I am rejecting this response because: it does not accurately represent the dispute. Also, they admit that it was obvious that the leaves had already been cleaned up. The leaves were stacked four feet high along the curb for roughly 100 yards. No reasonable person would assume services were needed. Further the purported contract was invalid. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the document my wife signed was, in fact, a contract, the contract was to perform leaf cleanup services. Since leaf cleanup services were obviously not necessary, Shermans should have inquired whether services were still necessary. Instead they lied about the services they performed and billed for services they did not perform. I reassert my request for reimbursement of the funds that were paid for work that was not performed.
I am rejecting this response because: it does not accurately represent the dispute. Also, they admit that it was obvious that the leaves had already been cleaned up. The leaves were stacked four feet high along the curb for roughly 100 yards. No reasonable person would assume services were needed. Further the purported contract was invalid. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the document my wife signed was, in fact, a contract, the contract was to perform leaf cleanup services. Since leaf cleanup services were obviously not necessary, Shermans should have inquired whether services were still necessary. Instead they lied about the services they performed and billed for services they did not perform. I reassert my request for reimbursement of the funds that were paid for work that was not performed.