I've written to each of my State representatives, to State investigatory and regulatory agencies, and to Governor Pete Wilson. Each one that responded (if I was lucky enough to even get the courtesy of a response) had forwarded my letter to the Department of Consumer Affairs, then responded to me with the pat answer of the Department of Consumer Affairs -- that this case was decided in a court of law.  Not one acknowledged the fact that this case was not decided in a court of law -- it was dismissed for nonsuit based on the “lack of evidence”; not one was concerned with why the case was dismissed for lack of evidence; not one was concerned with whether or not this case had merit; and not one answered even one of my questions:

Was the pest inspection report Terminix prepared before we purchased the house fraudulent and negligent, or did the Structural Pest Control Board make a mistake when it ordered Terminix to bring the property into compliance?
 

Does the Structural Pest Control Board receive taxpayer money to protect consumers or to protect the pest inspection companies?
 

Is it the Structural Pest Control Board's responsibility to regulate pest inspection licensees and to take action against a licensee who fails to comply with the Structural Pest Control Act?
 

Are Charles Peterson and the Structural Pest Control Board capable of determining if the Structural Pest Control Act has been violated?
 

Why didn't Mr. Peterson, who was under subpoena to testify as our expert witness, appear in court?
 

Why was Terminix's attorney privy to the whereabouts of our witness? What happened?  Was Mr. Peterson bought off... was he threatened in some way... was he tricked by Terminix's attorney...? What?!?
 

Where was Mr. Peterson when he was supposed to appear in court?
 

If Mr. Peterson was on vacation or out of state on official business, how long prior to his departure did the Structural Pest Control Board approve of this absence? On what date did they officially approve his absence -- before or after he agreed to appear and was subpoenaed?
 

Did Mr. Peterson sign the Memorandum to the Attorney General's Office on the same day that his supervisor was subpoenaed to appear in court because he could not be found?
 

Why didn't the Structural Pest Control Board follow up on their letter to Terminix and their Report of Findings?
 

Was Terminix on probation for similar violations at the time I filed my complaint against Terminix?
 

Did Terminix violate their probation?
 

If Terminix violated their probation, were they supposed to lose their license to operate in the state of California?
 

Does the fact that I filed a civil action against Terminix negate all actions against Terminix by the Structural Pest Control Board -- even though in their own documentation, they stated they found Terminix to be negligent and to have violated the Structural Pest Control Act?

If the California Structural Pest Control Board and Department of Consumer Affairs would just answer the above questions, then I believe it would be indisputable that the results of my individual civil suit should have had no impact on the Department of Consumer Affairs' responsibility to protect all consumers in the state nor on the Structural Pest Control Board's responsibility to regulate their licensees and enforce violations.