Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the member's recent complaint. Regarding the subject matter, System4 began providing the every other month floor care service for the member staring in October 2012. The Service Agreement executed between System4 and the member, called for five (5) VCT burnishing’s and one (1) annual strip and wax. As such, a service, either a burnishing or a strip and wax would be performed every other month. As a courtesy to the member, System4 amortized the cost of these services over a one (1) year period, to enable our customer, the member, the ability to have equal monthly payments. Burnishing’s were performed as scheduled, every other month, in; October, December, February, and as a courtesy, a complementary banishing was performed in early March due to complaints about the condition/shine on the floor. This is not an on-going regular service activity as was alluded to in the complaint, wherein it was stated there were several months of complaints. Regarding the initial complaints about the burnishing work, System4 had nothing to do with the floor’s existing condition prior to starting the service in October, as System4 was working with another contractor’s prior work. The issues referenced in the complaint, with respect to the corners and edges of the floor being filthy, where the baseboard meets the floor, were issues that could not be resolved with the routine contracted burnishing service performed in; October, December, February and early March. Those referenced issues were directly related to the daily floor care that was the responsibility of the member. Having said this, System4 did in fact put the extra work into resolving the stated issues, each visit, to the best of our ability, given the condition of the floor. This additional work was completed on a scheduled basis as a courtesy to the member, which was not after several months of complaints as was stated in the complaint. To resolve these initial complaints however, in mid-March, System4 recommended that the floor be stripped and waxed, due to the untenable condition of the floor. After the initial strip & wax, the member did raise some concerns, with respect to hair and dirt in the finished work. This condition is normal with such stripping and waxing jobs. System4 returned to resolve these issues on two separate occasions, immediately after the initial work. Each time, the issues were visually resolved. On the second and last return visit, the issues were confined to only a few, one square foot tiles, covering approximately .2 to .3 percent of the entire floor area. This is a facility that had just short of 2,000 square feet of surface. Prior to the second return of the floor technician, System4’s Manager of Operations, an industry professional with over twenty-one years of Commercial Cleaning Industry experience, visited the member, at the request of System4’s President and Company Owner. At no time did the member call System4 to request a supervisor appear to see the work, as was stated in the complaint. System4’s Manager of Operations confirmed with Marva, the front desk receptionist, that the only remaining issue was confined to a few, one square foot tiles. As stated in the previous paragraph, these issues were visually resolved. During the visit by System4’s Manager of Operations, Marva acknowledged that the floor technician had returned to resolve issues on two occasions. Subsequently, after resolving these two relatively minor issues, a new issue arose, wherein System4 was asked to place additional wax under an area where the front desk receptionist sits. This area was protected by a chair matt. Prior to this complaint, System4 applied seven (7) coats of a professional grade floor finish. In the Commercial Cleaning Industry, four (4) coats of floor finish are considered a standard application. With seven (7) coats of floor finish, the floor was exceptionally shiny, similar in shine to retail stores like Target and Kroger’s. When System4 went back to resolve this final issue, at the request of the member, the floor technician was not permitted in to apply additional coats of floor finish, under the chair matt. The complaint states that System4 terminated the service at the member, wherein what actually occurred, is that the member terminated System4’s service, by virtue of not allowing System4 back to correct what was not a ligament complaint, but, instead was additional work that was going to be performed as a courtesy of System4 for its customer. It is with these facts in mind, that on April 14, 2013, System4 sent the member a final demand for payment, in the amount of $921.25, Ohio State Sales Tax included. This was a pro-rated amount, reflecting seven (7) monthly incremental payments made for work performed previously, in; October, December and February. The final demand letter referenced that System4’s Manager of Operations had reviewed the work performed to industry standards. The final demand letter also requested this payment be made by May 15, 2013, and that System4 was prepared to take the matter to collections, if full payment was not made by this date. As a remedy to resolve this matter once and for all, System4 is willing to extend the date for full payment, by an additional seven (7) calendar days, to May 21, 2013, at which time this matter will be turned over to System4’s legal entity, for the matter of collections. Unfortunately, it has been over six (6) years since System4 has had to turn collections issues over to our legal entity, for non-payment due to service quality complaints. As the member is in the business, of treating people for aliments, that are not always resolvable on the first attempt, the thought process goes; how would the member feel, if a patient they treated refused payment, for any/all work performed by the member? We all know how the medical profession works, the doctor gets paid irrespective of the degree of success, for the work performed. System4 performed the work to Commercial Cleaning Industry Standards. System4 stands by the quality of the work performed System4 resolved all issues that System4 was allowed to resolve in an ethical and professional manner. System4 has a right to demand payment for the work performed. Sincerely: Kevin J. Alleman President System4