Steve Rich Environmental Contractors

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: I'm not sure what this response was to because nowhere in the complaint was there anything about the removal of the oil tank, or lack thereof Our complaint was that this investigation was not required in the first place We were forced to do so because Steve-Rich's initial "investigation" found a 550-gallon tank They claim to have used equipment to find it, then tested the sound with a hammer and found it to be an oil tank As I mentioned, this turned out to be a rock We already wasted $because of their erroneous reporting, plus we were forced to delay our closingAgain, I was convinced to let this go until we got a bill for another $ Steve-Rich needs to be investigated for their business practice of finding metal anomalies in order to extract more money for digging when in fact, there was never any metal anomaly Regards, [redacted] ***

Please see the attached report regarding the investigation We were hired to do an investigation for the presence of an
underground oil tank SREC did find an anomaly which was giving
positive readings with the equipment (please see disclaimer). After discussing
this with the client, we specifically did
not give a proposal for the removal of an oil tank Our
proposal (signed by client) is specifically for an anomaly and not for a tank
removal No where does it state that we were hired to dig and remediate
an oil tank as *** *** statesOur proposal is clearly to perform and investigate for an
unknown anomaly. This is what we did. That again is why we state, “it is important to realize that
interference from and not limited to steel, reinforcing rods, buried utilities
could impair equipment and the accuracy of." Not only is this our disclaimer, its written on all
underground or subsurface investigation companies This info comes
off the literature from the company that manufactures the equipment.
The client signed to have the investigation completed along
with the saw cutting as per her request at the time we put the proposal
together

From beginning to end my oil tank removal project was organized and went smooth. Steve Rich and Associates provided a detailed proposal with unit costs for various situations that might arise during the job. Their costs are competitive and fair. I reviewed it and had several questions which their office staff and owner were helpful in answering. I was out of state and they informed me well in advance of when the work was to start. On the day of the job, they were punctual and ensured the town inspector would be available when called upon. My representative at the job site noted that they took precautions to cover the lawn with rigid sheets to minimize damage to areas adjacent to the excavation. They had all the equipment and materials ready to keep the job running continuously regardless of unforeseen conditions. They were prompt in providing documents soon after the work was completed; that I needed to support a pending sale of the affected residence.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
I'm not sure what this response was to because nowhere in the complaint was there anything about the removal of the oil tank, or lack thereof.  
Our complaint was that this investigation was not required in the first place.  We were forced to do so because Steve-Rich's initial "investigation" found a 550-gallon tank.  They claim to have used equipment to find it, then tested the sound with a hammer and found it to be an oil tank.  As I mentioned, this turned out to be a rock.  We already wasted $407 because of their erroneous reporting, plus we were forced to delay our closing.
Again, I was convinced to let this go until we got a bill for another $46.  Steve-Rich needs to be investigated for their business practice of finding metal anomalies in order to extract more money for digging when in fact, there was never any metal anomaly.
Regards,
[redacted]

