D's R Trees, Inc. Reviews (2)
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/06/13) */
As you can see we have an impeccable Revdex.com record, and we work very hard to keep it that way. We believe that the claim from the [redacted]'s is untrue. We are not responsible for the damage they are accusing us of doing. We are...
currently working with our Bonding Company because the [redacted]'s have filed a claim against us to the CSLB also. We have submitted pictures and are awaiting their decision. The pictures we submitted are of what a stump grinder looks like, what the teeth look like and what the damage looks like from a stump grinder. The damage the [redacted]s claim we made to their concrete is inconsistent in depth, thin and curved. Damage from a stump grinder looks like bite marks that are in a straight pattern. [redacted] inspected the damage and knew it wasn't from a stump grinder. I have attached a letter that I submitted to our Bonding Company. This seems to be a claim that is unsubstantiated and untrue. If we had done the damage we would have most assuredly taken care of it.
LETTER SUBMITTED TO BONDING COMPANY:
D's R Trees, Inc. has worked with [redacted] and [redacted] four times. The first time we removed Palm Trees from the right side of their back yard without any problems. The second time we trimmed the Brazilian Pepper Tree in the front yard and trimmed the Bottle Tree in the back yard, and the [redacted]'s accused us of damaging the concrete with our pole pruners. After inspection I informed the [redacted]'s that the damage was inconsistent with damage from pole pruners. No further issue was made and they called us out again. The third time we trimmed the Brazilian Pepper in the front yard without any problems. The fourth time we removed the Bottle tree and tipped the Italian Cypress, and again we are being accused of damaging the concrete.
I went out to inspect the damage to the [redacted]'s concrete on December 10, 2013 and observed that it was inconsistent in depth (1/8"- 1/4"- 1/8") and curved. It looked to me like a leveling string got dropped in the concrete at the initial pour. There was no color differentiation between the expansion joints, the salt indentations and the damage, which indicates that it has been there a while. I [redacted]'t believe that the stump grinder, or any of our equipment, caused the damage to the [redacted]'s concrete, if I did I would have made it right. Stump grinder damage would most likely be on the direct edge of the concrete where stump grinding has occurred not on the sidewalk. Stump grinding damage that does occur on concrete looks like bite marks taken out in a straight pattern and consistent depth. I have included pictures of the stump grinder and the teeth. A picture of the damage would conclusively show that the stump grinder is not the culprit.
D's R Trees, Inc. sent a letter in response to the [redacted]'s December 10th letter on January 13, 2014 proposing a $100 reduction in their tree service bill. No agreement was made.
In response to the concrete estimate, I [redacted]'t see a Contractor's License Number on the estimate or their website, so I'm not sure of the validity of this estimate. The [redacted]'s first asked for $300.00, now it's $500.00.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/06/25) */
Thank you for your June 16, 2014, letter and response from D's R. Trees, Inc. regarding above referenced consumer complaint. HCC Surety Group, the bond company, has been provided with substantiating evidence including photographs documenting damages to our property caused by D's R. Trees, Inc., Mr. Donald [redacted] and his employees. As of yet, no resolution or reimbursement for damages caused by Mr. [redacted], D's R. Trees, Inc., has been made by Mr. [redacted] or the bond company.
Mr. [redacted]'s, D's R. Trees" June 13 response to Revdex.com complaint states, "The pictures we submitted are of what a stump grinder looks like, what the teeth look like and what the damage looks like .from a stump grinder." HCC Surety Group has forwarded all photographs submitted to HCC Surety Group by D's R. Trees to us for our review. Please be aware there were no photographs forwarded of "what the damage looks like from a stump grinder" as Mr. [redacted] incorrectly states in his June 13 response to the Revdex.com.
We have submitted substantiating proof and photographs to the bond company confirming damage D's R. Trees caused to our property and will provide same photographs to the Revdex.com upon request. Submitted to HCC Surety and enclosed for the Revdex.com review is a rough sketch of our backyard. Attached below is our most recent correspondence to HCC Surety Company
[redacted],D's R.Trees Inc., and his employees did not exercise reasonable care when performing tree services and our property was damaged.
On December 3, 2013 a stump grinding machine was used by D's R. Trees, Inc., Mr. [redacted], and his employees and was brought up the side yard of our residence on our cement sidewalk. Mr. [redacted], and his employees, did not exercise reasonable care when performing the tree services including stump grinding and transporting the stump grinding equipment which resulted in damage to our property. Due to Mr. [redacted], D's R. Trees, Inc. and its employees' negligence the damages consist of scratches in our cement sidewalk, made by the stump grinder, and a 16" long gouge in a section of our cement sidewalk.
Upon completion of the tree services, D's R. Trees, Inc. did not exercise reasonable care and left the side yard with tree debris and litter scattered on the side yard and on the cement sidewalk. Damages to our sidewalk were noted upon our clean up and sweeping of the sidewalk.
Upon contacting D's R. Trees, Inc. we spoke with Mr. [redacted], owner, and advised of the damages and a date was set for him to view the damages. On Dec. 10, 2013, Mr. [redacted] arrived at our residence and after viewing the damages caused by D's R. Trees, Inc., and its employees, Mr. [redacted] decided not to accept responsibility for the damages.
On December 10, 2013, after Mr. [redacted] left our residence, we discovered at www.cslb.ca.gov that D's R. Trees, Inc. and Mr. [redacted]'s contractor license was suspended as of 11/1/2013. On December 10, 2013 I contacted CSLB at (XXX)XXX-CSLB and spoke with [redacted] to confirm as of 11/1/2013 D's R. Trees, Inc. license had been suspended and she advised us Mr. [redacted] should not have contracted to do tree services on 12/3/13.
On December 11, 2013, we forwarded a letter sent certified mail to Mr. [redacted], owner of D's R. Trees Inc., and requested a response from Mr. [redacted] acknowledging if he would provide reimbursement for the cost to repair damages to our sidewalk caused by Mr. [redacted]'s, D's R. Trees' Inc., and its employees' negligence.
On December 11, 2013 a complaint was filed against D's R. Trees, Inc. and Mr. [redacted] R. [redacted], and his employees with the Contractors State License Board Southern California.
We forwarded a second certified letter to Mr. [redacted] dated January 27, 2014 and addressed to: Mr. [redacted], XXXXX Auld Road, Winchester, CA XXXXX. We requested Mr. [redacted] acknowledge he would provide reimbursement for cost to cure damages caused by D's R. Trees, Mr. [redacted], and his employees.
In March 2014 the California State License Board contacted us by phone and provided bond information. They advised a claim should be filed with the bond company. A request for claim information was made to the bond company. Included with our letter we provided a completed bond claim form and supporting documents to the bond company. As of yet, no resolution or reimbursement for damages caused by Mr. [redacted], D's R. Trees, Inc. has been made by Mr. [redacted] or the bond company.