There are many incorrect claims by (removed member name) in his complaint to you. (removed member name) breeched his contract with Cullivour Landscapes on June 11, 2013 by violating our agreed contract general notes. (removed member name) failed to agree to bring a resolution to disagreement or even notify Cullivour of any dissatisfaction prior to June 11, 2013. He further violated the contract when he posted negative information about Cullivour and it’s principals on the internet on June 11, 2013. As per agreed contract general notes: “If in the event of disagreement, homeowner/client and contractor agree to meet within 10 days to bring a swift resolution to dispute(s) so that work may resume. If a resolution is not made within a 10 day meeting, contractor and homeowner/client furthermore agree to continue to meet and work towards a resolution within 30 days. Both parties agree to this 30 day resolution period and may not pursue legal actions, reporting to organizations such as the Better Business Bureau, Angie’s List, posting blogs, etc.” Please see item A. We were diligent in our work and had a professional working relationship. We met (removed member name) along with two colleges at the St. Louis Home Builder’s Show the weekend of 2.23-24, 2013. We were exhibitors promoting the services of our two companies, Cullivour Landscapes and Cullivour Construction as well as the Deer Creek Watershed Alliance, a project of Missouri Botanical Garden, RainScape Rebate Program, see item B. Tay Farrelly was also a featured speaker at the Show. (removed member name) and his colleges stopped at our booth. (removed member name) and one of the colleges expressed interest at the Show in the RainScape Rebate Program. We did nothing unethical in our solicitation to him or anyone else interested in the Program. An incorrect claim: The total rebate, (and his total rebate) by qualifying for the program is $2000.00, not $2500.00. See RainScape Rebate brochure in Submission Packet, items C. The deadline for submission for Round One was fast approaching, 3.1.2013 so we were moving quickly with clients. By 2.26.13 we had scheduled our first meeting with (removed member name) at his home to discuss possible areas for submission to the RainScaping Program. It was at this meeting that we walked his property with him, not at later meetings. By February 28th, we presented an estimate and landscape designs for (removed member name) review which he approved. (removed member name) was aware of the $150.00 charge for our RainScape Rebate plans for his submission. Here is (removed member name) first wrong claim in his complaint to you: We proposed a Woodland Restoration, not “our lawn” as he indicates, but a site in an overgrown wooden Honeysuckle infested area (see photos in packet of site, item C). On February 28th, (removed member name) was given an invoice, dated 2.28.13 for the plans and he gave us a check, dated 2.28.13, see item D at that meeting. Thus, (removed member name) claim in his documentation to you, that Cullivour…”quickly accepted my $975 deposit check and then told me I also owed them $275 for the project plans…” is incorrect. He did not contract until April 12th, see item A, the contract. Another incorrect claim, (removed member name) contract total was for $2700.00, not $2900.00 plus $275. It was on 4.12.13, date of contract signing when he gave Cullivour a down payment check of $900.00, not $975.00. As per invoice #191565, dated 2.28.13, (item D), $150.00, not $275.00 was charged for designs. On 4.12.13 $900.00 was the agreed contract down payment. (See contract, item A). Thus, (removed member name) paid us $150.00 on 2.28.13 for plans and $900.00 down payment on 4.12.13 upon contract signing. Not, $975.00 and $275.00 and not at the same time. Thus, he paid Cullivour a total of $1050.00, not $1250.00. Another false claim. And another false claim that “he thought the whole project was $2900, not $2900 + $275.” It was $150.00 for design plans, preparation, and submission of his packet (items C & D) plus contract total (item A) of $2700.00 = $2850.00, not $3175.00. By 3.1.2013 (Rebate Program Round One submission due date) we had prepared and presented all the necessary information to him for his signature to conclude his submission packet for the RainScaping Rebate Program. This is what he paid us $150.00 for. And, from the work we prepared and submitted for him, he was deemed qualified. Once notified of his acceptance, (see email E), we scheduled a meeting with him on March 22nd to sign our contract. This was canceled by (removed member name) because he had the flu. We emailed him on 3.26.13, see item F to reschedule. It was not until April 12th, that we met to sign the contract. We took care of his interests. See the emails, item G, where we helped him respond and accept Rebate offer and item H, regarding needed percolation test. Throughout our relationship with (removed member name) we had his best interests in mind and worked professionally to serve our client. The Program did not allow any work to be performed on qualifying sited until 3.18.2013. (removed member name) project start date was April 29, 2013. It is noted on the contract, item A. He was made aware of that start date at our contract signing on 4.12.13. We do not set a start date until the client contracts. In many cases, we have jobs ahead of a client who has just contracted. We make clients aware of factors that may delay start dates. For instance, if previous clients add work to their project, it can affect and possibly push back other start dates. His start date was predominately delayed however by bad weather and our difficulty in finding large, exact specified native shrubs, trees, and perennials for his project. (removed member name) never gave us a date or deadline for when he wanted the project done. For 2013, we are hearing of other contractors being 6 – 8 weeks out – please note – as of June 10, we were 6 weeks out on (removed member name) job. Regarding weather delays: During the month of May, 2013 (removed member name) site received 13 days of rain as well as snow flurries. The weather is Missouri is very unpredictable and the months of February, March, April and May are generally very rainy. Also our frost date is April 15th in our zone so we do not install plants until after the danger of frost is gone. Rain days in the spring of 2013 were only days apart keeping the ground muddy and wet, thus delaying his start. It is not unusual for start dates to be pushed back during our rainy spring seasons. Weather dictates our ability to work in the field. In addition, we , as well as other landscape contractors, are and were having difficulty finding suitable native plants that qualify for the RainScape Rebate Program. (removed member name) plans required perennials, shrubs and a