Steve [redacted] removed my oil tank and initially everything seemed to be going along fine. There was a hole in my tank so Steve [redacted] Environmental was required to report it to the state. After waiting 7 business days for the initial results of the soil test, I was told the test came back non-detect but that I would have to have at least 3 more soil samples submitted to satisfy the state requirements to close out the case. This came at a cost of more than $4,000 and this was the first I was hearing of this expense. I was never informed that this was a possibility, in fact, I was given the impression that if nothing was found, nothing more would have to happen. I was then told that I would have to wait another 5-7 business days for the new tests to come back after the samples were taken which the company was able to schedule that week only because I paid the deposit with a credit card along with a credit card fee. Apparently these additional samples needed to happen because the hole was found in the tank. I asked why I had to wait for the initial results to come back for the next samples and was told that the additional samples couldn't be ordered the day of the excavation because the excavation took too long. I then asked why the samples couldn't have been taken in the next few days and was never given a clear answer, the representative kept skirting the issue and going back to the initial day of excavation. I then agreed to pay for rush service to get the results of the second samples back quickly which I was told would be back in 48 hours. When I checked back with the company after 48 hours since I hadn't heard anything, the representative told me that she had gotten the results back the next day but she forgot to email me (even though I paid several hundred dollars extra for this service). She then told me that the report for the state would be ready the week of May 5th and if I wanted to rush it, I could pay an additional $200. At this point I was not inclined to rush it because May 5th would have been just in time for my needs. A few days later she told me that the report wouldn't be ready till the week of May 9th. I explained what she had told me previously and she said she made a mistake. I told her I wanted the report rushed without paying the fee because of all the miscommunication. She said she could try to get that to happen but couldn't guarantee it. I said I would like to speak with someone else. The representative who I was speaking with told me she would leave a message for Steve (no last name and no explanation of who Steve is but I was able to figure out that this is the owner) but she had no idea when he would call me back. That was on Thursday of last week and now today is Monday at the end of the day and I still have not heard from the owner of this company even after repeated calls today expressing how urgent it is to speak with him. At this point I can't imagine that I will be satisfied with the final outcome as I am not getting a call back to resolve this. The service they are providing may be good but unfortunately in my case, the customer service has been atrocious.

Review: Based on Steve-Rich's inspection report indicating that there was likely a 550-gallon tank under the driveway, we hired them to dig and possibly remediate the oil tank. They charged us $407.81 initially, then added more money for saw-cutting even though we specifically asked that no saw-cutting be done as to minimize the damage to the driveway and to let us know if it was absolutely necessary. They went ahead and saw-cut without notifying us beforehand, but that's actually not our real complaint.

The real issue is that the oil tank that they found turned out to be a rock! Their earlier investigation was supposedly so thorough that they were able to determine that it was likely a 550-gallon tank (very specific). I am no geologist but mistaking a rock with a 550-gallon tank is, at best, incompetence; more likely, it is fraudulent business practice to extract more money for unnecessary work.

Back in August, I had wanted to pursue this matter further and have their business practices investigated, especially when they sent a bill asking for MORE money for the saw-cutting (another $46). I told them I was willing to let my complaint go, but now that they are threatening us over this $46 that we shouldn't have to pay, we decided to proceed with our complaint over the entire dig which was a colossal waste of time and money.Desired Settlement: Since they are not willing to drop their ridiculous $46 over services not requested, we are now requesting a full refund for the unnecessary work.

Business

Response:

Please see the attached report regarding the investigation. We were hired to do an investigation for the presence of an

underground oil tank. SREC did find an anomaly which was giving

positive readings with the equipment (please see disclaimer). After discussing this with the client, we specifically did

not give a proposal for the removal of an oil tank. Our

proposal (signed by client) is specifically for an anomaly and not for a tank

removal. No where does it state that we were hired to dig and remediate

an oil tank as [redacted] states. Our proposal is clearly to perform and investigate for an

unknown anomaly. This is what we did. That again is why we state, “it is important to realize that

interference from and not limited to steel, reinforcing rods, buried utilities

could impair equipment and the accuracy of." Not only is this our disclaimer, its written on all

underground or subsurface investigation companies. This info comes

off the literature from the company that manufactures the equipment.

The client signed to have the investigation completed along

with the saw cutting as per her request at the time we put the proposal

together.

Consumer

Response:

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:I'm not sure what this response was to because nowhere in the complaint was there anything about the removal of the oil tank, or lack thereof. Our complaint was that this investigation was not required in the first place. We were forced to do so because Steve-Rich's initial "investigation" found a 550-gallon tank. They claim to have used equipment to find it, then tested the sound with a hammer and found it to be an oil tank. As I mentioned, this turned out to be a rock. We already wasted $407 because of their erroneous reporting, plus we were forced to delay our closing.Again, I was convinced to let this go until we got a bill for another $46. Steve-Rich needs to be investigated for their business practice of finding metal anomalies in order to extract more money for digging when in fact, there was never any metal anomaly.

Regards,