Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 17, 2015/07/13) */ ***Document Attached [redacted] We first made contact with the [redacted] at the Calgary Home and Garden show, we had a request submitted via our website to meet regarding demolition and landscape workWe arranged a meeting for the afternoon of the 14th of MarchAt the meeting we discussed the [redacted] requirements, personal aesthetic tastes, scope of work and budget rangeThe original number specified was 40,to 50,for the project, and it was suggested this is a manageable number for a landscape renovationIt was also mentioned that we will design to satisfy all elements of their wish list in their landscape and pare back elements to meet the clients budgetThis is common practice throughout the industry We are taken aback at the level of dissatisfaction of the [redacted] as it pertains to the first concept sketch providedWe were directed to provide a xeriscaped style in the front yard along with a raised bed, and to enclose the front yard; all of which were provided in the first conceptThe quantity of planting and the perceived 'busyness' of the design was a concernIn the back yard we were directed to provide a deck, single car garage, garden space, shade, remove the existing walk and replace, repair grading, add screening from neighbours and was to be able to be left without any maintenance requirement over the summerSod being a high maintenance item was left out of the design to accommodate the [redacted] request, and all other requests were satisfied in our opinionWe do not expect to provide a design that requires no alterations whatsoever; two-way dialog is required for any design processTypically we get feed back from our clients we revise the design accordinglyThis is why the Contract signed by Little Creek Landscaping and the [redacted] was for "concept sketches" (two sketches)This was discussed at the initial consultationIn our contract it states that any work incurred outside of the scope of work summary (1.0) will be charged at a rate of $ The correspondence referred to by the [redacted] included producing a site model to help articulate the design intent in an effort to satisfy their questionsAny platitudes offered were based on a concern that they would like something green, and they were assured that there would be plenty of greenery within the yardThis level of effort to assist the design process caused an atypically high time requirement to our response If in the opinion of the [redacted] they had had enough by the end of April they were within their right to cancel the contract, which they did notWe received no indication from the [redacted] that they did not wish to proceed any further until the final invoice was issuedOn the 9th of May we sent a correspondence to the [redacted] wishing them well and asking their thoughts on our discussion regarding the original sketch, which was ignoredAfter nearly three weeks without response or indication from the client we completed the scope of work as indicated in our contract The tone in which all correspondence were written to the [redacted] were done in a professional manner, and in our opinion were acquiescent of all the [redacted] concernsThe final invoice provided on June the 2nd was for the total owing relative to the contract and had omitted the depositWe promptly corrected the oversight and reissued the invoice We are very frustrated that the [redacted] chose on multiple occasions to ignore our attempts to satisfy their concernsLittle Creek Landscaping strives to satisfy our clients, however, it very difficult to do so when your customer intentionally ignores every attempt to make them happyAs a concession to the [redacted] based upon their dissatisfaction with our design/ design process, we will not bill for the second sketch despite the fact that it was in the scope of work outlined in the contractWe accept the proposed resolution as suggested
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 17, 2015/07/13) */
[redacted]Document Attached[redacted]
We first made contact with the [redacted] at the Calgary Home and Garden show, we had a request submitted via our website to meet regarding demolition and landscape work. We arranged a meeting for the afternoon of the...
14th of March. At the meeting we discussed the [redacted] requirements, personal aesthetic tastes, scope of work and budget range. The original number specified was 40,000 to 50,000 for the project, and it was suggested this is a manageable number for a landscape renovation. It was also mentioned that we will design to satisfy all elements of their wish list in their landscape and pare back elements to meet the clients budget. This is common practice throughout the industry.
