up. If it was imperative for them to speak with [redacted] before his departure they should’ve made the effort themselves to see him. They knew exactly where to find him. The lack of internal coordination and timely communication regarding the Churros on the part of AEI is not the fault of the Wandering Donkey… period! We will not negotiate based upon their bad faith to be reimbursed at even deeper discount for service and product rendered per the “Signed Contract”. In business the contract ‘ALWAYS’ takes precedence and if changes are to be made, the party seeking the change must do their own diligence that the instrument reflects the change. Everything else in their argument is not relevant without an executed change to the original contract based upon this precedence they themselves set with all other changes negotiated in advance with the Wandering Donkey. Shame on Arizona Eye Institute for this unethical practice. We will be certain to share this experience with our fellow food truckers who know us only as fair and ethical business people within our community. We strongly encourage AEI to withdraw this frivolous complaint as it will only serve to tarnish their reputation and ability to contract other truckers in the future.
From: Harold E[redacted] Subject: #[redacted]Attached are pictures of the project.Harold E[redacted]Chugach Yard Care[redacted]SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REDACTED BY Revdex.com[redacted]
Response to Rebuttal for Revdex.com Complaint No [redacted] April 14, First, I would like to make it clear that we do not accept the rebuttal from the Wandering Donkey as a final statement on this complaintAlso, it is in no way and acknowledgment on our part that by cashing the check we received from Wandering Donkey that we accept that the complaint is resolvedThere was no supporting documentation, either separately or on the check itself, indicating that cashing the check would resolve the outstanding issue and ba***In [redacted] rebuttal, she stated that her decision to provide churros as part of the menu was based on a phone conversation with our marketing director, ***, who allegedly said "ok" to adding the churros with the reduction of the price based on the elimination of the dipping saucesOur marketing director has no record of this conversation and states firmly that she did not say that it was "ok" to add the churros to the menuIn fact, when [redacted] saw that the churros were being distributed, she immediately addressed this with [redacted] ***, the owner, stating they were not supposed to be part of the menuIt was also stated that the employees as a part of their supposed free meal consumed churros and that is not an accurate statementIt was also said in the rebuttal that [redacted] made a concerted effort to locate the marketing director and the administrator after the event, and that is also a very inaccurate statementThe administrator and marketing director were present and available throughout the entire event, and would have gladly met with ***There was not an effort made on ***'s part to make sure that either of those people were found and the final tally reportedThe obvious solution for [redacted] would have been to simply call ***'s cell phoneIn the rebuttal from [redacted] ***, she acknowledges that there was indeed a conversation with ***e [redacted] , our administrator, where middle ground regarding a final accounting involving a reduced refund back to the Arizona Eye Institute was established and agreed uponIn the spirit of that acknowledgment, both parties achieved a "win-win" solutionIt was a solution that served to cover the cost of the churros without dipping sauce, and allowed for a reduced refund of $to be returned to Arizona Eye InstituteIf this option would have been executed, or still could be executed, as it was intended and accepted in good faith by both parties, there would not have been a business to business complaint filed by Arizona Eye InstituteUnfortunately, that was not the case and Arizona Eye Institute considers this complaint to be active and unresolvedRespectfully Submitted, ***e [redacted] Administrator Arizona Eye Institute & Cosmetic Laser Center
Complaint # [redacted] Arizona Eye Institute / Wandering Donkey 3/4/EventWe too were very disappointed with the results of the day As Arizona Eye Institute representatives and their guests told us how great the food was and how happy they were with our service We negotiated a contract with Dr [redacted] (Az Eye Institute) through his employee [redacted] for an event on March 4, After some negotiations and changes a final and revised contract was agreed upon and signed(see attached document) We did receive an email from [redacted] (Feb2016) stating they did not want the Churros due to the mess it might cause on the carpets with the dipping sauce Instead of sending emails back and forth, I called her to let her know that we could leave out the dipping sauces, therefore, causing no mess She said "ok" I had the impression we would move on with the Churros and we did not get a request