Minnesota

How many complaints and lawsuits involving Terminix have been filed in Minnesota?  How does the State of Minnesota rate both as a public agency in providing information to the public and in their own knowledge to license and regulate the pest control companies that spray toxic chemicals in homes, businesses, and schools?
State of Minnesota Responsiveness

The following questions were asked in an e-mail letter December 12, 1998 to the Webmaster of the State of Minnesota’s web site.  On December 14, 1998, the answers shown below were provided in a letter from Linda J. Haiby, Data Practices and Records Management, Agronomy and Plant Protection Division of the Minnesota Department of Agriculture:

  1. What is the name and address of Minnesota’s pest inspection/pests control licensing and regulating agency:

    2. Minnesota Department of Agriculture
    Agronomy and Plant Protection Division
    90 W. Plato Boulevard
    St. Paul, MN 55107-2094

    The division’s Certification & Information Unit licenses structural pest control businesses and applicators.  The division’s Surveillance & Investigation unit investigates complaints regarding pesticide use.

  2. How many years does Minnesota’s licensing and regulating agency maintain records of complaints against pest control/pest inspection companies?

    3. Present retention schedules for pesticide complaints show them to be “permanent records.”  Records date back to the latter part of the 70’s.

  3. How many Terminix branches are currently operating in Minnesota? (My records, taken from the yellow pages on the Internet, indicate there are currently 2 Terminix, aka Terminix International, aka Terminix Pest and Termite branches operating in Minnesota; however, they are listed at the same address at 6989 Oxford Street, St. Louis Park.)

    4. Our records list five Terminix International branches but only two of those are physically in Minnesota (Brooklyn Center and Saint Louis Park).  The other three are in Wisconsin (Cashton, LaCrosse, and Waukesha).

  4. How many complaints, if any, have been filed in Minnesota 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.)?

    5. 6 complaints from 1993 to June 8, 1998 as shown on attachment provided:

COMPLAINT

ACTION

Pesticide applied inconsistent with label directions; improper record keeping

Advisory notice

Improper record keeping

?

Complaint investigation into alleged exposure

None - evidence did not substantiate a misuse

Improper record keeping; no Master employed (minimum 2-yr. prior experience as journeyman required) for a period of time

Administration Action: Notice of violation issued for record keeping violation.  Since MDA erred in issuing a Master license to a nonexperienced Terminix employee, no action taken on that violation. However, they were notified of the experience prerequisite required for Master pest control operators and required to employ at least one experienced Master.

Complaint investigation into exterior carpenter ant treatment allegedly made to wrong property

None (although we confirmed application was made to wrong house in wrong town, it was apparently consistent with label directions.)  The Minnesota Pesticide Law does not have language that would give us the authority to take action for a proper labeled use on the wrong property.

Some employees making pest control applications not licensed; some applications inconsistent with label direction; improper record keeping.

Civil Remedy:  Notice of Intent with a civil penalty of $1,300 which was paid.
Terminix/Terminex Lawsuits Filed in Minnesota

Herb vs. Terminix.  In 1990, the Herb family sued Terminix, alleging personal injuries from exposure to fenvalerate. Terminix settled the Herb lawsuit. (See McLaughlin Gormley v Terminix below.)

McLaughlin Gormley v Terminix Intl Co.  This link provides information of two cases involving Terminix.  In 1984, McLaughlin Gormley King Company (MGK) agreed to supply fenvalerate, an insecticide, to Terminix International Company for repackaging and sale to exterminators. The written contract provided for arbitration of “[a]ny controversy arising out of, or relating to this Agreement or any modification or extension hereof.”  In 1990, the Herb family sued Terminix, alleging personal injuries from exposure to fenvalerate. MGK refused to indemnify or defend Terminix against this claim. Terminix settled the Herb lawsuit and filed a demand to arbitrate its claim against MGK for indemnification and defense costs. MGK refused to arbitrate...
Mississippi