Lake Restoration, Inc.

Lake Restoration feels as if this matter has been resolvedWe have been contacted by the State of Minnesota and responded to the customers concerns, no additional action was required on our partWe have responded to his claims to the Revdex.com as well, and feel as if Lake Restoration is not responsible for the health of his pet

***, Someone ordered the products on line without discussion with Lake RestorationAll of the documentation states to follow label ratesIf there were questions in regards to application someone should have contacted Lake RestorationLabel rates need to be followed Please refer back
to the label in regards to application ratesIf you are in need of a label I will be happy to provide one to youOnce again, Lake Restoration will not be refunding your moneyThank you, Jennifer *** Sales and Service Manager Lake Restoration Inc*** *** *** Rogers, MN [email protected] ###-###-#### ###-###-#### Fax

I am rejecting this response because:We expected Lake Restoration to deny all responsibility. Our dog was perfectly healthy before they arrived on October 26th, and was deathly ill immediately after they they treated the pond on October 26th. We will continue to pursue a fair resolution in this matter

Lake Restoration was contacted in regards to Mr***’s dog and its ill health. Lake Restoration was contracted to conduct services at the pond near Mr***’s home on October 26, 2016, the service was conducted at 12:05pm and ended at 1:00pm. Aluminum Sulfate was used per
label ratesOn the date of application the wind speed was 7-10mph which is an acceptable treatment wind speed per the manufacturer. Lake Restoration did place a placard on the property of the pond customer who contracted services with Lake Restoration. Lake Restoration spoke with Ahna *** Veterinary Toxicology specialist from the Pet Poison HelplineShe stated that the exposure and the amount of aluminum sulfate used in the pond does not all fit together with the symptoms the dog was havingLake Restoration did let Mr*** know that Lake Restoration will not be paying any veterinarian bills for the pet nor any future billsLake Restoration did place a placard on the property of the pond customer who contracted service with Lake Restoration, as well as speak with and gave treatment information to the veterinarian toxicology specialist. Lake Restoration will not be paying any veterinarian bills nor any anticipated additional medical costs. If services are contracted againLake Restoration will notify the individual who contracts services and any additional homeowners he would like to be contacted Thank you, Jennifer ***

See Attached.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/22) */
Unfortunately, we cannot provide a guarantee of specific results for our kits. There are many factors in the application of the kits that are outside our control. This was explained in correspondence prior to placement of the...

order.
Overflow from heavy rains or shallow, boggy areas can also have a negative impact on overall results.
The products we offer are proven solutions. The herbicides and algaecides are widely recognized for their consistent performance. Proper rates of application (proper herbicide dose) are necessary in order to achieve results. Yes, Fluridone can manage Watermeal; however, the maximum application rate would be necessary to so.
An increase in the application was recommended mid-summer due to measurements determined by aerial photos. The pond appeared to be nearly 50% larger than the PONDRestore kit would have suited. An application rate that is too low will delay results, or results may be unsatisfactory.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/09/23) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I spoke to a rep even on the phone and was told the product would work. I was even told I would be compensated if it didn't!!! I told them I had an extensive situation and wanted to be sure I would be compensated if their product didn't perform as they mentioned. The young woman assured me I would be yet all I'm getting now are excuses about how their product doesn't work unless the pond is pretty much already in pristine condition with no real issues... The product didn't do anything. The measurement was correct even in comparison to the aerial photo. Also, they did not account for proper depth either and at a low of 3 feet under average. They've "calculated" it off a much deeper level and at a full capacity from a picture at least 10 years old not know that the pond is nearly half the size it was because a large bank was formed after the pic where my neighbor made a barrier/bank to separate his side from mine (I can go and take pics. and make them available upon request). So if anything the pond is much smaller than what the kit was supposed to handle. Also it didn't even do %50 of the job rather nothing at all. The only difference were 2 spots the size of dinner tables that faded in color for a week then went right back to normal. Most likely not even caused by the product and really not even worth mentioning. Basically they are saying to the Revdex.com that our excuse is that our product is great and all but we can't guarantee it because there are too many normal factors that prove that otherwise. The product simply did not work either on the floating or submerged weeds after I was specifically told it would.

