SoCal Water$mart Rebate Program

The Metropolitan’s Water District’s (Metropolitan) SoCal Water$mart program (SCWS) has terms and conditions in place to help ensure that Metropolitan is achieving measurable water savings when providing...

incentives to customers to replace older water-using devices with more efficient ones. The SCWS turf removal program has requirements that help us determine customer eligibility for rebates. A customer’s eligibility is dependent on the following criteria only: 1. The site or residence is in Metropolitan’s service area; 2. The site has not received a previous rebate or incentive from Metropolitan or another water agency for the same measure or device; 3. The applicant has met the terms and conditions for the overall SCWS program and additional requirements for turf removal incentives. Your request to be approved for a SoCal Water$mart turf removal rebate (Rebate TRM # 5670) was denied because your submittal failed to comply with the program terms: “At least 5 color photos of the areas where you planned to remove turf. The area must be grass to qualify for a rebate.” The photos submitted showed little actual turf. Since this is a public program paid for by water customers with the goal of saving water and little to no turf exists in the photos, the application was denied due to the fact that there appeared to be little to no water savings from the photos submitted. However, due to the current drought conditions, we will make an exception and allow your rebate to be processed. We will contact our rebate processing firm for SCWS and instruct them begin the process of allowing your applcation and rebate. We look forward to working with you and apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.

Application TRM170874 has been reviewed, and will remain denied per Los Angeles Department of Water and Power due to the program terms not being met. The program requires newly planted California-Friendly plants to be included in the conversion project. Per the terms of the program, that were...

also included in the reservation approval email, "projects that are 100% non-planted materials (i.e. pavers, decomposed granite, gravel, mulch, etc.) will be denied. Pavers must be set on sand base and a minimum of 3/8" spacing". This conversion project is considered 100% pavers, and therefore does not meet the program requirements.

Consumer states that they received the rebate and the complaint has been resolved.

My staff has worked with customer and the retailer where the rain barrels were purchased and we now have all the required documentation and will begin processing his $300 rebate. There was no bait and switch. We have rebated over 65,000 rain barrels. But as a public agency we need certain...

documentation before we can process the check and that was the issue in this case. Apologize for any inconvenience it may have caused. Thx[redacted]

Hello
The local water agency in this case [redacted] has the option of physically inspecting the project. If they choose to which [redacted] does they have 30 days to do that. They inspect in order to make sure public funds are being used correctly and due to the enormously large...

volume of customers it takes a few weeks to inspect then process the application. We are processing over $10 million dollars a month in rebates. We appreciate your patience and we are processing public funds as fast as possible with the proper financial controls. 
Thx
[redacted]

HiYou are rejecting our explanation that we are currently required to hold rebate checks due to IRS regulations. I cannot do anything about that. You state that if you knew the process was to take 6 months you would not have applied. But we received final application at the end of July. The IRS ruling is substantial and involved as the privacy of that information is vital and he has taken time to program that into the system. Your rebate like tens of thousands of others are on hold until this is resolved. We are hoping to be processing those applications shortly and I apologize for the inconvenience. We are working as quickly as we can I assure you to process yours and all the other applications.

As stated in my prior response, I understand the IRS issue, but the response still fails to address the other points made in my prior responses. My reference to six months refers to the 10 weeks it has been since I submitted the application, the approximate 1 week before I can submit tax information, plus another 8-10 weeks to process the check, which totals approximately 19-21 weeks and that assumes everything goes properly from this point on, which I have no confidence will happen.

Mr. and Mrs. [redacted],Thank you for notifying us of the situation. I reviewed the information you provided and that of our vendor and I have approved your application for the entire 3,350 sqft. I apologize for any inconvenience. To clarify your application was not denied it was...

requesting a second measurement as your receipt showed that you purchased "used" synthetic turf. Since we are using public funds for this program we do not allow "used or free" synthetic turf as part of the program as we cannot allow people to make money off of the program. So the email was about your synthetic turf being "used" not that it was made of recycled material as all synthetic turf is made of recycled material. As you can see your material costs for the synthetic turf are more than the rebate which is why we have that rule but make exceptions as needed. Since you also, put in drip irrigation, and drought tolerant plants etc we made an exception.  We appreciate you participating in the program during this drought. We have rebated on tens of thousands of homes and sometimes there are unique circumstances that need follow-up.Thx[redacted]?

