Coastal Diabetes LLC

On May 8, 2017, the Buyer's and Buyer's Agent, [redacted] ***, met with Mr [redacted] to complete a pest inspectionA termite inspection is actually a Wood Destroying Organism Inspection, which is clearly defined and stated on page of every report we completeWe look for Section I items which pertain to active infestation and Section II items, which are conducive conditions that in future may become Section I itemsOnce the inspection was completed, the Inspector reviewed all findings of the report with the Buyers and Buyer's AgentThe Inspector walked the property with the Buyer and Buyer's Agent to review his findings on the field sheetMr [redacted] noticed that the Buyer's Agent was becoming irritatedAfter reviewing the field sheet, the Buyer's Agent confronted Mr [redacted] and questioned all findings that were foundShe indicated in her experience she had never seen dry rot as a finding on a pest reportOn May 25, 2017, the Buyer's Agent requested Mr [redacted] meet her with the Buyer's and Seller, who had flown in from out of state, to complete the repairs, to re-inspect the completed items that had been repaired; which is known as a Re-InspectionOn May 25, 2017, at the beginning of the review, the Seller was confrontational, due to the fact that he had repaired some items without the understanding of the scope of the pest inspectionMr [redacted] walked with the Seller to review the items listed on the ReportThe Buyer's and Buyer's Agent remained in the structureMr [redacted] explained to the Seller the conditions of the Section I and II findings on the reportIt was discussed between the Inspector, [redacted] and the Seller admitted that he had not understood the scope of the report initiallyThe Seller was only able to repair (3) three Section I items of concernAfter review of the report the Seller stated he understood and agreed to the findings on the reportThe Seller stated that [redacted] had treated the surface fungus under the structure, but Mr [redacted] was never given documentation to sign that item off as completedMr [redacted] gave a summary to the Buyers and Buyer's Agent, due to them not being present during the conversation with the Seller previously outsideFollowing the summary to the Buyers and the Buyer's Agent, they both became very upset with the Inspector and the Buyer's Agent also stated that the Inspector had added additional findings to the report, which was untrueThere were ReportsThe original Report [redacted] was completed on May 8, 2017, and resent as a corrected report due to a coding errorA Supplemental Report [redacted] was also issued on May 8, 2017, indicating dry rot at the garageThe Buyer's Agent called and requested an appointment with Mr[redacted] to meet at the property to re-inspect the items repairedOn May 25, 2017, Mr [redacted] completed a Re-Inspection Report [redacted] The Inspector could only clear of Section I items that had been completed and therefore, no Section I or II Clearance could be given at that timeThe Buyer's Agent paid for the original Inspection, indicating it was a gift to the Buyer's which she paid by credit cardThe Buyer's Agent indicated she would no longer use River City Termite and Pest Control for servicesShe has refused to pay for the Re-Inspection and at this time is still outstanding, although we don't expect payment at this time