to revise the contract The day of the event we served their guests and employees (including ***e & ***) with meals and Churros, per the contract At the end of the event, [redacted] went to find ***e and/or [redacted] to let them know we were done and would be leaving He could not find either person, so he left the propertyGuests (approximately per ***e) and employees (approximately 30) all had meals and Churros At the end of the day they decided they are going to say something about how they didn't want Churros? After eating Churros themselves and watching all their guests with Churros, they then want to dispute the Churros? We had no intention of giving away free ChurrosOn approximately 3/7/or 3/8/16, ***e [redacted] called to discuss the total count of guests and the Churros issue After some discussion, I came to an agreement, but after discussing the situation with [redacted] we decided to stick with our original agreement We did exactly what our contract stated plus much more (accounting & money collection from their vendor reps etc- see below email copy sent to ***e [redacted] on 3/8/16) Dr [redacted] negotiated meals for his guests, we do not typically refund any amount for guests that do not show, but we know how particular he is about costs and we want to win his business back, so we accommodate him and gave him credit for guests that did not show
May 2, 2016: Complaint ID # [redacted] It’s apparent by their rebuttal to our response, Arizona Eye Institute (AEI) has no boundaries as to how low they will go to try and extract money from honest small business people for specifically bargained upon services and product being fully rendered to themThere is certainly ‘NO’ dispute Churros were served to the guests of AEI at an already discounted rateThey know very well their employee [redacted] had agreed to keep the Churros on the menu once her concerns of messiness had been satisfactorily addressedTo demand a deeper discount by leveraging the Revdex.com after the fact is not an acceptable business practice in our mindIn fact, we consider it to be shady and will not veer from the terms of the contract as was executed in fullThe Churros were a revision and became a defined part of the finalized/signed contractTherefore, they remained a part of the contract through the completion of our service to their guests, as no other revision was requested to the contraryBased upon every other change that was made to the food/service in advance, Dr [redacted] through ***, required a ‘change’ to the contract be executedHowever, when it came to the deletion of Churros [redacted] did not request, let alone require a new contract or addendum to reflect thisWhy not this time??? Furthermore, [redacted] didn’t bring this to our attention until the end of service after ‘ALL’ the Churros had been disbursedRegardless of what they claim many of their employees did eat them How convenient to wait until some were passed out starting with their first guest to the last! It is not even realistic to believe the marketing director nor did the administrator not notice hundreds of Churros were being served throughout, right up to the end of the dayDoes AEI, or will anyone, honestly think we would have served Churros for ‘free’ if we were not contractually bound monetarily to do so??? Any reasonable business person will see the true intent of AEI here!In respect to their statement “ [redacted] did not make a concerted effort to locate the marketing director and the administrator after the event” is not relevantThe contracted service had been fully completed in the allotted time as agreedNevertheless, he did try and locate them amongst the 300+ people present with no availFor them to claim this shows their ability to try and falsely skew the facts against us simply because they say so! How could they know if [redacted] did or didn’t seek them out? Furthermore, they knew we had served all their guests on time and we were onsite an additional 45-minutes from that point doing clean-upIf it was imperative for them to speak with [redacted] before his departure they should’ve made the effort themselves to see himThey knew exactly where to find himThe lack of internal coordination and timely communication regarding the Churros on the part of AEI is not the fault of the Wandering Donkey period! We will not negotiate based upon their bad faith to be reimbursed at even deeper discount for service and product rendered per the “Signed Contract”In business the contract ‘ALWAYS’ takes precedence and if changes are to be made, the party seeking the change must do their own diligence that the instrument reflects the changeEverything else in their argument is not relevant without an executed change to the original contract based upon this precedence they themselves set with all other changes negotiated in advance with the Wandering DonkeyShame on Arizona Eye Institute for this unethical practiceWe will be certain to share this experience with our fellow food truckers who know us only as fair and ethical business people within our communityWe strongly encourage AEI to withdraw this frivolous complaint as it will only serve to tarnish their reputation and ability to contract other truckers in the future