HiThe project was completed prior to the pre-approval which was the reason the computer denied the project . An exception has been made by me and the customer will be notified of this through the program email system. So the project has been approved and the...

situation resolved.Thx[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
I have checked the website and do not see any change in the status of things or any indication that they have approved my application for the rebate... All I see is what you have sent me...So really so far I have not seen exactly what the business's response is.. [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because we have documented our compliance with the initial SoCAL WaterSmart requirement, and have included new documentation to show our compliance with the additional LADWP requirement.

HiWe have approved the project after reviewing photos and receipts of the project. The application is currently being processed for rebate. The web site should show the change in status this week.Thx[redacted]

Review: I began my back yard application on 4/18/15 with the socal watersmart program. I filled out the online application and sent the requisite number of pictures before. My online initial application was accepted. I used a contractor to draw up the plans. The socal watersmart web site continued to say pending .. for 1 month. The web site finally said APPROVED and then a few days later it said NOTIFICATION and then it changed to APPROVED. The contractor began work in early June completing the project in late June. I then took the required number of pictures and sent them in as directed. I heard nothing back from the socal watersmart after returning late in July to the site they asked for a paid invoice from my contractor which I also this time faxed in 2 different times. I continued to hear nothing for several weeks until this week I called the socal watersmart company. I learned from them that the approval for our project had not been issued until June 9th and that since my invoice was dated June 2nd that we had completed the project before socal watersmart said that we were approved which by their rules must be a reason for denial. The web site had indicated that our application had been approved before we started work. We did all we could possibly do to abide by their requirements. My application number is[redacted].Desired Settlement: I would like to get my rebate of $1,800. Which is 2 dollars per sq foot of the area that was approved for rebate in the first place.It said APPROVEDThen it said NOTIFICATIONIt changed to APPROVED

Business

Response:

HiThe project was completed prior to the pre-approval which was the reason the computer denied the project . An exception has been made by me and the customer will be notified of this through the program email system. So the project has been approved and the situation resolved.Thx[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

I have checked the website and do not see any change in the status of things or any indication that they have approved my application for the rebate... All I see is what you have sent me...So really so far I have not seen exactly what the business's response is.. [redacted]

Review: They are a branch of the Metropolitan Water District. They have been promoting water conservation with rebates. At the suggestion of your office, I am submitting evidence of my submission, which was denied, after following the instructions. Their website was blocked from uploading several times. And with teir permission, I mailed my application direct. A staff member Sarah Cunningham denied the application. I appealed and was turned down again. Because in an attempt to conserve water, after the local rabbits had destroyed lawn, by capping sprinklers, while preparing to install the artificial turf. I was rejected. I sense discrimination, as a senior and possibly because I was part of the Care program. As you can see it make no sense to "pour water on a sinking ship". I was accused of Photo Shopping the photo's. I do not have such a program. Trusting that the enclosed photos will show a history of our project. And I am sure that this should be an exception.Desired Settlement: I would like my request approved.

Business

Response:

