Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/06/12) */ Re: Case # [redacted] Dear Sir/Madam: [redacted] hired Bob Freiermuth Sanitation ("BFS") to do a compliance inspection on the septic system of a home he owns in Rosemount, MNThe reason he needed to have the inspection done was so he could sell this home/property Dakota County requires that a compliance inspection and water test be completed before the sale of a home or property The compliance inspection has a number of questions on the form that need to be answered in order to pass the inspection, or to be compliantAfter our inspection, we were unable to answer all of the questions as requiredMost importantly, we were unable to locate the drainfield, which needs to be verified that it is protecting the ground waterMr [redacted] stated that pipes were up to inspect the drainfield,but this information was not trueBecause, upon inspection by BFS, no pipes were up to inspect the drainfieldWe then probed for the drainfield and was still unable to locateWe did soil borings and determined wet model soil at 28" deep, which deems the system non-compliant, irregardless of drainfield locationOur responsibility is to inspect the drainfield, not to locate it, which is the owner's responsibility I called Mr [redacted] and explained what the situation was and told him that we would have to fail the system because of the soil findings and that we could not find or inspect the drainfieldI told him he would have to dig it up to find the drainfield and then we could inspect itMr [redacted] said he would think about it and call us back, which he never did I sent him a bill for our services a week after I spoke with Mr [redacted] We received one-half ($175) of the payment with a note stating that he was only going to pay half because we only did half of the jobWe attempted to contact Mr [redacted] many times by phone and left messages for him to return our callsWe finally made contact and responded that we did the compliance inspection according to the MPCA Rules and Form that was required, and that we are to inspect what is there for us to see, so we did complete the jobWe again requested payment of the remainder of the bill or we would file a lien on the property While we were waiting for Mr [redacted] 's response, we called the City of Rosemount to inquire about Mr [redacted] and that we would send the compliance report to them as required by the CodeThey informed us that we were the third party that inspected Mr [redacted] 's property and that the first two parties failed the system alsoWe also contacted the first two parties that he contacted for inspection and they told us that they could not locate the drainfield either and regardless, the system was non-compliant In my opinion, Mr [redacted] was trying to find someone to inspect and pass his septic system so that he could sell the property (to the renters) and leave the new owners unknowingly with a non-compliant systemwhich they then would be responsible for the cost of repair or replacement of the system to bring it into compliance, not Mr [redacted] himself I am also aware that he is having a new system installed by one of the first two parties who had failed his system in the beginningKnowing the above information, I believe Mr [redacted] was the party in error, and believe his complaint against BFS is unjustified and should be removed Sincerely, Bob Freiermuth Sanitation LLC ***original document attached Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/06/21) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) To whom it may concern, When I spoke to to [redacted] on the first phone call I specifically told him that there was NOT drain field pipes sticking upI told him the only pipe that was sticking up was to access the tank itself and NO drain field pipes were presentHe obviously doesn't hear very well; he didn't even get my name right(as evidenced by the bill attached) The phone call that I received from him on the day of the inspection, there was no mention that he had done any soil borings/samplesAll he said was he couldn't find the drain field and that he would have to fail the system As I had stated [redacted] was a second opinion on a previous failed compliance testWhen he says he was the third person to do the test that is incorrectHe was the second one to do the test and since I believed he did not do it correctly I had a third company do itBy the time he called the city I had had the third test already completed [redacted] did attempt to contact me many times but only left one message all those times that he tried to callThere was no messages [redacted] assessment that I was trying to pass off a shoddy septic system is falseLike I have stated before I was wanting a second opinion on a previously failed septic test to make sure that I wasn't going to have to shell out thousands of dollars needlessly in case the first test was incorrect Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 10, 2015/07/06) */ Re: Case # [redacted] : [redacted] Dear Sir/Madam: Customer [redacted] hired Bob Freiermuth Sanitation ("BFS") to do a compliance inspection on the septic system of a home he owns in Rosemount, MN We completed the job, like previous contractors didThe question arises "has Mr [redacted] filed complaints about other contractors that completed the same inspection?" As a business, we expect to be paid for the job, whether the inspection fails or passes BFS stands by our previous statements and decisions and requests removal of the above complaint Sincerely, Bob Freiermuth Sanitation LLC By Bob Freiermuth