We are taken aback at the level of dissatisfaction of the [redacted] as it pertains to the first concept sketch provided. We were directed to provide a xeriscaped style in the front yard along with a raised bed, and to enclose the front yard; all of which were provided in the first concept. The quantity of planting and the perceived 'busyness' of the design was a concern. In the back yard we were directed to provide a deck, single car garage, garden space, shade, remove the existing walk and replace, repair grading, add screening from neighbours and was to be able to be left without any maintenance requirement over the summer. Sod being a high maintenance item was left out of the design to accommodate the [redacted] request, and all other requests were satisfied in our opinion. We do not expect to provide a design that requires no alterations whatsoever; two-way dialog is required for any design process. Typically we get feed back from our clients we revise the design accordingly. This is why the Contract signed by Little Creek Landscaping and the [redacted] was for "concept sketches" (two sketches). This was discussed at the initial consultation. In our contract it states that any work incurred outside of the scope of work summary (1.0) will be charged at a rate of $125.
The correspondence referred to by the [redacted] included producing a site model to help articulate the design intent in an effort to satisfy their questions. Any platitudes offered were based on a concern that they would like something green, and they were assured that there would be plenty of greenery within the yard. This level of effort to assist the design process caused an atypically high time requirement to our response.
If in the opinion of the [redacted] they had had enough by the end of April they were within their right to cancel the contract, which they did not. We received no indication from the [redacted] that they did not wish to proceed any further until the final invoice was issued. On the 9th of May we sent a correspondence to the [redacted] wishing them well and asking their thoughts on our discussion regarding the original sketch, which was ignored. After nearly three weeks without response or indication from the client we completed the scope of work as indicated in our contract.
The tone in which all correspondence were written to the [redacted] were done in a professional manner, and in our opinion were acquiescent of all the [redacted] concerns. The final invoice provided on June the 2nd was for the total owing relative to the contract and had omitted the deposit. We promptly corrected the oversight and reissued the invoice.
We are very frustrated that the [redacted] chose on multiple occasions to ignore our attempts to satisfy their concerns. Little Creek Landscaping strives to satisfy our clients, however, it very difficult to do so when your customer intentionally ignores every attempt to make them happy. As a concession to the [redacted] based upon their dissatisfaction with our design/ design process, we will not bill for the second sketch despite the fact that it was in the scope of work outlined in the contract. We accept the proposed resolution as suggested.
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 17, 2015/07/13) */ ***Document Attached [redacted] We first made contact with the [redacted] at the Calgary Home and Garden show, we had a request submitted via our website to meet regarding demolition and landscape workWe arranged a meeting for the afternoon of the 14th of MarchAt the meeting we discussed the [redacted] requirements, personal aesthetic tastes, scope of work and budget rangeThe original number specified was 40,to 50,for the project, and it was suggested this is a manageable number for a landscape renovationIt was also mentioned that we will design to satisfy all elements of their wish list in their landscape and pare back elements to meet the clients budgetThis is common practice throughout the industry We are taken aback at the level of dissatisfaction of the [redacted] as it pertains to the first concept sketch providedWe were directed to provide a xeriscaped style in the front yard along with a raised bed, and to enclose the front yard; all of which were provided in the first conceptThe quantity of planting and the perceived 'busyness' of the design was a concernIn the back yard we were directed to provide a deck, single car garage, garden space, shade, remove the existing walk and replace, repair grading, add screening from neighbours and was to be able to be left without any maintenance requirement over the summerSod being a high maintenance item was left out of the design to accommodate the [redacted] request, and all other requests were satisfied in our opinionWe do not expect to provide a design that requires no alterations whatsoever; two-way dialog is required for any design processTypically we get feed back from our clients we revise the design accordinglyThis is why the Contract signed by Little Creek Landscaping and the [redacted] was for "concept sketches" (two sketches)This was discussed at the initial consultationIn our contract it states that any work incurred outside of the scope of work summary (1.0) will be charged at a rate of $ The correspondence referred to by the [redacted] included producing a site model to help articulate the design intent in an effort to satisfy their questionsAny platitudes offered were based on a concern that they would like something green, and they were assured that there would be plenty of greenery within the yardThis level