The Metropolitan’s Water District’s (Metropolitan) SoCal Water$mart program (SCWS) has terms and conditions in place to help ensure that Metropolitan is achieving measurable water savings when providing incentives to customers to replace older water-using devices with more efficient ones. The SCWS turf removal program has requirements that help us determine customer eligibility for rebates. A customer’s eligibility is dependent on the following criteria only: 1. The site or residence is in Metropolitan’s service area; 2. The site has not received a previous rebate or incentive from Metropolitan or another water agency for the same measure or device; 3. The applicant has met the terms and conditions for the overall SCWS program and additional requirements for turf removal incentives. Your request to be approved for a SoCal Water$mart turf removal rebate (Rebate TRM # 5670) was denied because your submittal failed to comply with the program terms: “At least 5 color photos of the areas where you planned to remove turf. The area must be grass to qualify for a rebate.” The photos submitted showed little actual turf. Since this is a public program paid for by water customers with the goal of saving water and little to no turf exists in the photos, the application was denied due to the fact that there appeared to be little to no water savings from the photos submitted. However, due to the current drought conditions, we will make an exception and allow your rebate to be processed. We will contact our rebate processing firm for SCWS and instruct them begin the process of allowing your applcation and rebate. We look forward to working with you and apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Review: I submitted my application for rebate #[redacted] on 7/27/15. On 7/31/15, I got an email requesting more information. I called and gave the requested information. I was put on hold while she checked with someone in processing to ensure that there was no further information needed. I was told no further information was needed. In early September, I checked to see if there was a status update on my rebate. I was surprised that there was still the "requesting information" notification with the same request that I received on 7/31. On 9/9/15, I called and learned that more additional information was needed, but I had never been notified of this. My application had been sitting idle for weeks, not being processed, but nobody had bothered to alert me of this request. Furthermore, the information that was needed was information that was already available in all of the pictures and notations I submitted with the reservation and application. I again provided the information that was requested. The girl helping me tried to speak to processing about the new information to ensure that this was truly everything they needed to know to finish processing the application. She was not able to speak to anybody in processing but told me she would email them to provide all of the information I had given her. She promised she would call me once they responded to her email, which should be in 2-3 days. I called her back about 5 days later to follow-up. She then told me that the response time from processing was actually 5-10 business days. On September 17, 2015, I called again and was told that there was still no response from processing to the prior email.I called again on 9/23 spoke to someone who was condescending and told there was still no response from processing to the email. It has been 8 weeks since I submitted my application. Due to the lack of communication on your end, my application sat idle for weeks. Even after I provided the information you requested, my application continues to sit idle.Desired Settlement: I want my application for rebate processed and my rebate check to be issued in an expeditious manner

Business

Response:

HiWe have approved the project after reviewing photos and receipts of the project. The application is currently being processed for rebate. The web site should show the change in status this week.Thx[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

It would be appreciated if the business could provide an estimate as to how long it will take to receive the rebate check. Thank you.

Business

Response:

HiYou are rejecting our explanation that we are currently required to hold rebate checks due to IRS regulations. I cannot do anything about that. You state that if you knew the process was to take 6 months you would not have applied. But we received final application at the end of July. The IRS ruling is substantial and involved as the privacy of that information is vital and he has taken time to program that into the system. Your rebate like tens of thousands of others are on hold until this is resolved. We are hoping to be processing those applications shortly and I apologize for the inconvenience. We are working as quickly as we can I assure you to process yours and all the other applications.

Consumer

Response:

As stated in my prior response, I understand the IRS issue, but the response still fails to address the other points made in my prior responses. My reference to six months refers to the 10 weeks it has been since I submitted the application, the approximate 1 week before I can submit tax information, plus another 8-10 weeks to process the check, which totals approximately 19-21 weeks and that assumes everything goes properly from this point on, which I have no confidence will happen.

Review: We decided to remove the grass in our parkway area of our home. We submitted an application to the So Cal WaterSmart Rebate program. We only selected to remove the grass in the parkway area and not the rest of the grass on our property. There is a question on the application that says, "If less than 250 sq.ft, will all turf on site be removed (excluding parkway)? Yes or No (ineligible for rebate)." The question seemed vague if we were removing just the parkway and it was less than 250 square feet. I contacted a representative at So Cal WaterSmart Rebate program and I confirmed that if we were removing all of the grass in the parkway and it was less than 250 sq feet, we would be eligible. He said yes. This phone call happened in February. We submitted our application and on March 2nd, we received confirmation our turn reservation application had been approved. #[redacted]. It clearly states on the application we were only removing 243 sq feet and it is just for a parkway. With our reservation approval, we proceeded to remove the grass. We submitted the final application within the final deadline. On July 1, 2015 we received an email saying we were denied because the entire project was less than 250 sq feet and something regarding photos taken. My main complaint is why were approved in the beginning if we clearly had less than 250 stated on the application? If that was the rule, then why were we approved? And trying to get a hold of someone is nearly impossible with the wait times and they did not return my phone call left on their message system.Desired Settlement: Since we received a reservation approval, and we removed the amount of turf in the application, I would like to have the full rebate processed and paid to us of $486.00

Business

Response:

HiYes, this issue was corrected for the customer and he was approved for the rebate on 8/4/15. Thx[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. Within a short time of the Revdex.com sending in my complain, I received the attached approval. Thank you very much for your help in resolving the matter![redacted]

Review: I was approved for the Socal Watersmart Residential Turf Removal program with a required submission date of September 5, 2015. We removed our grass and installed drought tolerant landscape. This work was completed and photos were submitted on September 4, 2015. On October 21, 2015, I received a notice that a portion of the turf removal does not qualify for the program. I provided a detailed plan sheet that showed area of grass removed, and excluded areas replaced with concrete steps and wood deck. I logged into the system today and it states that the application was just recently sent to the local water agency Golden State Water for approval (within the last five days). I would have expected this request to be submitted timely after my evidence was submitted. I called EGIA today and they said it could take 4-6 weeks for [redacted] to approve, and it could take up to 10 weeks for SoCal Watersmart to proceed with the approval. That is a timeframe of over 24 weeks from the time my application was submitted. That is very long to wait for reimbursement for the $6k I spent redoing my irrigation and landscape. This 6 month expected reimbursement should be clearly noted in the approval letter, so consumers can understand the time it will take to be reimbursed.Desired Settlement: Expedite rebate payment.

Business

Response:

HelloThe local water agency in this case [redacted] has the option of physically inspecting the project. If they choose to which [redacted] does they have 30 days to do that. They inspect in order to make sure public funds are being used correctly and due to the enormously large volume of customers it takes a few weeks to inspect then process the application. We are processing over $10 million dollars a month in rebates. We appreciate your patience and we are processing public funds as fast as possible with the proper financial controls. Thx[redacted]

Review: On January 12, 2014 I purchased 4 rain barrels with the understanding that I could go online or mail in a rebate to receive reimbursement of $75.00/rain barrel for a total of $300.00. I researched to make sure my water service provider was a participant, received a rebate confirmation and conversed with SoCal Watersmart Rebate Program customer service representative confirming I had all the documents in for processing. My rebate No. is [redacted]. A pdf of all the documents requested to be handed in was sent and the representative confirmed (E-mail confirmation dated February 3, 2014) he had the information. The representative that assist me was [redacted] (Customer Service Representative). After not receiving a rebate check, I contacted customer service and was and received the following message:On May 20, 2014, at 11:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:Site Information:[redacted] # [redacted] ___________________________________[redacted]Thank you for participating in the SoCal WaterSmart rebate program. This email is to update you on the current status of your rebate. We will continue to update you as your rebate continues through the process.Rebate and supporting documents have been processed and approved.Thank you,The Metropolitan Water District Rebate Processing CenterSoCal Water$mart Rebate Program3800 Watt Avenue Suite 105Sacramento, CA 95821Phone: ###-###-####To this date, I have not received my rebate for my purchase and it appears that I am being stalled intentionally. On June 18, 2014 I received an e-mail my check was being mailed and on June 20, 2014 I received a message my request was denied. PLEASE HELP! I will provide all the e-mail and backup again if necessary.Desired Settlement: I selected "Refund" because I am only seeking reimbursement for the advertised rebate of $75/each x 4 rain barrels = $350.

Business

Response:

Company states that the customer received the rebate already.

Consumer

Response:

Consumer states that they received the rebate and the complaint has been resolved.