Background:The homeowner is in the military, and being transferred in SeptemberHe has spent money on some remodeling at his rental unitsHe had vacancies, and was very anxious to begin and complete the project so the tenants would have a fenced in yardHe had not been able to fill the vacancies
Offering a fenced yard would be an added benefit to showing prospective tenants.It was a very smart decision to remove the asphalt on the West side of his property, fill in with topsoil, plant grass, and provide a fenced in yardThis would completely change the property and provide the needed incentives for his tenants.Our initial contact with the homeowner was over the phoneHe was so anxious that I could hardly understand him, talking so fastIt was quite difficult to understand what he was talking about, and his willingness to provide information so that an offer could be provided.Several hours later, after looking at his property, we provided a price quote for $5,300.00, which he told me was $1,less than another company he had been planning to go withI wanted to have one half down, and the balance on completionThe homeowner agreedLater, I asked the homeowner if it was possible to get an additional $1,paymentHe said it would be fine, and gave the check to an employee on siteInspection of the yard where the asphalt would be removed.Inspection of the area where the fence would be installedInspection of the yard to determine property lines, easements, and required setbacksThree day delay due to required utility locates during regular business hoursAdded delay waiting for locates to be completed due to a weekendDelay due to municipal zoning code clarification from the city on any special requirements for building a fence near an ally wayAll of this information and clarification took over a week, which could have been provided by the home owner, prior to our contactHowever, they were a necessary delay that would benefit the homeownerWe could not start the project until the utility locates were done, and clarification from the city planning and zoning department had been providedIt also rained steady for a couple of days, which delayed the project.MrHomeowner became angry with any delayHe threatened to have his lawyer call meThe three day completion date was the result of threats from the homeownerIn reality, it was not possible to complete the project in three daysAs progress continued, he said he was happy as long as he could see progress being madeOur main project leader's hand swelled up, and was no longer able to work, due to unrelated work issues with his handI had to find another project leader, which caused a delayAgain, the homeowner stated he was happy as long as he could see progress being made.MrHomeowner stated that because there had been delays, he expected us to fix the outside water faucet on his house as part of the dealHe needed it fixed in order to water the lawn on the North sideI agreedOnce the fence and landscaping was complete, I tried to fix the faucet for close to hours, but was unable to do it, since his main water valve had a problem and would not shut the water off.He ended up calling a plumber to fix the outside faucetAbout a week after the project was completed, I received a call from the homeowner complaining that we had the worst service of anyone, and he was extremely dissatisfied with our service, and he was going to spend the rest of his time in Alaska making sure that everyone knows what a crappy service we offer, and to make sure we don't do business with anyone in this townHe wanted a receiptHe said the back yard was not even, and some of the lawn seed had washed awayHe also said he wanted a support board at the top of one of his gates boards like the other gateI asked him why he was so angry? I told him he did not have to be so angryHe said he can be angry if he wants to and it's his right.We went to his house, re-raked his back yard, planted new lawn seed again, and fertilizedHe seemed happy with the resultHe told us his, (father-in-law, or brother-in-law) is a contractor, and he said we should have killed the weeds in the yard before we put in the new topsoilHe said it is an understandable given that does not need to be in writingI told him that was one person's opinion, and it was not mineI told him that appying weed killer on an area where new lawn was going to be planted would contaminate the soil and effect the new lawn seed germinationThe weeds can be killed after the new lawn has come up.Followup:AWe have installed the support board on the other fence gate boards.BWe re-raked, seeded and fertilized the back yardThis is the 3rd time we have added lawn seed.DWe inspected the yard for weeds, bald spots, and overall appearance.EWe picked up our hoses, but Mrhomeowner still has one of our timers.FOn Saturday, July 8, 2017.aI told the homeowner, in response to another angry outburst that I was in Valdez.bI would be by on Monday to put the