How many complaints and lawsuits against Terminix have been filed in Colorado? How does the State of Colorado rate as a public agency in providing information to the public and in their own access to knowledge necessary to regulate the businesses they authorize to spray toxic chemicals in homes, businesses, and schools?

Via an e-mail letter sent December 6, 1999, to the State of Colorado Attorney General’s Office, I requested the total number complaints filed against Terminix with Colorado’s licensing/regulatory agency and during what time period. In response to my request, I received a telephone call on December 8, 1998, in which I was informed:

Each Terminix branch in Colorado is licensed.  Colorado of Terminix - 4 complaints; Terminix International - 6 complaints; dba Hutchison Pest Control - 3 complaints.  Total of 13 complaints since 1991.

I followed up with the following questions on February 21, 1999, via a letter to the State of Colorado, Department of Agriculture, Division of Plant Industry. On March 4, 1999, the answers, as shown below, were provided in a letter from Thomas M. Kosinski, Pesticide Enforcement Specialist:

1. Name and address of Colorado’s pest inspection/pest control licensing and regulating agency:

State of Colorado
Department of Agriculture
Division of Plant Industry Pesticide Section
700 Kipling Street, Suite 4000
Lakewood, CO 80215-5894
(303) 239-4140 - phone

2. Number of Colorado’s licensing and regulating agency maintains records of complaints against pest control/pest inspection companies?

The Department maintains complaint records for five years.

3. Terminix branches currently operating in Colorado:

Terminix currently has four branches operating in Denver, Colorado Springs, Pueblo, and Grand Junction.

4. Complaints filed in Colorado against Terminix International (and its aka’s); including the nature of the complaints, name and location of Terminix branch involved; and disposition of complaints (dismissed, settled, fine, suspended or revoked license, probation, etc.)?

Terminix has had three complaints in the last five years, filed on 9/8/94, 11/2/95, and 5/29/98. All three complaints originate from the CO Springs location.

• The 9/8/94 complaint involved suspected cyfluthrin exposure in a residence.  Complaint was not substantiated and dismissed.
• The 11/2/96 complaint involved suspected acephate exposure to school children.  Samples were inconclusive but a miscellaneous enforcement letter was issued.
• The 5/29/98 complaint involved suspected unsafe applications to a residence. This case is still open and under review.

Ross vs. Terminix.  According to an article written by Steve Raabe in the August 22, 1997, issue of the Denver Post, “Exterminator Charges Race Bias in Suit,” Richard R. Ross, a Denver employee of Terminix International Co., filed suit against Terminix, alleging Terminix discriminated against him because he African-American. Mr. Ross, represented by Karen Hay, is seeking damages of $45 million ($1 million in compensatory damages and $44 million in punitive damages) for allegations of being subjected to racially-derogatory names and to a “racially hostile work environment” and for Terminix failing to pay him for work performed, paying him less than they pay non-African American employees, giving him less desirable or low-paying routes, and refusing to allow him to take vacation time off when giving vacation time to nonminority employees with less seniority.