Review: This complaint is regarding Application#: [redacted]. I obtained my pre-approval for the turf removal for the above address on Sept 19 2014 (Attatchment application #[redacted] Pre-Approval) the project was completed on 1/9/2015. The application was completed in early January 2015. The package that I sent included photo, water bill, and receipt from the contractor, online within the timeframe as requested by the program guideline. (Please note the Attatchment called Turf Replacement Receipt 1-9-2015). As of May 2015, 4 months after I submitted the complete package, I was yet to receive any payment from the agency, so I checked the website and it indicated that the status was requesting information. However, I had never received any communication from the agency regarding further request, electronically or in paper. I started calling the agency at [redacted], but I was not able to speak with anybody after a long wait. I sent an email on May 18, 2015 to inquire the status. I received an email back with the following note The invoice for the synthetic turf needs to show that the amount was paid in full, and that I should email the updated Receipt." The receipt included with the packet clearly indicates the total amount received and for that reason it is called a receipt and not an invoice. It is well known that businesses only issue receipts only after they receive the amount indicated from the customers and not beforehand. I believe the person in charge of reviewing my file has a very poor understanding of English language since he/she cannot distinguish the difference between a receipt and an invoice. I did respond that the document indicates clearly it was a receipt however on 2 separate email communication one on May 20 and one on June 8th I was asked to provide further proof of payment. On July 27 2015 I included a copy of the cancelled check (Attatchment Turf Replacement Cancelled Check) with an email and on Auguest 17 I received an email communication indicating that since more than 120 days has passed the processing time my application is denied.I should mention that SoCal Smart Water initially failed to inform me of any issues for over 5 months. And it was until I communicated with them several times , that they informed me of such a issue regarding a receipt. As I mentioned the Receipt was the proper proof of payment and it was included in the original packet submitted back in January. Then even when I provided further proof, they still denied me because they initially took 5 months to inform me of any issues.I believe SoCal Smart water Rebate has mishandled my case in bad faith. They initially gave me pre-approval , so I invested money in synthetic turf, then totally neglected to communicate with me regarding my application and came up with some phony reasons to deny my application. I would like to inform Socal Smart Water that even if they are doing this unknowingly , they are committing fraud by promising the rebate via pre-approval and then delaying and mishandling my file afterwards. I would like to receive the full rebate of $1200 which I was approved for.Desired Settlement: I would like to be paid the full rebate amount of $1200 and an apology from Socal Smart Water Rebate program for mishandling my case and their incompetence.

Business

Response:

HiThe customer was communicated with on numerous occasions. The receipt for synthetic turf does not show that it was paid in full. That was communicated to the customer who stated her contractor said that receipt would be fine. The customer was then out of the country for a month they said which is why the application ran out of time. We have made an exception to the rule and allowed the customer rebate to processed without a receipt stating it as paid in full. The application is not denied now but reinstated. The customer has been sent a W9 request email. This is an email that is requesting the customer fill out a W9 to allow us to process the rebate. The IRS has told Metropolitan that any rebate we issue over $600 requires us to get a w9 from the customer then later we will issue our rebate customers 1099s. So the application is reinstated and we will need the W9. without the W9 we will not be able to process rebate per the IRS. thx[redacted]

Review: I applied for the Turf Removal Rebate Program from Socal Water Smart [redacted]) and was approved on November 14, 2014. I was told that the rebate check would be sent out to me between the 8th and 10th week after it was approved.On the 8th week, I called Socal Water Smart (1 888 376 3314) and was told to wait 1 or 2 more weeks for a check to be sent out to me.On the 10th week, I called again and was again told to wait 1 or 2 more weeks.On the 11th week, I called again and was told to wait for 1 more week. I told the lady who answered the phone that I needed an exact date when the check would be issued to me. She asked me back, Do you need me to repeat myself? I explained to her that this was the 3rd time I had been told to wait 1 or 2 more weeks, so I need to know exactly how long I needed to wait to receive the rebate. She finally said that, There was a technical issue so it was delayed, but the issue was already resolved and a check will be issued to you by the end of next week (week 12th). I wanted to ask her if the technical issue was already resolved, why the rebate check needed 1 more week to be issued, but I didnt dare to ask.On the 12th week, which is today, I called again this morning, and again was told to wait some more weeks due to a technical issue. I asked how long I needed to wait. The lady who answered the phone said that she didnt know and could not tell me when the check would be issued and how long I had to wait, just told me to wait some more weeks.I wonder if it is the Socal Water Smarts policy to do its business by trying to hold on the money of the rebate as long as possible. Every time I called the Socal Water Smart to check on my rebate status, all of the employees who answered the phone always gave me exactly the same answers just wait 1 or 2 more weeks and its delayed due to a technical issue. The rebate is like free money for applicants, but we apply for it, and we are approved because we are qualified to receive the rebate. We are not beggarsDesired Settlement: Receive my rebate as soon as possible.

Business

Response:

Business states that they apologize for the delay. According to company records, this check was paid on February 11th, 2015. Check #[redacted].

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.