support board on, which we did.cI would check on the lawn seed, and add more seed if necessary, which we did.dI would add more fertilizer if needed,, it did not need any.eI told him I would mail his receipt, not put it on his truck as requested, had not done.GOn Sunday, July 9, 2017.aEven after I told the home owner that I was in Valdez, I would be by to look at his property on Monday, he was on a rant again, claiming that we did not complete our contract because we did not kill the weeds, trying to link his weeds as part of our landscaping contractwhich it is not, and because the weeds had not been killed the project is not complete.bI told him to quit trying to link his weeds to the project because they are not a part of it.cHe wrote back and insisted that they are.dEven though I had already told him I would be by on Monday, he continued to try and provoke a written response.eI had to remind him again that I was not going to argue with him over text and I would be by on Monday.On Monday, July 10, 2017.aThree of us went by and inspected his yard(Pictures enclosed)Our inspection showed some dandelion leaves poking up through the new grass on the North side of the house, near the East end of the strip of lawn.bLong grass and dandelions on approximately 3'x10' section of grass along the South side of the yard, near the gate(Pictures enclosed)After careful inspection, we could see some very small bald spots inside the tall grass and dandelions(Pictures enclosed).cA small bald spot near the sidewalk and the gate(Pictures enclosed)dThe rest of the lawn was a beautiful deep green color, covering the entire yard, edge to edge.eA thin spot in the middle of the lawn where the homeowner had placed the sprinkler.Response:aChugach Yard Care was hired to provide a serviceSome of the delays were administrative requirements that we had no control over, such as utility locates, and easement notifications.bSome of the actual work delay was caused by the time it took to go and pickup supplies, wait for the topsoil to be delivered, and the time it takes to go to the dump, hauling away the debris.cOne of my guys cut some of the fence boards shorter, and those boards had to be removed, and new ones installed.dMrhomeowner stats that I continue to want to argue and justify our subpar performanceI have never wanted to argue with MrhomeownerHe has never called me up and said, 'hey Harold, can you come over and take a look at my yard and see if you can make some suggestions, or see what you think'? Instead, he calls up with a very hostile combative attitude, telling me what a rotten service we have, how angry he is, how disgruntled he his, and how his objective is to put me out of business, called the JAG office, filed a complaint, make sure I never do business againEach time he has contacted me has been him trying to provoke an argument, trying to provoke a response, trying to link something to something.eIn this complaint letter, he has changed the weed killing issue from his father or brothlaw, now its other landscapers.eThe fact is, I will not kill weeds prior to planting new lawnThe weed killer will contaminate the soil and effect germination and seed development.eI did not include a price quote, or discuss or suggest killing any weeds at any time.eI do not have a license to kill weeds and would not have done soThe other landscapers were not on this project, and did not see the project, and don't understand the scope of the project, so it does not matter what they have to say about it.eThe North side of the property has a natural sloped drainage away from the houseI did not promise to level that area, it has never come up before, so this claim is just another attempt to argue or find something to complain about.eOn July 10, 2017, after inspecting his property, making an assessment of our findings, I sent a text and picturesSometime later, in an attempt to continue to argue and provoke some kind of response from me, he called me on the phone, again, trying to make the weeds growing in a small area of his yard our faultInstead of taking a weed eater, and cutting the grass and weeds down, he let them grow so tall that water could not get through, then trying to say that we have performed an unprofessional serviceWith his words and attitude, full of his traditional anger provoking attitude, he finally got to meHe again, he wanted to blame us for weeds in a small portion of his yard, but it is not our responsibilityWe are not going to correct the weedsTo futher illistrate his intent of provocation, he began using profanity against me, and was obtaining an illegal recording of my responseI was not aware I was being recorded and I did not agree to be recordedNever-the-less, he again vowed to put me out of business, file a complain against me, and contacted the base JAG office, and make sure I never worked on base againI swore at himI told him to take some responsibility for his yard and cut the weeds down.Scope of the Work:Remove old wire fence on the North side of the property, cut back the brush so a new wood fence could be installedIntall