Matthew's Grounds Maintenance

Consumer T. *** solicited our company for landscaping and turf care needs. The 3 tasks we provided are: 1) filling backyard ankle bender ruts with black dirt, packed firm. 2) weed control treatments (three treatments). 3) landscaping of shed rock bed (cutting existing edging to re-create bed shape, re-arrange river rock on premise). The 3 tasks have been provided in full and consumer T. *** disputes the quality of services and does not wish to compensate for services rendered with the contract 0000024 T. *** accepted. I will discuss T. *** dis-satisfaction with each task and state the facts with each task. For zero reason is there a valid argument that can be made for non-payment. Task 1) consumer T. *** is upset that no grass seed was applied to black dirt in the ankle bender ruts. However if the contract 0000024 is reviewed: no seed planting or seed application is mentioned as a service. The job we were asked to do is pack in dirt to level the grounds. This was completed using black dirt packed firm. If seed were to have been applied it would have raised the bid considerably, seed application was not spoken of at the time we were solicited by consumer T. *** for labor. Task 2) weed control treatments were applied on the turf grass as a liquid blanket spray application. The chemicals are post-emergence. The three service dates were scheduled strategically to be spaced out for the best results, given the late in season solicitation. After the second service date consumer T. *** phone called the company asking about how the treatments work and expressing concern of effectiveness. During this phone call an explanation was provided that the chemicals are a post-emergence that means the weeds emerge and our service date is strategically scheduled on the calendar for our arrival to spray after weeds have sprouted/emerged. It was also explained to consumer T. *** that due to the late in season solicitation by her, that no pre-emergent would be used on the turf grass to prevent weeds. Our service is simply spraying weeds that have emerged. To her complaint: there is no scientific way that our service treatments can "make her lawn worse". In fact it is the cultural practices of her lawn mowing, and the lack of additional care needed to be put into her lawn that we were not hired for. The chemicals have labels from manufacturers that we follow per our Department of Agriculture licensing, which we follow. Her statement is not factual. Task 3) we re-positioned a rock bed existing on the premise around her shed that has a wooden timber edging. We cut the timbers to shorter length per her request so that the bed is shorter and re-positioned. To do this task we also shuffled around existing river rock on her premise to ensure the landscape bed is presentable. We hauled away the scrap wood from her premise. All items on the landscape job completed. We are not sure why consumer T. *** disputes payment for this line item.

In conclusion, our small business has been solicited by consumer T. *** for 3 tasks. All 3 tasks have been completed on schedule per green industry standards. At time of compensation consumer T. *** refuses to compensate for the services she solicited and requested. Her words were that we would have to go to court before she pays for the services she ordered and that were rendered, per the contract 0000024 that was accepted by consumer T. ***. The business Matthew's Grounds Maintenance is asking for compensation in full + court costs re-imbursements from consumer T. ***.

This matter will be handled in court.