Straight from their site with misspelling/typo and all...:
"A complete kit for controlling floating and submerged weeds in ponds of any size. This kit includes a herbicide, Mizzen(r) algaecide, nutrient reducers and blue pond dye. With a few simple steps the PONDRestore(r) kit will hae you on your way to a beautiful, clear and healthy pond"

Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 11, 2015/10/02) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
All the factors where in favor of the product yet it did not yield the expected results set forth by Lake Restoration.com
The water level was at a record low, it was applied as instructed, and the target vegetation was listed as a type treated by the product.
The results where not even half way acceptable. The site states that the product works, it didn't, so all that is left are excuses as to why the product isn't effective as advertised.
I've documented every step, did exactly what was instructed yet the product did not work as I was purposely led to believe. It did not work at all. It's as if nothing at all was done. I spent a lot of money, time, and labor using and documenting the progress for the company on a product that was a complete failure.
I have not been given any compensation. I have only received excuses that do not even apply to my situation as documented. The rep on the phone told me they would work with me if the product didn't work as it stated when I asked them about a guarantee as one of my inquiries. All I got was excuses and extra steps to take which I did with still no result.
I can not retract my complaint as it would be wrong to approve of this type of wrongful business practice.
Att: Revdex.com
I have notes, pics, documentation, and can take more pics if need be to support my complaint.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 13, 2015/10/12) */
We do work with our customers when there are questions regarding results. Advice and suggestions are provided in correspondence or by phone. Refunds, however, aren't provided.
In this instance, we corresponded several times by email; photos were provided, advice was given, and suggestions were made. Unfortunately, a refund isn't provided.

I am rejecting this response because:
My farm manager followed the instructions and discussed this with Jennifer [redacted] by phone. Mr. [redacted] is a certified/licensed pesticide user by the State of Virginia.  Despite this, they prefer to state we didn't follow directions for use which is untrue.[redacted]

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/22) */
Client signed up for services on July 2, 2015. Permit application for Minnesota DNR was applied for on July 8, 2015. Permit was received on August 5, 2015. Treatment was conducted August 19, 2015. Client should have received permit from...

Minnesota DNR at his home address. The Minnesota DNR permit was very specific: Adjacent to permittee's property only. 15' wide channel in submerged vegetation as diagrammed on back of
this permit. Entire shoreline of lagoon for filamentous algae. Half of surface area of lagoon for duckweed. Lake Restoration followed the DNR permit when they treated. Lake Restoration treated what was present at the time within the permit parameters. Treatments do not prevent drift of other species. The treatment was conducted properly, a contract was signed payment is required for services rendered.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/09/22) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I did sign an application to be submitted to DNR for a permit to treat my pond. They are correct about that. I am not an expert on treating ponds and specifically asked the experts to treat the green slime, (my term), which covered my pond. I specifically asked if it would disappear and was told that it would. It quite simply did not.
The company says that, "The Minnesota DNR permit was very specific: Adjacent to permittee's property only. 15' wide channel in submerged vegetation as diagrammed on back of this permit. Entire shoreline of lagoon for filamentous algae. Half of surface area of lagoon for duckweed. Lake Restoration followed the DNR permit when they treated. Lake Restoration treated what was present at the time within the permit parameters."
The problem is that when I signed a permit application, it was prior to when Lake Restoration secured a permit that was to do the job I asked to have done. It should not be my fault that they did not secure the correct wording in the permit. If they are experts they should have not done the treatment rather asked the DNR for the correct permit.
I refuse to pay for something I did not receive and the pond is still to this day covered with green slime.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 14, 2015/10/08) */
Lake Restoration will write this account off as a loss.
Final Consumer Response /* (2000, 16, 2015/10/09) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
I do accept the companies offer to write the $1120.00 off.