of effort to assist the design process caused an atypically high time requirement to our response If in the opinion of the [redacted] they had had enough by the end of April they were within their right to cancel the contract, which they did notWe received no indication from the [redacted] that they did not wish to proceed any further until the final invoice was issuedOn the 9th of May we sent a correspondence to the [redacted] wishing them well and asking their thoughts on our discussion regarding the original sketch, which was ignoredAfter nearly three weeks without response or indication from the client we completed the scope of work as indicated in our contract The tone in which all correspondence were written to the [redacted] were done in a professional manner, and in our opinion were acquiescent of all the [redacted] concernsThe final invoice provided on June the 2nd was for the total owing relative to the contract and had omitted the depositWe promptly corrected the oversight and reissued the invoice We are very frustrated that the [redacted] chose on multiple occasions to ignore our attempts to satisfy their concernsLittle Creek Landscaping strives to satisfy our clients, however, it very difficult to do so when your customer intentionally ignores every attempt to make them happyAs a concession to the [redacted] based upon their dissatisfaction with our design/ design process, we will not bill for the second sketch despite the fact that it was in the scope of work outlined in the contractWe accept the proposed resolution as suggested
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 17, 2015/07/13) */
[redacted]Document Attached[redacted]
We first made contact with the [redacted] at the Calgary Home and Garden show, we had a request submitted via our website to meet regarding demolition and landscape work. We arranged a meeting for the afternoon of the...
14th of March. At the meeting we discussed the [redacted] requirements, personal aesthetic tastes, scope of work and budget range. The original number specified was 40,000 to 50,000 for the project, and it was suggested this is a manageable number for a landscape renovation. It was also mentioned that we will design to satisfy all elements of their wish list in their landscape and pare back elements to meet the clients budget. This is common practice throughout the industry.
We are taken aback at the level of dissatisfaction of the [redacted] as it pertains to the first concept sketch provided. We were directed to provide a xeriscaped style in the front yard along with a raised bed, and to enclose the front yard; all of which were provided in the first concept. The quantity of planting and the perceived 'busyness' of the design was a concern. In the back yard we were directed to provide a deck, single car garage, garden space, shade, remove the existing walk and replace, repair grading, add screening from neighbours and was to be able to be left without any maintenance requirement over the summer. Sod being a high maintenance item was left out of the design to accommodate the [redacted] request, and all other requests were satisfied in our opinion. We do not expect to provide a design that requires no alterations whatsoever; two-way dialog is required for any design process. Typically we get feed back from our clients we revise the design accordingly. This is why the Contract signed by Little Creek Landscaping and the [redacted] was for "concept sketches" (two sketches). This was discussed at the initial consultation. In our contract it states that any work incurred outside of the scope of work summary (1.0) will be charged at a rate of $125.
The correspondence referred to by the [redacted] included producing a site model to help articulate the design intent in an effort to satisfy their questions. Any platitudes offered were based on a concern that they would like something green, and they were assured that there would be plenty of greenery within the yard. This level of effort to assist the design process caused an atypically high time requirement to our response.
If in the opinion of the [redacted] they had had enough by the end of April they were within their right to cancel the contract, which they did not. We received no indication from the [redacted] that they did not wish to proceed any further until the final invoice was issued. On the 9th of May we sent a correspondence to the [redacted] wishing them well and asking their thoughts on our discussion regarding the original sketch, which was ignored. After nearly three weeks without response or indication from the client we completed the scope of work as indicated in our contract.
The tone in which all correspondence were written to the [redacted] were done in a professional manner, and in our opinion were acquiescent of all the [redacted] concerns. The final invoice provided on June the 2nd was for the total owing relative to the contract and had omitted the deposit. We promptly corrected the oversight and reissued the invoice.
We are very frustrated that the [redacted] chose on multiple occasions to ignore our attempts to satisfy their concerns. Little Creek Landscaping strives to satisfy our clients, however, it very difficult to do so when your customer intentionally ignores every attempt to make them happy. As a concession to the [redacted] based upon their dissatisfaction with our design/ design process, we will not bill for the second sketch despite the fact that it was in the scope of work outlined in the contract. We accept the proposed resolution as suggested.