Peterson Lawn Services

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2016/03/02) */ The complainant owns a property for which our company provided a mowing service in Aug It is now March and we have yet to be paid The only name on the account is for the woman who lives at this property -- she is the one who hired our servicesUnable to reach her via phone or mail, we used the Hennepin County Property Information search to see if there were any other known contacts for this propertyIt was at this time that we found the name for the ownerAt this time, we assumed that the woman who hired us was his wifeAt the time of service, she had not disclosed to us that she was a renter The phone number publicly listed for the property owner turned out to be an old home phone number for his motherWe asked her if she knew the owner or recognized the property addressShe told our office she would let her son know we were trying to reach him regarding services performed at his rental propertyAt this time, we let her know that due to the fact we were unable to reach anyone for the service at this address the next step would be conciliation courtWe did want to make our intent clear as we would much prefer to handle this issue internally without the use of litigation which costs money and is time consuming A few minutes after this very polite conversation with the landlord/owner's mother, his wife called our office and offered to pay the billShe said this renter had a history of not paying bills and that because this bill was so small she would pay it and add it to the renter's fees We were so pleasantly surprised by the generosity of the landlord/owner's wife that we gladly accepted her offer and mailed her a receipt along with a copy of the billThe wife explained that this renter had done this beforeShe said it was not a problem for them to pay the bill and she would add the charge to the renter's rent At the time of these phone calls we were seeking contact information for the person living at the property where service was providedWe would like to try and handle this issue with our customer personally before litigation becomes necessary -- which would be our last hope for collecting According to FCC regulations we are allowed to contact third parties in order to reach the person who owes usWe did NOT ask for payment from this individual or anyone in his family However, we do feel that as a landlord, the homeowner does hold some responsibility for ensuring that a responsible tenant is in placeAlso, we do feel that this was a very reasonable misunderstanding on our part because it was not disclosed to us that we were hired by a renterThe phone number we called (for the mother) was listed publicly as that of the homeowner, and the owner's wife called us of her own volition offering to settle the bill We have been in contact with the owner since 2/26/and have already offered to credit the charge back to his wife's credit cardHe said that was not necessary at the time because he wanted the opportunity to verify our side of the storyWe will repeat our offer We do wish to be paid for the service that we provided, but we are more than willing to continue to pursue the renter as we view her as our true customer If the renter continues to be unresponsive we will reserve the right to proceed with small claims as plannedThis is always our last course of action and we were really hoping to settle this matter peacefully We greatly apologize for any frustration or misunderstanding that occurredWe are just a small local company doing our best to provide a quality service for which we feel we should be paidOur business is not collections but this is an unfortunate side product in our line of workWe are a simple lawn mowing companyIf the owner would like his card credited, we are happy to do so Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 8, 2016/03/07) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Peterson admits in their statement above that they contact family members and others, which is acceptable per the FCC, I have not reviewed thatThey also state that they told my mother that they would send this to collectionsDue to this "threat", my mother called my wife and said that Peterson would file a collections claim, which is why my wife called immediately and offered to pay The issue at hand, this could be construed as mail and wire fraud, as the threat of collections for a bill that we did not owe was used to extract money from us They claim they have offered to credit me the money back, however it was my wife with her credit card that paid Peterson the money under duress and fear that our credit will be tainted when this goes to collections My expectation is that Peterson calls my wife back and tells her that they must credit back the charges as they were collected fraudulentlyWhen the money is credited back,I will consider this closed and not further pursue reconsilation thru law or the Revdex.com I would suggest to Peterson for future work, they better understand the contracts that they are signing with clients, including obtaining multiple contact forms and confirm if they are a renter or an owner Shawn Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 10, 2016/03/07) */ As the property owner/landlord's wife was the one who called our office we do not have her phone number on recordAgain, she called our office and offered to pay this bill on the behalf of the tenant, stating that this is something that has happened before If the owner/landlord does not wish to authorize any charges/credits on his wife's behalf, she may call our office at: [redacted] or she may contact us via the Revdex.com However, because she called us, we do not have her phone number and so she will need to call our office if she would like to discuss this matter Again, there is no fraud being committed when we were contacting the OWNER of the property in order to obtain contact information for the person living at the property who hired our serviceBut we are more than happy to offer crediting back the card, as previously stated

