Colorado - 12-99.  Below is what I have just sent to Terminex via the Feedback option on their web site:

We’ve used the Terminex service for the past year and will not renew another year. We’ve called the serviceman back several times this summer for spiders and nothing changed. We even asked for a different service person because the first did not seem knowledgeable at all.  On the last scheduled visit, I asked that the bait in the mouse stations be changed since they were a year old.  I was told they would be okay as they were.  The first guy said they lasted a few months.  Of course, we have mice again.  I have no idea what we paid for and feel we got taken to the cleaners. I will never recommend Terminex to anyone; and given the chance, I will deter those who may consider their service.

West Virginia - 12-99.  Although it’s been a couple of years, I still burn over my Terminix experience.  When we first moved into our home, we found a flea infestation we hadn’t noticed before.  So we bombed the place and took care of that. The following summer, we encountered some other bugs, so we called Terminix to the rescue.  We paid their upfront fee and agreed to a service contract -- $30 a month for at least a year. The idea was to prevent bugs.  We were foolish enough to believe they wanted to.  For the next three summers, our problems worsened.  Each year, we asked them to treat the yard ahead of time. My wife watched from the kitchen window as the “service” man spent about 15 seconds tossing a few grains around the yard. Each year, the flea infestation became worse.  Oh, yes, we treated the animals with preventative medicines.  We’d call Terminix and ask them to return. They could do nothing to clear the house.  So we spent hundreds of dollars on remedies for the house, lawn, and pets every summer. Finally, I had enough. After several complaints were unanswered by the corporate and local offices (the manager was always “out”), I finally told Terminix to take a hike.  They actually had the nerve to pursue collection of my last month’s service fee (I guess the previous $1,000 they took was not enough). For the last two summers, my home has been flea-free by my own efforts. The cost -- about $10 each summer for a bag of insecticide and about an hour of my time. I wonder why the “professionals” couldn’t get the same results?

Arizona - 12-99.  I signed a contract with Terminix in May 1998 and renewed it one year later.  This is for the Sentricon termite control. The terms include that they are to visit my home monthly.  At first, they came without calling and left notes that they were unable to get inside.  I informed them that if they would let me know when they were coming, I would be there.  They then would show for their scheduled appointment about every other month. I have complained to all kinds of supervisors who have assured me that they would monitor my appointments and they will be on time.  They are not. I feel sure that once they have your money, they are done with you.  The only thing they are good at is sending the renewal bills in advance.

Florida - 12/99.  Here’s my experience with Terminix. Not the kind of nightmare you experienced, but bad enough and it suggests much worse is happening to others.  When reading it, keep in mind that I am a lawyer.  If I encountered this type of foot-dragging, what’s happening elsewhere?

I own a modern one-story office building -- concrete block, stucco, steel truss roof, and even steel interior studs.  Literally, the only wood in it is doors, window trim, and decorative molding, and very high quality at that.  Nevertheless, within a few years of its buildout, I experienced subterranean termite infestation in multiple places.  I had done business with a local extermination company with a superb reputation but chose to use Terminix solely because I felt a national company could and would stand behind its work, and too much was at stake to take a chance. Terminix was no cheaper than the local company.  I had Terminix do a complete treatment and have renewed the annual contract yearly.  Within a couple of years, infestation was apparent again at all the same places and several others on the building perimeter. Much of the wood already replaced had to be replaced yet again.  Terminix did, or allegedly did, area retreatment. Frankly, I saw no difference since as soon as the season arrived again, so did the swarms.  This pattern continued every year or two until about 1998.  My tenant was livid.  Nothing was ever done to eliminate the problem completely.  There was no complete retreatment, with the result that new infestation would simply be evident the next swarming season in areas adjacent to the last ones or even at the SAME location.  I wrote threatening letters, most of which were not even acknowledged.  (Even being a lawyer seemed not to help; in fact, from comments made to me, it seemed that legal threats merely gave the local office an excuse to ignore the problem and pass it on to someone else.  I replaced wood in some areas three times, and Terminix always disavowed responsibility for that. Thank heavens none of this was structural, but replacing window framing and similar items became quite expensive. After one particularly annoying period, I was informed that a complete retreatment would be done. It was not.  Indeed, nobody came out again at all, and the problem was ignored for months.  When I finally got somebody on the telephone, they tried again to simply sell me a “Sentricon” system for a couple of thousand dollars. Contrary to the tone of their early literature, they now claimed that their standard treatment DOESN’T eliminate termites at all -- and isn’t SUPPOSED to. I declined, partly because as a matter of principle I expect them to solve the problem they contracted to solve and partly because if I were to spend another couple of thousand dollars for treatment, it would NOT be with Terminix.  They chose their methods and as far as I was concerned, they were STILL obligated to solve the problem by the most effective method, whatever it might be.

Perhaps the worst sham in this lousy experience was when a “service” manager sent me a nonsensical letter blaming this NEW, CONCRETE building for the termite problem.  He blamed everything from wood that must be buried on the site (there is no such wood) to air conditioning condenser outlets dripping water (which are required by building codes). Worst, he demonstrated his total ignorance of construction methods by characterizing this solid concrete block structure as “frame-stucco” (an older construction method, hardly used in 50 years or more, which contains wood framing). He decreed that I must remove stucco in a band all the way around this building to solve the problem -- a method unlikely to help if it HAD been a frame structure and perfectly ludicrous with a concrete and steel building.  How to avoid this ridiculous and pointless expense? Invest in the new “Sentricon” system.  The “service manager” turned out to be another salesman.  I was steamed! It appeared to me that the many, many frame-stucco residences in Florida who had the misfortune to have Terminix contracts must be receiving the same run-around I was. Since much of my law practice is construction litigation, I was well aware that their suggestions were downright silly, but are the elderly who own such homes so well informed?  The only purpose I could conceive of for suggesting modifications to the building that were either impossible, downright silly, or just expensive and pointless, was to make their sole suggested alternative of a profitable Sentricon treatment seem cheap by comparison!

I seriously considered suing but didn’t. Why? There is no “upside” to doing so.  With an arbitration clause in the contract, a suit would result in simply having an arbitrator someday order Terminix to perform the work it owed me. My experience showed that the Terminix staff was quite expert at making the point that I would GET that work done by “playing ball” but nothing would happen if I were aggressive in pursuing the issue. It simply wasn’t worth my time to sue them on a $1500 contract and at the same time provide a plausible excuse to stop providing service.  That’s why only deceptive-practice actions by state authorities, in my opinion, are of any value.