Westcoast Tree Care Inc

Westcoast again appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Customer and to correct the inaccurate information represented by the Customer
The Customer appears to continue to misunderstand the legal nature of the relationship he entered into with Westcoast. He was never presented with a bid. Attached to this response are the excerpts of the top and bottom of the contract that the customer signed (the full contract has not been included out of respect for the Customer's privacy, but is available to the Revdex.com upon request). The document is clearly labeled in large letters at the top "Contract for Work to be Performed." It is signed by BOTH parties (a bid would not be signed by the customer until it was accepted, at which point it would be a contract). Directly above the signature lines, in bold writing includes the language "This contract is binding and cannot be cancelled. If you attempt to cancel this contract after the third business day, and Westcoast accepts that cancellation, you agree to pay Westcoast fifty percent...." Finally, this Customer has also retained a lawyer and that lawyer sent a letter in which he refers to this document as a "contract" and demands that the "contract" be rescinded. Thus, it is clear that the Customer's claim that he thought the document was a "bid," rather than a contract is not genuine and is made merely in an attempt to avoid his own contractual obligations
Westcoast entered into a contract with this Customer. The Customer knowingly signed the Contract and paid a nonrefundable down payment. Despite having many months to ensure that he had sufficient funds to pay the contract price to which he had agreed, the Customer then sought to cancel the contract without paying the fee to which he agreed. His sole justification is that he was low on money. While Westcoast understands that managing one's finances can be challenging at times, Westcoast schedules its work geographically for many business reasons. In connection with this scheduling, it makes commitments to its employees and their families. When a customer cancels a contract, it is extremely burdensome for Westcoast to attempt to fill one day or partial day with replacement work, particularly because its salespeople have moved to a different geographic area. If it does not have work to perform on a given day, then its employees don't work. It is for this reason that it contracts carefully with its customers, clearly labels its contracts as such, has both parties execute the contract after it has been completed with all material terms and requires a down payment to ensure that the customer is serious about having the work performed. Once it goes through these careful steps, it has a right to rely upon the contract and insist that a customer perform their obligations, just as Westcoast is bound to perform its obligations under the contractWhile it strongly discourages cancellations for all of the reasons set forth above, it does allow them upon payment of a 50% cancellation feeThe Customer agrees to this fee when it signs the contract. The fee is clearly disclosed immediately above the customer's signature
It is unfortunate that this Customer has refused to uphold his end of the written contract that he entered into with Westcoast. Westcoast, however, has done nothing wrong in enforcing its contractual rights

Westcoast Tree Care, Inc("Westcoast") appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint. As explained in more detail, below, the customers' son was not present for any of the communications between Westcoast, its attorneys and his parentsThe true facts of this matter show that the
contract was validly entered into. Moreover, Westcoast has already extended significant accommodations to the customer by both agreeing to an extended payment plan without interest or fees, and then agreeing to release them from the contract and the cancellation fee. Unfortunately, the customers' son does not appear to be interested in resolution, and continues to threaten to defame Westcoast if he doesn't get his wayIn October, 2014, Westcoast's President visited the *** and talked with them about their trees. At the end of a long meeting, he wrote up a contract that details the work to be performed and the price. The *** agreed. The contract is very simple (copy attached) and clearly states that the deposit is non-refundable, the contract is non-cancellable after the 3-day statutory recession period and that a cancellation fee applies. There is no fine print Westcoast was with both of the *** throughout the visit. Mr*** told Westcoast's President that he likes to let Mrs*** sign documents as it preserves her dignity as she was suffering from some dementia. She signed the contract and wrote the check, all within Mr*** presence and with his consent. A few weeks later, Mr*** called indicating that he was concerned about the cost because he had some other expenses. Westcoast agreed to accommodate that concern by stretching out the contract price over three payments. Mr*** and Westcoast's lawyer exchanged letters and faxes on the issue and also spoke by phone. Mr*** was clearly competent during the phone calls and his letters also show complete competence. Indeed, he even negotiated a more favorable payment plan than initially offered by Westcoast. Westcoast heard nothing further from Mr*** until late March or early April when his son suddenly contacted Westcoast. Westcoast informed the son of the previous agreement with Mr***, believing that would resolve the issue. Instead, approximately ten days later, the son sent a very threatening and rude letter containing pages of and unjustified accusations and complicated demands. Westcoast was shocked by both the substance and tone of the letter, given that the son had absolutely no knowledge of what had occurred. After reading the letter, Westcoast decided it did want to do business with the ***s' son and agreed to cancel the remaining obligations under the contract. It immediately communicated this acceptance to the ***s' sonHe did not respond, instead filing this complaint.The son's complaints about price have no merit. As with any service, tree care can be performed for a variety of different price points. Westcoast does very thorough work and charges a fair price for the work it performs. That someone else charges less is irrelevant. Indeed, this is why people often get bids before having service work performed. The *** were free to get bids before they signed the contract with Westcoast, or even in the following days. They did not and Westcoast is entitled to rely upon the contract that was signed.Westcoast enjoyed meeting the *** and looked forward to performing much-needed work for them. Westcoast stands by its agreement not to pursue the *** for their remaining obligations under the contract, and will waive the cancellation fee, but they are not entitled the deposit that was clearly labeled as "non-refundable" under the contract, and their son is certainly not entitled to the return of that deposit simply because he disagrees with the contract they freely entered into and repeatedly ratified.Please advise if we can provide any further information. We appreciate the opportunity to respond to Mr*** meritless demands
***SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REDACTED BY Revdex.com***