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/03/02) */
The complainant owns a property for which our company provided a mowing service in Aug 2015. It is now March 2016 and we have yet to be paid.
The only name on the account is for the woman who lives at this property -- she is the one who...

hired our services. Unable to reach her via phone or mail, we used the Hennepin County Property Information search to see if there were any other known contacts for this property. It was at this time that we found the name for the owner. At this time, we assumed that the woman who hired us was his wife. At the time of service, she had not disclosed to us that she was a renter.
The phone number publicly listed for the property owner turned out to be an old home phone number for his mother. We asked her if she knew the owner or recognized the property address. She told our office she would let her son know we were trying to reach him regarding services performed at his rental property. At this time, we let her know that due to the fact we were unable to reach anyone for the service at this address the next step would be conciliation court. We did want to make our intent clear as we would much prefer to handle this issue internally without the use of litigation which costs money and is time consuming.
A few minutes after this very polite conversation with the landlord/owner's mother, his wife called our office and offered to pay the bill. She said this renter had a history of not paying bills and that because this bill was so small she would pay it and add it to the renter's fees.
We were so pleasantly surprised by the generosity of the landlord/owner's wife that we gladly accepted her offer and mailed her a receipt along with a copy of the bill. The wife explained that this renter had done this before. She said it was not a problem for them to pay the bill and she would add the charge to the renter's rent.
At the time of these phone calls we were seeking contact information for the person living at the property where service was provided. We would like to try and handle this issue with our customer personally before litigation becomes necessary -- which would be our last hope for collecting.
According to FCC regulations we are allowed to contact third parties in order to reach the person who owes us. We did NOT ask for payment from this individual or anyone in his family.
However, we do feel that as a landlord, the homeowner does hold some responsibility for ensuring that a responsible tenant is in place. Also, we do feel that this was a very reasonable misunderstanding on our part because it was not disclosed to us that we were hired by a renter. The phone number we called (for the mother) was listed publicly as that of the homeowner, and the owner's wife called us of her own volition offering to settle the bill.
We have been in contact with the owner since 2/26/16 and have already offered to credit the charge back to his wife's credit card. He said that was not necessary at the time because he wanted the opportunity to verify our side of the story. We will repeat our offer.
We do wish to be paid for the service that we provided, but we are more than willing to continue to pursue the renter as we view her as our true customer.
If the renter continues to be unresponsive we will reserve the right to proceed with small claims as planned. This is always our last course of action and we were really hoping to settle this matter peacefully.
We greatly apologize for any frustration or misunderstanding that occurred. We are just a small local company doing our best to provide a quality service for which we feel we should be paid. Our business is not collections but this is an unfortunate side product in our line of work. We are a simple lawn mowing company. If the owner would like his card credited, we are happy to do so.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2016/03/07) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Peterson admits in their statement above that they contact family members and others, which is acceptable per the FCC, I have not reviewed that. They also state that they told my mother that they would send this to collections. Due to this "threat", my mother called my wife and said that Peterson would file a collections claim, which is why my wife called immediately and offered to pay.
The issue at hand, this could be construed as mail and wire fraud, as the threat of collections for a bill that we did not owe was used to extract money from us.
They claim they have offered to credit me the money back, however it was my wife with her credit card that paid Peterson the money under duress and fear that our credit will be tainted when this goes to collections.
My expectation is that Peterson calls my wife back and tells her that they must credit back the charges as they were collected fraudulently. When the money is credited back,I will consider this closed and not further pursue reconsilation thru law or the Revdex.com.
I would suggest to Peterson for future work, they better understand the contracts that they are signing with clients, including obtaining multiple contact forms and confirm if they are a renter or an owner.
Shawn
Final Business Response /* (4000, 10, 2016/03/07) */
As the property owner/landlord's wife was the one who called our office we do not have her phone number on record. Again, she called our office and offered to pay this bill on the behalf of the tenant, stating that this is something that has happened before.
If the owner/landlord does not wish to authorize any charges/credits on his wife's behalf, she may call our office at: [redacted] or she may contact us via the Revdex.com.
However, because she called us, we do not have her phone number and so she will need to call our office if she would like to discuss this matter.
Again, there is no fraud being committed when we were contacting the OWNER of the property in order to obtain contact information for the person living at the property who hired our service. But we are more than happy to offer crediting back the card, as previously stated.