tree. Perennial plants do not grow to quart or gallon sizes until mid June in our zone. Growers are also no longer “speculatively” growing plants. So many native trees and shrubs are small and low in quantity making finding good well established plants that will satisfy a client and qualify for the RainScape Program difficult. We were very diligent in finding (removed member name) the best plant stock we could to make sure both he and the Program would be satisfied and that his rebate would be issued. Plants for the landscape come from the grower or retailer in different size pots or in what is called “b &b” (balled and burlap). We do not know why (removed member name) does not want plans “Plants for sale at a nursery are stored in pots or are B&B’d. They remain like that until sold. His desire to not want the plants we secured we believe is an indication that (removed member name) decided to with drawl from the RainScaping Program completely. He would be able to hire another contractor to do the work and still qualify for the rebate if the work was done as submitted. (removed member name) and the Program all have copies of what was submitted. (removed member name) told us he was in no hurry to complete his Woodland Restoration. He gave us no indication that he was unhappy with us. Thus it came as a surprise that he suddenly emailed us to cancel the project on June 11, 2013. (see item I). We do not understand his change in personality and behavior towards us. We had a positive, friendly relationship with him until June 11th (see item I). Regarding his claim that he walked his property to discuss other landscaping jobs after we contracted is incorrect. It was on February 26th, our first meeting, that we walked his property with him. Not when we spoke of mulch and more plants on 4.12.13. February 26th was the only time we walked his property with him. We spent over an hour discussing areas and possible plans for those areas that would qualify for the RainScape Rebate Program. What he is referring in his complaint to you is our meeting to sign the contract on 4.12.2013. We did not walk his property at that meeting. We sat indoors at his dining room table. The additional landscaping work he is referring to at that meeting was to mulch his beds and to suggest suitable plants in one specific spot outside his dining room window that he wanted planted. The “copious notes” we took were from (removed member name) sales pitch to us on how to improve our company’s web search optimization. He runs an internet SEO, Search Engine Optimization, company out of his home. He was giving Larry and Tay an explanation of an acronym he uses and Tay took notes on what he was saying. Our “copious notes” had nothing to do with mulch or plants. He gave his sales pitch for SEO and Tay took notes. We no longer have the notes Tay took as we were not interested in pursuing SEO for Cullivour, thus we can not include them in this response. Also, at the 4.12.13 meeting (removed member name) told us his beds had been mulched by another company the year prior but wanted us to quote on doing it. We asked him if he could tell us how much yardage of mulch he had been given so we could match what had been done before. (removed member name) said he would look up the old invoice3 and give us the information. We sent him an email, see item J dated 4.26.13, regarding his start date and asking him again for mulch yardage. So, he did not “reach out to” us, we reached out to him. Note in his response to our email he says he will take care of the plants and the mulch. If he was dissatisfied with us at that time he should have let us know then. However, in his complaint to you he states, “…It was if they had never had been at my house, took notes, and wasted my time walking them through the potential projects…” He made no mention to us about being dissatisfied with us. If he was disappointed on 4.27.13, he should have informed us of it so we could work on a resolution. There are many other incorrect claims made by (removed member name) in his complaint. We did not take his money and do nothing. We created his submission packet, once contracted, plants were found, purchased, and cared for. MO One Call was notified and utility lines were marked on 5.10.13 (see item K) a worker was sent to start removing honeysuckle but was called to another location…his project was in process. Clients who are concerned about their project will contact us – by phone, email, or in writing. We heard nothing from (removed member name) about any disappointment or concerns about his job. Instead, we received his emails dated June 11, 2013. See items I. We offered a partial refund as well as to give him the plants we had secured for his project. We assumed he would go forth with another qualifying contractor in the program. He can, could, do this. He also told us he did not want the plants on June 11th and now he claims we have not “provided any plants…” We can not and will not refund all his money back to him. Work was performed, materials were purchased. He did not pay Cullivour $1250.00. He paid Cullivour $1050.00 (150 + 900 = 1050). We performed services for $150.00 that won him a qualifying Rebate of $2000.00 had he completed the project. We will not refund him the $150.00. We had an agreed contract, he breeched that contract on June 11th. See item L, our certified letter to him dated 6.12.1013. Now, he claims to you “To-date they have not sent any money back or provided any plants…” he emailed he did not want the plants (see item I), “…or scheduled a date for work”. He canceled the project, see item I. In good faith we worked and proceeded on his project. We were predominately delayed by rain and material shortages. He did not inform us of any dissatisfaction or give Cullivour an opportunity to resolve. We had his best interests in mind and worked professionally for him. We do not deserve a poor rating from Angie’s List because of his complaints. With regards to his desired resolution Cullivour will not be refunding a total of $1250.00. We will continue efforts to resolve this issue with (removed member name), but not through Angie’s List. We thank Angie’s List for an opportunity to respond to (removed member name) complaint to you and appreciate Angie’s List unbiased review of the issues. We wish not to resolve this through Angie’s List because if (removed member name) or his associations continue to publish and spread incorrect information about our companies. Cullivour Landscapes, Cullivour Construction, and its principals, Tay Farrelly and Larry Taylor, with business and organizations such as Angie’s List and one the internet, he may end up in a lawsuit for Deformation of Character. Again, thank you for the opportunity and for your review of our response. Sincerely, Tay Farrelly Owner Cullivour Landscapes