|
Sign on with Terminix; and like too many others, you may also experience:
- worthless guarantees
- false promises
- fraudulent pest inspection reports
- unkept appointments
- unreturned telephone calls
- ineffective treatments
- extensive property damages
- signing an annual contract for monthly inspections, only to be told inspections will be conducted quarterly -- at the same price
- billing for services not performed
- falsified records
- being turned over to a collection agency for fees already paid
- losing a beloved pet
- losing all your possessions
- being forced to leave your home for years
- suffering or watching helplessly as your children and spouse suffer life-threatening, life-altering effects of misapplied toxic chemicals
- being unable to sue for any of the above if you signed a contract -- the contract contains a mandatory arbitration clause
- bankruptcy
Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut Attorney General:
“Terminix degraded the environment, defied the law, and endangered Connecticut citizens. Terminix must make amends, not just apologies, for its egregious, repeated lawlessness.”
Bob Butterworth, Florida Attorney General:
“On the properties we inspected, we found that as many as 25 percent of the holes drilled for chemical injection were in effect dummy holes with no chemicals applied. We also found supposedly treated areas where the company had drilled no holes at all.”
Eliot Spitzer, New York Attorney General:
“This cover up had a significant impact on Terminix customers who were trying to deal with termites. As a result of this defendant’s actions, paying customers did not receive the treatment they paid for.”
10th Circuit Court of Appeals (Bielicki v. Terminix International Co., L.P.):
“The evidence supporting our conclusion that Terminix authorized, participated in, or ratified Sanchez’s conduct... establishes Terminix’s indifference to, and reckless disregard for, the health and safety of plaintiffs. Because the atmosphere of condoning disregard of safety concerns resulted in permanent physical injuries to the plaintiff, we cannot denounce the award as excessive based on lack of reprehensibility.”
Since this web site has been available to the public, I have been privileged to hear from many Terminix employees and hundreds, perhaps thousands, of other dissatisfied Terminix customers. It did not take long for me to realize “denial of any wrongdoing” is a typical Terminix response, and there are cases much worse than ours. We were financially ruined; but unlike numerous others, we still have our health and our home. Indeed, Terminix’s business practices are such that fines have been levied or settlements made with several State agencies; i.e.:
- New Jersey Attorney General and Consumer Affairs Director Announce Terminix to Pay Penalty and Resolve Consumer Complaints Under Settlement Agreement
- Terminix Pays $80,000 Settlement in New Jersey for Fumigation Safety Violations
- New York Attorney General announces Terminix to Pay $759,000 for Environmental Violations; Company Also Violated Consumer Protection Laws
- Massachusetts Attorney General announces $100,000 Terminix settlement
- Connecticut Attorney General announces $1,000,000 Terminix settlement
- Ohio Department of Agriculture Revokes Buckeye Terminix Co., Inc.’s Business License
- Kentucky Attorney General announces $800,000 Terminix settlement
- Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Conservation announces $225,000 penalty against Terminix for severe fish kill
- Terminix Agreement with Florida Attorney General Could Reach Millions of Dollars
- State of Massachusetts vs. Terminix
- New York vs. Terminix -- $50,000 penalty
- Terminix enters into Consent Order with New York Department of Environmental Conservation, paying the State of New York $11,000 for civil penalties and agreeing to remediate the property in question -- the same property involved in the $215,000,000 civil suit below. No admission of liability or guilt...
- Trimper vs. Terminix. $215,000,000 civil suit against Terminix in New York -- “2 dead, 3 injured, 3 years homeless.” Settlement favorable to the Plaintiffs reached just days before the long-awaited arbitration hearing was to begin.
|