Westcoast Tree Care, Inc("Westcoast") appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Customer's complaint. As explained below, the Customer's allegations are false. In fact, the Customer entered into a binding contract and, after waiting four months, cancelled the contract a few weeks
before the work was scheduled to be completed. The Customer's complaint is, unfortunately, nothing more than an effort to force Westcoast to excuse the Customer's breach of his contractual obligations
Westcoast plans its work geographically for maximum efficiencyConsequently, it does offer its services door-to-door. Of course, any resident is free to decline Westcoast's offer to discuss recommended tree work. The Customer did not do that, but instead invited Westcoast's President, MrM***, into the office where he maintains a tax preparation/accounting practice. The Customer and MrM*** spent well over an hour discussing the potential work needed at the Customer's property, with the Customer telling MrM*** that the Customer has been involved in financial matters as part of his profession for over years and was very sophisticated in such dealings. Ultimately, MrM*** prepared a written contract describing the work to be performed and the cost. The Customer reviewed the contract very closely, including the deposit and non-cancellation provisions, as well as the statutory right to cancel the work within three days- clearly understanding the terms and conditions of the relationshipAfter doing so, he tried to negotiate a waiver of the 15% non-refundable deposit. MrM*** refused, telling the Customer that the deposit ensured that the Customer was committed to having the work performed as cancellations are extremely burdensome. MrM*** advised the Customer that if he didn't want to pay the deposit, that the negotiations could cease and MrM*** would leaveIn response, the Customer agreed to pay the deposit and executed the contract. There was no "high pressure," as the Customer contends. Rather, MrM*** offered to leave on at least one occasion during the negotiations
The contract included a 3-day right of rescission that allowed the Customer to cancel the contract for any reason within the three days following its' signing and receive a refund of the deposit. The Customer did not exercise this rightRather, he waited months and then called Westcoast asking to cancel the work a few weeks before it was scheduled to be performed. Notably, the Customer did not have any valid justification for the cancellationRather, he simply indicated that he did not have the funds to pay the contract price he was obligated to pay. Given that the Customer had months to make arrangements to pay the contract price, this was not a valid justification for the Customer breaching his contractual obligations
Westcoast advised the Customer that he could either have the work performed as scheduled, or pay the 50% cancellation fee that is clearly set forth in the contract terms which the Customer had carefully read. The Customer indicates that he does not want to pay the cancellation fee, or does not have the funds to do so. The Customer then stopped communicating with Westcoast and instead had his daughter-in-law, who is neither a party to the contract nor does she have a power of attorney, contact Westcoast in an attempt to persuade it to release the Customer from his clear contractual obligations
The Customer's reference to a "bid" is simply wrong. "Bids" are not signed by the customer - this contract was signed by the Customer. The document the customer signed is a simple one page document that is labeled "Contract" on the topAdditionally, the Customer's allegation that Westcoast told the Customer that his trees were in danger of falling is simply wrong. Westcoast never made that representation. If the trees were truly in danger of falling, Westcoast would have suggested that the work be done immediately, not months later
Westcoast takes its contractual obligations very seriously. It recognizes that it has an obligation to show up on the date scheduled and perform the work described in the Contract. It believes that it is reasonable for its Customers to do the sameOnce a Customer has signed a contract, and not rescinded during the 3-day period, Westcoast expects its customers to perform their obligations. If they want to cancel the Contract, they have agreed to pay a 50% cancellation feeThis fee is designed to both discourage cancellation and to compensate Westcoast for its losses as it is very difficult for Westcoast to go back and fill in a day of work given the method by which it schedules this work
It is unfortunate that this Customer chose to simply ignore his contractual obligations and then chose to file a and meritless complaint against Westcoast. Westcoast has done nothing improper - it has merely held this Customer to his contractual obligations. Westcoast remains willing to perform the work as scheduled and is confident that the Customer would be satisfied with the quality of the work. As of this writing, with the work scheduled only a few days away, the Customer has still not told Westcoast whether he wishes to have the work performed or not - leaving Westcoast unable to even attempt to mitigate the losses caused by this Customer's breach
Westcoast is, and intends to continue to, pursue its legal remedies arising from the Customer's breach of his contractual obligations