new wood fence, with pressure treated posts, pressure treated rail boards, posts cemented into the groundScrew the fence together with painted wood screws to prevent rustingHaul and dispose of the debris. Remove the asphalt from the yardCut and remove a portion of the concreteInstall topsoil on the North side of the house, and the West side of the property, inside the newly formed fenceRake and install Alaska Lawn Mix(R) lawn seedInstall self timers to turn the water on and off several times a day, to keep the seeds moist for germination.AFence Preparation:Use a power auger to drill fence post holes feet deep, at least inches in diameterMost fence post spacing shall be feetClean excess dirt from each post hole.BFence Installation:The fence shall be foot wood fenceThe fence shall be constructed with the following materials:4x4xpressure treated posts, cut off for a stepped down appearance2xpressure treated rail boards, attached with Simpson clips in a verticle position1x5xCedar dog eared fence boardsEach post will be cemeted in the groundFence boards will be screwed on, making potential repairs easier without damage.CLandscaping:Utilizing our compact Volvo loader, break and remove the asphalt driveway on the West side of the propertyUtilizing our Stihl cut off saw, cut and remove excess portions of the sidewalkBring in, spread and rake the topsoilPlant lawn seed, and rake into the soilFertilize the newly planted grassGive the homeowner instructions for watering.Pricing: $5,300.00Payment Terms: Half down, balance on completion.Customer Signature:_____________________________________Date:_______________________ ______________________________________________Title:____________________________...⇄ Print Name _______________________________________________________Organization Name Contractor Signature:_____________________________________________Date:_______________Harol...⇄ Echols______________________________Title_____Owner______________________ Print Name
Response to Rebuttal for Revdex.com Complaint No. [redacted] April 14, 2016 First, I would like to make it clear that we do not accept the rebuttal from the Wandering Donkey as a final statement on this complaint. Also, it is in no way and acknowledgment on our part that by cashing the check we received from Wandering Donkey that we accept that the complaint is resolved. There was no supporting documentation, either separately or on the check itself, indicating that cashing the check would resolve the outstanding issue and ba[redacted]. In [redacted] rebuttal, she stated that her decision to provide churros as part of the menu was based on a phone conversation with our marketing director, [redacted], who allegedly said "ok" to adding the churros with the reduction of the price based on the elimination of the dipping sauces. Our marketing director has no record of this conversation and states firmly that she did not say that it was "ok" to add the churros to the menu. In fact, when [redacted] saw that the churros were being distributed, she immediately addressed this with [redacted], the owner, stating they were not supposed to be part of the menu. It was also stated that the employees as a part of their supposed free meal consumed churros and that is not an accurate statement. It was also said in the rebuttal that [redacted] made a concerted effort to locate the marketing director and the administrator after the event, and that is also a very inaccurate statement. The administrator and marketing director were present and available throughout the entire event, and would have gladly met with [redacted]. There was not an effort made on [redacted]'s part to make sure that either of those people were found and the final tally reported. The obvious solution for [redacted] would have been to simply call [redacted]'s cell phone. In the rebuttal from [redacted], she acknowledges that there was indeed a conversation with [redacted]e [redacted], our administrator, where middle ground regarding a final accounting involving a reduced refund back to the Arizona Eye Institute was established and agreed upon. In the spirit of that acknowledgment, both parties achieved a "win-win" solution. It was a solution that served to cover the cost of the churros without dipping sauce, and allowed for a reduced refund of $360 to be returned to Arizona Eye Institute. If this option would have been executed, or still could be executed, as it was intended and accepted in good faith by both parties, there would not have been a business to business complaint filed by Arizona Eye Institute. Unfortunately, that was not the case and Arizona Eye Institute considers this complaint to be active and unresolved. Respectfully Submitted, [redacted]e [redacted] Administrator Arizona Eye Institute & Cosmetic Laser Center
Complaint #[redacted]Arizona Eye Institute / Wandering Donkey 3/4/16 EventWe too were very disappointed with the results of the day. As Arizona Eye Institute representatives and their guests told us how great the food was and how happy they were with our service. We negotiated a...