On May 8, 2017, the Buyer and their Agent, *** ***, met with Mr*** to complete a pest inspection. A Termite Inspection is actually a wood destroying organism inspection, which is stated on page of our reportWe for look for Section items, which is active infestation or
infection. Section items, which are conducive conditions that may in future become a Section I item. Once the inspection was completed, the Inspector reviewed all findings of the report with the Buyer’s and their Agent, Ms***. When Mr*** walked the property with the Buyer’s and their Agent to review the findings on the report, Mr*** noticed the agent was becoming irritated. After reviewing the report, the Agent confronted Mr*** and question all of the findings on the report. She indicated that in her experience, dry rot had never been a finding on a Pest ReportOn May 25, 2017, the Buyer’s Agents had requested Mr*** come back to the property to perform a Re-Inspection. A Re-Isnspection is to review the completed items of repair. He met with the Buyer, Agent and the Seller who had flown in from out of state to complete the repairs. In the beginning, the Seller was confrontational, due to the fact that he was fixing repairs without understanding the scope of the Pest Inspection. Glenn *** walked with the Seller to review items that were listed in the report. The Buyer and Agent remained inside the structure. Mr*** explained to the Seller the conditions of the Section 1, Section and findings on the report. The Seller was only able to repair area of concern, under the house was completed by ***, as per Seller’s conversation with Mr***. Mr*** then gave a summary to the Buyer and Agent because they were not present for that conversation. After review of the report, they understood and agreed to the findings on the report. It was discussed with the Seller and the inspector. The Seller admitted that he had not understood the scope of the report initially. Once providing the summary with the Buyer and Buyer’s Agent, the Buyer and Buyer’s Agent were very upset with the inspector. The Buyer’s Agent, Ms***, again questioned all of the findings on the report. The Buyer’s Agent stated that the inspection had added additional findings, which was untrue. There were reports. The original Report Wwas sent on May 8, 2017, and immediately resent as a corrected report due to a doing error. On May 8, 2017, a Supplemental Report Wwas also sent to indicate dry rot at the garage door. On May 25, 2017, Mr*** was able to sign off as completed, items of total. Regarding the surface fungus, although it was *** completed Mr*** never received any documentation showing that was completed. The Buyer’s Agent paid for the original Inspection for the Buyer’s, indicating it was a gift to the Buyer’s which she paid by credit card. She refused to pay for the Re-Inspection and at this time that fee is still outstanding; which we do not expect payment forThe Buyer’ Agent indicated that she would no longer use our company for services. why here

On May 8, 2017, the Buyer's and Buyer's Agent, [redacted], met with Mr. [redacted] to complete a pest inspection. A termite inspection is actually a Wood Destroying Organism Inspection, which is clearly defined and stated on page 2 of every report we complete. We look for Section I items which...

pertain to active infestation and Section II items, which are conducive conditions that in future may become Section I items. Once the inspection was completed, the Inspector reviewed all findings of the report with the Buyers and Buyer's Agent. The Inspector walked the property with the Buyer and Buyer's Agent to review his findings on the field sheet. Mr. [redacted] noticed that the Buyer's Agent was becoming irritated. After reviewing the field sheet, the Buyer's Agent confronted Mr. [redacted] and questioned all findings that were found. She indicated in her experience she had never seen dry rot as a finding on a pest report. On May 25, 2017, the Buyer's Agent requested Mr. [redacted] meet her with the Buyer's and Seller, who had flown in from out of state, to complete the repairs, to re-inspect the completed items that had been repaired; which is known as a Re-Inspection. On May 25, 2017, at the beginning of the review, the Seller was confrontational, due to the fact that he had repaired some items without the understanding of the scope of the pest inspection. Mr. [redacted] walked with the Seller to review the items listed on the Report. The Buyer's and Buyer's Agent remained in the structure. Mr. [redacted] explained to the Seller the conditions of the Section I and II findings on the report. It was discussed between the Inspector, [redacted] and the Seller admitted that he had not understood the scope of the report initially. The Seller was only able to repair (3) three Section I items of concern. After review of the report the Seller stated he understood and agreed to the findings on the report. The Seller stated that [redacted] had treated the surface fungus under the structure, but Mr. [redacted] was never given documentation to sign that item off as completed. Mr. [redacted] gave a summary to the Buyers and Buyer's Agent, due to them not being present during the conversation with the Seller previously outside. Following the summary to the Buyers and the Buyer's Agent, they both became very upset with the Inspector and the Buyer's Agent also stated that the Inspector had added additional findings to the report, which was untrue. There were 3 Reports. The original Report [redacted] was completed on May 8, 2017, and resent as a corrected report due to a coding error. A Supplemental Report [redacted] was also issued on May 8, 2017, indicating dry rot at the garage. The Buyer's Agent called and requested an appointment with Mr.[redacted] to meet at the property to re-inspect the items repaired. On May 25, 2017, Mr. [redacted] completed a Re-Inspection Report [redacted]. The Inspector could only clear 3 of 10 Section I items that had been completed and therefore, no Section I or II Clearance could be given at that time. The Buyer's Agent paid for the original Inspection, indicating it was a gift to the Buyer's which she paid by credit card. The Buyer's Agent indicated she would no longer use River City Termite and Pest Control for services. She has refused to pay for the Re-Inspection and at this time is still outstanding, although we don't expect payment at this time.