Westcoast Tree Care, Inc("Westcoast") appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint. Unfortunately, the customers' recitation of the facts is both inaccurate and incomplete. In particular, the customers' claim that they incurred $3,in charges for an day extension is
plainly false. They were neither charged, nor paid, this sum.In January 2017, Westcoast proposed a scope of work for the trees on the customers' property. The customers and Westcoast's President, Jim M***, spent an extensive period of time together discussing the work and agreeing to a scope of work. The scope of work was outlined in a written contract, a copy of which is attachedThe contract clearly sets out the work to be performed, the cost and the fact that payment was due in full at the time the work was performed. The customers signed the contract. When MrM*** met with the customers in January 2017, they indicated that they intended to pay for work with an inheritance that they were absolutely certain they would receive by July when the work was scheduled to be performed. Westcoast agreed to a reduced non-refundable deposit as an accommodation to the customers.As promised, Westcoast did call the customers a week before the work was to be performed to remind them of the upcoming work. This reminder call is documented on the face of the attached contract where it states "reminder call 7/18/17." The customers did not tell Westcoast at that time, or any time prior to the date the work was scheduled to be performed, that they could not fulfill their payment obligations. Westcoast's crew arrived at the customers' property as scheduled. At that time, the husband informed Westcoast's foreman that they could not presently pay for the work, but promised to ultimately pay for it. Because Westcoast schedules its work geographically, and because this work really needed to be done, Westcoast agreed to go ahead and perform the work and work with the customers on payment arrangementsThe work was performed as contracted and to the customers' satisfaction. The alternative at that point would have been for Westcoast to refuse to perform the work and enforce the 50% cancellation fee in its contract. Clearly, Westcoast's willingness to perform its contractual obligations and accept a late payment was a significant benefit and accommodation to the customer. Westcoast discussed with the customer that it would need to confer with its attorney and would have the attorney prepare appropriate documents to secure the customers' payment obligations. The customer made no objection to that proposal.After consulting with legal counsel about appropriate steps, Westcoast asked its attorney to prepare a promissory note and deed of trust that allowed the customer to pay the contract price, which was due in July, upon receipt of the anticipated inheritance or by December 31, 2017. The attorney prepared the documents and sent them to the customer for consideration and execution. A few days later, a friend of the customer called the attorney and indicated that she was assisting them and asked for additional time to respond because the customer was trying to get a loan to pay the balance in full. Westcoast agreed, on the condition that the customer pay the attorneys fees it had incurred in preparing the documents. The customers' friend responded to this condition with "I will have the check made payable to Westcoast Tree Care." I have attached this email exchange. She did not object to the request for payment of the attorneys fees, nor did the customer, who was included on the correspondence. Later on, Westcoast provided a payoff calculation that included the attorneys fees of $and the interest that had accrued pursuant to the express terms of the contract. Again, neither the customer nor the friend objected to the requested payoff, or disputed that they owed either the attorneys fees or the interest The customers' complaint that Westcoast did not "work" with the customer is simply not true. While it was not required to do so, Westcoast worked with the customer in numerous respects, including reducing the nonrefundable deposit, performing needed work despite the customers' inability to pay as agreed, and then allowing the customer an additional five months to pay the contract balance at a reduced interest rate, provided that the payment obligation was properly documented. In the end, Westcoast merely requested that the customer reimburse it for the attorney fees it spent preparing the note and deed of trust, which would have been unnecessary had the customers fulfilled their payment obligations and/or secured the bank loan before the payment was due, or simply informed Westcoast that they were in the process of obtaining a bank loan prior to the attorney preparing the documents, and the interest that had accrued under the express terms of the contract. Westcoast was entitled to both the attorneys fees and interest under the express terms of the contract, and the customer had agreed to pay those fees when it requested additional time. The customers never expressed any concern, dispute or objection about paying either the attorneys fees or the interest, and willingly paid both sums. Indeed, this Revdex.com complaint is the first that Westcoast has heard that the customers were anything but completely satisfied with the entire experience.In sum, Westcoast appreciated the opportunity to perform much-needed work for these customers, it performed great work and it made significant accommodations to them with respect to their payment arrangements. Westcoast regrets that they did not communicate that they were obtaining a bank loan to pay the debt in full prior to the attorney preparing the documents, but Westcoast was entitled to be reimbursed for attorneys fees it actually incurred in documenting the agreement it had made to allow the customer an additional five months to pay their obligations to Westcoast, and the customer agreed to do so. Westcoast is disappointed that the customers did not communicate their concerns directly to Westcoast, particularly after willingly paying the allegedly disputed sum without objection. Finally, the customers' allegation that they were charged $3,as a result of their late payment is clearly false. The total in attorneys fees and interest was approximately $950.Thank you for providing Westcoast the opportunity to respond to this complaint