contract with Dr. [redacted] (Az Eye Institute) through his employee [redacted] for an event on March 4, 2016. After some negotiations and changes a final and revised contract was agreed upon and signed. (see attached document). We did receive an email from [redacted] (Feb. 2016) stating they did not want the Churros due to the mess it might cause on the carpets with the dipping sauce. Instead of sending emails back and forth, I called her to let her know that we could leave out the dipping sauces, therefore, causing no mess. She said "ok". I had the impression we would move on with the Churros and we did not get a request to revise the contract. The day of the event we served their guests and employees (including [redacted]e & [redacted]) with meals and Churros, per the contract. At the end of the event, [redacted] went to find [redacted]e and/or [redacted] to let them know we were done and would be leaving. He could not find either person, so he left the property. Guests (approximately 348 per [redacted]e) and employees (approximately 30) all had meals and Churros. At the end of the day they decided they are going to say something about how they didn't want Churros? After eating Churros themselves and watching all their guests with Churros, they then want to dispute the Churros? We had no intention of giving away free Churros. On approximately 3/7/16 or 3/8/16, [redacted] called to discuss the total count of guests and the Churros issue. After some discussion, I came to an agreement, but after discussing the situation with [redacted] we decided to stick with our original agreement. We did exactly what our contract stated plus much more (accounting & money collection from their vendor reps etc... - see below email copy sent to [redacted] on 3/8/16) Dr. [redacted] negotiated 350 meals for his guests, we do not typically refund any amount for guests that do not show, but we know how particular he is about costs and we want to win his business back, so we accommodate him and gave him credit for 2 guests that did not show.
May 2, 2016: Complaint ID # [redacted]It’s apparent by their rebuttal to our response, Arizona Eye Institute (AEI) has no boundaries as to how low they will go to try and extract money from honest small business people for specifically bargained upon services and product being fully rendered to them. There is certainly ‘NO’ dispute 300 Churros were served to the guests of AEI at an already discounted rate. They know very well their employee [redacted] had agreed to keep the Churros on the menu once her concerns of messiness had been satisfactorily addressed. To demand a deeper discount by leveraging the Revdex.com after the fact is not an acceptable business practice in our mind. In fact, we consider it to be shady and will not veer from the terms of the contract as was executed in full. The Churros were a revision and became a defined part of the finalized/signed contract. Therefore, they remained a part of the contract through the completion of our service to their guests, as no other revision was requested to the contrary. Based upon every other change that was made to the food/service in advance, Dr. [redacted] through [redacted], required a ‘change’ to the contract be executed. However, when it came to the deletion of Churros [redacted] did not request, let alone require a new contract or addendum to reflect this. Why not this time??? Furthermore, [redacted] didn’t bring this to our attention until the end of service after ‘ALL’ the Churros had been disbursed. Regardless of what they claim many of their employees did eat them. How convenient to wait until some 300 were passed out starting with their first guest to the last! It is not even realistic to believe the marketing director nor did the administrator not notice hundreds of Churros were being served throughout, right up to the end of the day. Does AEI, or will anyone, honestly think we would have served Churros for ‘free’ if we were not contractually bound monetarily to do so??? Any reasonable business person will see the true intent of AEI here!In respect to their statement “[redacted] did not make a concerted effort to locate the marketing director and the administrator after the event” is not relevant. The contracted service had been fully completed in the allotted time as agreed. Nevertheless, he did try and locate them amongst the 300+ people present with no avail. For them to claim this shows their ability to try and falsely skew the facts against us… simply because they say so! How could they know if [redacted] did or didn’t seek them out? Furthermore, they knew we had served all their guests on time and we were onsite an additional 45-minutes from that point doing clean-up. If it was imperative for them to speak with [redacted] before his departure they should’ve made the effort themselves to see him. They knew exactly where to find him. The lack of internal coordination and timely communication regarding the Churros on the part of AEI is not the fault of the Wandering Donkey… period! We will not negotiate based upon their bad faith to be reimbursed at even deeper discount for service and product rendered per the “Signed Contract”. In business the contract ‘ALWAYS’ takes precedence and if changes are to be made, the party seeking the change must do their own diligence that the instrument reflects the change. Everything else in their argument is not relevant without an executed change to the original contract based upon this precedence they themselves set with all other changes negotiated in advance with the Wandering Donkey. Shame on Arizona Eye Institute for this unethical practice. We will be certain to share this experience with our fellow food truckers who know us only as fair and ethical business people within our community. We strongly encourage AEI to withdraw this frivolous complaint as it will only serve to tarnish their reputation and ability to contract other truckers in the future.
From: Harold E[redacted] Subject: #[redacted]Attached are pictures of the project.Harold E[redacted]Chugach Yard Care[redacted]SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REDACTED BY Revdex.com[redacted]