Mountain West Arbor Care

The customer entered into a binding contract with Mountain West for the work described therein (a copy of which is attached), which was scheduled to be performed on June 5, 2017. On the day the work was scheduled, the customer met with Mountain West's foreman, and they walked the job
together. The contract called for the removal of two pine trees. During the walk-through, the customer identified the two pine trees to be removed. The identification was from some distance away, and it turns out that the foreman misunderstood the customer's identification. The customer then left for the better part of the day to attend an appointment. As the crew was beginning to remove one of the two identified pine trees, her daughter came out of the house screaming at the crew to stop and that it was the wrong tree. The crew stopped and waited for the customer to return. When the customer returned, the foreman met with her and she confirmed that she had identified a different treeThe crew had just begun limbing up the tree and offered to simply finish pruning that tree, rather than removing it. The customer rejected that offer and confirmed that the crew should just go ahead and remove it, and they did, along with the other two pine trees she had identified. The customer told the foreman she was not upset and did not object to the removal of the third tree, which was completed without cost to the customer. At the conclusion of the job, both the customer and her daughter reviewed the work the crew had performed and verbally confirmed that they were very satisfied with the workThe customer executed a written satisfaction (copy attached) and paid the contract in full. The contract specified that Mountain West would grind the stump of one spruce tree that Mountain West had removed in the front yard. The stump grinding is performed by a subcontractor. After Mountain West's work was complete, the stump grinder Mountain West retained came to the customer's property at the appointed time. Unfortunately, the customer's daughter got into a dispute with him, claiming that he was to remove the spruce stump from the front yard identified in the contract, as well as all the stumps in the back yard. Despite numerous attempts by the stump grinder, Mountain West's owner and Mountain West's foreman to discuss the matter with the customer's daughter and explain that only one stump was included in the contract, and, in fact, the contract specifically sets out that the remainder of the stumps should be cut low (which would be unnecessary if they were to be ground), she refused to listen to any explanation and, ultimately, the stump grinder left the customer's property as he was unable to resolve the dispute or perform the required work. It is important to mention that, at the time that the customer entered into the contract, Mountain West told her that it could grind all of the stumps, but as a way of reducing the cost, it suggested that the customer pay to have the front yard stump ground, but just cut the back yard stumps low. The customer appreciated and agreed with this suggestion, and that's what the contract provides There would have been no reason to cut the back yard stumps low if they were to be removed. It is unclear why the customer's daughter would insist otherwise when she was not involved in the negotiation of the contract. In any event, as the customer concedes in the complaint, the contract clearly provides that only one stump would be removed, and Mountain West was, at all times, ready and willing to do that work. Mountain West regrets that it was unable to complete the stump grinding for this customer due to her daughter's refusal to let it complete the work. It did, however, voluntarily refund to the customer the cost of the stump-grinding in order for her to have the stump ground by someone else since she had paid for this service and Mountain West was unable to complete the service due to the dispute caused by the customer's daughter. Mountain West appreciates the customer's business and courtesies and is pleased that she is happy with the work it performed.Again, we appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. Please let us know if there is any other information that we can provide

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: The actual  response made by Mountain West Arbor Care is incorrect. The time line and actions taken are untrue. To begin with the crew did show up on scheduled date and began getting gear ready to cut trees. I myself did a walk through with the Foreman and let him know which trees were to be cut down. The trees should have been marked and written as to which ones in the contract. So again there was a miss communication on the Foreman part. After the crew began to work I went inside to make breakfast while they were working.  When my daughter finished her breakfast she went outside to watch the crew when she realized they were cutting down the wrong tree. She hollered at one of the crew members that was picking up the limbs and taking to the chipper. As you can imagine there were four chain saws going and the chipper so you would have not heard a normal tone of voice. She had to literally go up to the guy and asked if he was cutting down the tree down. At this point the tree had been limbed up three quarters of the tree only leaving the top fourth of the tree and the rest of the trunk was bare. My daughter called me to come outside and had a conversation with the foreman  to let him know it was the wrong tree. The pine tree at this point was unsafe to leave in this condition as it was now top heavy and with heavy wind and or snow it could cause it to up root and fall and damage my home. The lower limbs of the pine tree give it stability and takes the weight from the wind to help support the tree. Once the limbs are cut from the trunk they will not grow back. This tree also was to help shade my yard. When Mr. M[redacted] was here  he told me that this particular pine tree was   healthy and did not need to be removed.  So with all the conditions of safety and sore sight for the yard I asked the Foreman to go ahead and cut down the tree.To make the time line correct your Foreman left right after meeting with me and was gone for over an hour and came back with food for his crew. I still had not left my home. I did have an appointment to take my daughter to and that happen at 11:00 am and was back home by 12:00 pm. That was the only time I left my home. Upon the end of the day the crew had finished cutting down the trees and pruning the other trees the Foreman came and asked for payment at that time. I did tell him that the crew had worked hard and did a good job but that does not excuse the incident of cutting down the  wrong tree. People make mistakes and this should not take away from the hard work they put forth. To use this as an opportunity to learn from your mistakes. So if the job was not complete at the time why did he collect the remaining on the bill. I find this unethical. I felt like this job had not been completed as the subcontractor was to come the next day on June 6th to grind the stumps. I had left to take my daughter to an appointment and left my worker here to wait for him to show up as I left here at 7:45 am and returned around 12:00pm. The Foreman had said he would come between 8am -9am. Upon the return of my daughter appointment the subcontractor was sitting in my house with my worker and said he needed to wait upon the return of the home owner. Once I came in he stated that the name of his company was Integrity and that he was tired of cleaning of the mess of Mountain West. He also said I am going to leave and you can call Mr. M[redacted] but he won't answer the phone. Which my daughter did place a call to him. Left a message for him to return the call. At this point the subcontractor stated I am going to leave and you can tell Mr. M[redacted] you asked me to leave and when you work out the details of the contract you can call me. He also stated he was going to place a call to Secretary and to let her know. He also advised if I was not happy you could call Revdex.com. He said please don't tell them I told you this. So when Mr. M[redacted] tried to have him back to grind the stump of course my daughter said no, because at this point he was bad mouthing and playing a game between myself and Mountain West . So as you can see the time line and things that were stated were untrue. Mr. M[redacted] was never on site while the work was being done, nor is he able to state what and what not happen here. I did receive a check and letter from [redacted] for a refund of stump that was not grinded out. I did not receive the check until after the response had posted. So in that aspect when he stated he had reimbursed the home owner technically he had not done so, until a day later. Yes the contract only said one stump which was my mistake for not reading the contract correctly. I still want to be reimbursed for the wrong tree being taken down. It was necessary for it to come down for safety reason for the home owner.
Sincerely,
[redacted]