Westcoast Tree Care, Inc. ("Westcoast") appreciates the opportunity to respond to this customer's complaint.This customer initiated contact with Westcoast by calling and asking for Westcoast to come to her property and advise on any work that it recommended.  Westcoast's President visited her...

property on March 21, 2017.  He met with the Customer and spent a substantial amount of time walking the property and discussing the significant work needed on her trees.  Originally, he recommended a scope of work with a proposed cost of approximately $70,000.  The customer indicated that she would need to discuss it with her financial advisor to determine whether she had sufficient liquidity to pay that cost.  She made no mention whatsoever of her children.  Westcoast responded by indicating that it did not want the work to inconvenience her financially and offered to propose a reduced scope of work for now, and proposed the remaining work could be done next year.  The customer agreed and Westcoast proposed a scope of work totaling $37,500.  The work was described in detail in a written contract, which also contained the price and payment terms.  I've attached a copy of the contract.  The customer reviewed and signed the contract.  The contract clearly provides that it cannot be cancelled.  The customer paid the 20% non-refundable deposit.  That the deposit is non-refundable is clearly stated on the agreement.  Because the customer called Westcoast, rather than Westcoast soliciting her, Westcoast was not required to offer her a 3-day period within which to cancel the contract without penalty, but it extended that right to her as a matter of courtesy.  She did not exercise the right in that time period.Eight days later, the customer called indicating that she wanted to cancel the contract.  Because the customer was outside the 3-day rescission period, the customer was not entitled to cancel the contract without paying a 50% cancellation fee.  Again, this is stated clearly on the contract.  However, Westcoast waived its right to collect the cancellation fee and agreed to cancel the contract without further payment.  It did retain the 20% non-refundable deposit, which it was entitled to do.The customer is not a naive elderly woman.  She is clearly competent and financially-capable.  She initiated contact with Westcoast and invited it to her home for the purpose of securing a contract for tree services.  She engaged in detailed and substantive discussion about the work and the cost.  It is unfortunate that she elected to cancel the contract after the period in which she was permitted to do so without penalty. Westcoast has extended substantial courtesies to her, including providing the 3-day rescission right that it was not required to offer her, and forgiving her from paying more than $10,000 in cancellation charges which she clearly owes under the contract.  It has merely retained a deposit that was clearly labeled as non-refundable on the written contract.In short, Westcoast has done nothing improper.  It regrets that the customer chose not to proceed with the contract as it believes that she would have been very happy with the work.  If you need anything further, please let us know.

Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
Mr M[redacted] appears to be very adept at making the point that it's schedule for performing it's work is "cast in stone" and cannot be changed.  This approach to customer service is something that harbors on "strong arm" tactics.  There are numerous reasons for proposed work schedules to change.  They are far too many to numerate at this time, but the first one that springs to mind is that the customer drops dead.
However a point Mr. M[redacted] makes that is incorrect has to do with the term "bid".  I asked for an estimate to do the work, which is standard procedure whenever a solicitor makes a written request to perform work at a customer's residence.  I did not expect to be presented with a contract.  Contracts are customarily executed and signed  when all parties agree, not at the time of making an estimate.  Also "Bids" are signed, having signed many myself over the course of my business as an estimator for construction contractors.
I notified Mr M[redacted] in writing of my inability to have the work performed due to very limited funds available at this time and in the near future.  To demand a 50% cancellation fee is out of the question.
 
 
 
 
 
Sincerely,[redacted]

Westcoast appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint. As an initial matter, it should be noted that the complainant is not a customer of Westcoast, has never been a customer of Westcoast and has never spoken to anyone at Westcoast. The actual customer on the attached contract...

recognizes that the contract is binding and cannot be canceled.I will begin with a recitation of the accurate facts surrounding this contract.  The customer, [redacted], called Westcoast and asked it to come look at a damaged tree in the yard of the rental house which is presently occupied by his granddaughter.  After inspecting the tree, Westcoast confirmed that the damaged tree needed to be removed but that it was not at further risk of falling apart and it would serve the customer best to wait until the yard was dry to perform the work. The customer agreed.  The customer and Westcoast's President sat in the customer's truck as Westcoast prepared a written contract, which the customer signed.  The customer also paid the non-refundable deposit. While Westcoast was not required to do so as it did not solicit the customer, it extended the customer a 3-day period to cancel the contract for any reason without penalty.  He did not exercise this right.  Approximately one month later, the customer called and said that he had found someone else that would perform the work for considerably less than the price to which the customer had agreed in the contract.  Westcoast reminded the customer of the contract and the customer confirmed that he understood it was non-cancellable.Approximately one month later, on Saturday, April 21, 2017, the customer's granddaughter called Westcoast.  She claimed that she had found five companies that would perform the work at a lower cost.  Westcoast tried to explain that the contract was binding, and that Westcoast performs high quality work that it believes is superior to the work performed by low-cost competitors.  Her grandfather was free to obtain as many bids as he wished prior to signing the contract, but once he signed a contract, that contact was binding.  However, she kept interrupting him, and went on to threaten to make false and defamatory claims about Westcoast on social and other media.  Thereafter, Westcoast received multiple threatening voicemails from other family members over the following weekend.  While he tried to discuss the matter with the customer, the customer was non-responsive.Westcoast has elected to accept the customer's request to cancel the contract as it simply has no interest in doing business with individuals who behave in the unethical and unprofessional manner described above.  It was in the process of notifying its customer of this in writing when it received this complaint. Pursuant to the express terms of the contract, Westcoast is entitled to 50% of the contract price upon cancellation.  However, it has elected not to pursue payment of the 50% cancellation fee because it is no longer willing to perform any work for this customer given the behavior he and his family have exhibited.  It is important to note, again, that the person who filed this complaint is not a customer of Westcoast, has never been a customer of Westcoast, and has no personal knowledge regarding the contract.  Her allegation that Westcoast provided a "bid," is simply wrong as the document that the customer signed is clearly labeled "Contract" in large print at the top of the page.  If the customer wished to obtain bids, he was free to do so before signing the binding contract, or within the 3-day rescission period.  The complainant's allegations that the customer was somehow pressured to sign the contract are without any factual basis whatsoever - a fact the customer recognized when he initially called Westcoast about canceling the contract.  It was the customer, after all, who initiated the contract, not Westcoast.In short, Westcoast has done nothing improper in this matter.  It has simply enforced its contractual rights. If there is any further information that we can provide, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]