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/06/12) */ Re: Case # [redacted] Dear Sir/Madam: [redacted] hired Bob Freiermuth Sanitation ("BFS") to do a compliance inspection on the septic system of a home he owns in Rosemount, MNThe reason he needed to have the inspection done was so he could sell this home/property Dakota County requires that a compliance inspection and water test be completed before the sale of a home or property The compliance inspection has a number of questions on the form that need to be answered in order to pass the inspection, or to be compliantAfter our inspection, we were unable to answer all of the questions as requiredMost importantly, we were unable to locate the drainfield, which needs to be verified that it is protecting the ground waterMr [redacted] stated that pipes were up to inspect the drainfield,but this information was not trueBecause, upon inspection by BFS, no pipes were up to inspect the drainfieldWe then probed for the drainfield and was still unable to locateWe did soil borings and determined wet model soil at 28" deep, which deems the system non-compliant, irregardless of drainfield locationOur responsibility is to inspect the drainfield, not to locate it, which is the owner's responsibility I called Mr [redacted] and explained what the situation was and told him that we would have to fail the system because of the soil findings and that we could not find or inspect the drainfieldI told him he would have to dig it up to find the drainfield and then we could inspect itMr [redacted] said he would think about it and call us back, which he never did I sent him a bill for our services a week after I spoke with Mr [redacted] We received one-half ($175) of the payment with a note stating that he was only going to pay half because we only did half of the jobWe attempted to contact Mr [redacted] many times by phone and left messages for him to return our callsWe finally made contact and responded that we did the compliance inspection according to the MPCA Rules and Form that was required, and that we are to inspect what is there for us to see, so we did complete the jobWe again requested payment of the remainder of the bill or we would file a lien on the property While we were waiting for Mr [redacted] 's response, we called the City of Rosemount to inquire about Mr [redacted] and that we would send the compliance report to them as required by the CodeThey informed us that we were the third party that inspected Mr [redacted] 's property and that the first two parties failed the system alsoWe also contacted the first two parties that he contacted for inspection and they told us that they could not locate the drainfield either and regardless, the system was non-compliant In my opinion, Mr [redacted] was trying to find someone to inspect and pass his septic system so that he could sell the property (to the renters) and leave the new owners unknowingly with a non-compliant systemwhich they then would be responsible for the cost of repair or replacement of the system to bring it into compliance, not Mr [redacted] himself I am also aware that he is having a new system installed by one of the first two parties who had failed his system in the beginningKnowing the above information, I believe Mr [redacted] was the party in error, and believe his complaint against BFS is unjustified and should be removed Sincerely, Bob Freiermuth Sanitation LLC ***original document attached Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/06/21) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) To whom it may concern, When I spoke to to [redacted] on the first phone call I specifically told him that there was NOT drain field pipes sticking upI told him the only pipe that was sticking up was to access the tank itself and NO drain field pipes were presentHe obviously doesn't hear very well; he didn't even get my name right(as evidenced by the bill attached) The phone call that I received from him on the day of the inspection, there was no mention that he had done any soil borings/samplesAll he said was he couldn't find the drain field and that he would have to fail the system As I had stated [redacted] was a second opinion on a previous failed compliance testWhen he says he was the third person to do the test that is incorrectHe was the second one to do the test and since I believed he did not do it correctly I had a third company do itBy the time he called the city I had had the third test already completed [redacted] did attempt to contact me many times but only left one message all those times that he tried to callThere was no messages [redacted] assessment that I was trying to pass off a shoddy septic system is falseLike I have stated before I was wanting a second opinion on a previously failed septic test to make sure that I wasn't going to have to shell out thousands of dollars needlessly in case the first test was incorrect Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 10, 2015/07/06) */ Re: Case # [redacted] : [redacted] Dear Sir/Madam: Customer [redacted] hired Bob Freiermuth Sanitation ("BFS") to do a compliance inspection on the septic system of a home he owns in Rosemount, MN We completed the job, like previous contractors didThe question arises "has Mr [redacted] filed complaints about other contractors that completed the same inspection?" As a business, we expect to be paid for the job, whether the inspection fails or passes BFS stands by our previous statements and decisions and requests removal of the above complaint Sincerely, Bob Freiermuth Sanitation LLC By Bob Freiermuth