Wollerman's Inc.

Review: I CONTACTED TERRY WOLLERMAN OF WOLLERMAN'S INC. TO INSTALL A 2000 GALLON HOLDING TANK FOR MYSELF AND A 2000 GALLON TANK FOR MY NEIGHBOR. HE AGREED TO INSTALL A 2000 GALLON HOLDING TANK FOR MYSELF AND MY NEIGHBOR. MY NEIGHBOR, GARY ASCHENBRENER AGREED TO THIS. WHEN TERRY WOLLERMAN WAS DONE WITH THE INSTAL, HE ADVISED THAT HE HAD CONNECTED BOTH TANKS TO BE USED BY BOTH OF US. THAT WAS NOT OUR AGREEMENT AND GARY ASCHENBRENER DECLINED TO PAY FOR HIS HALF OF THE SEPTIC SYSTEM. TERRY DID NOT DO AS WHAT WAS VERBALLY AGREED UPON AND THEREFORE CAUSED ME UNDO MONETARY HARDSHIPS IN THAT I HAD TO PAY FOR THE WHOLE SYSTEM INSTEAD OF 1/2. WHEN I PAID FOR THE WHOLE SYSTEM, I EXPECTED TERRY WOLLERMAN TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND DISCONNECT GARY ASCHENBRENER FROM MY SYSTEM, WHICH I HAD PAID FOR IN FULL. TERRY WOLLERMAN REFUSES TO DISCONNECT GARY ASCHENBEREN FROM MY SYSTEM AND I AM LEFT WITH OWNING A SYSTEM THAT ANOTHER PERSON IS USING WITHOUT MY PERMISSION.Desired Settlement: I WOULD LIKE [redacted] TO DISCONNECT [redacted] FROM MY SYSTEM PRIOR TO MAY 1, 2014.

Business

Response:

[redacted] Inc. was contacted by plaintiff regarding a

problem with the septic system at her cabin. [redacted] evaluated the septic system,

which is shared by two cabins, and found the septic tank had collapsed and the

bed was failing. [redacted] contacted

both cabin owners with the results. The cabins

are part of a Condo situation. Due to the combined number of bedrooms in the

cabins, the minimum requirement was 3,000 gallons. Both cabin owners agreed to

have [redacted] install 2 – 2000 gallon tanks and each would pay half the

expense. We filed the emergency replacement paper work with the appropriate

county and provided each owner with a copy of a holding tank system user’s

manual and maintenance plan, a holding tank agreement and a holding tank

servicing contract. [redacted] then

installed the two tanks restoring service to both cabins. The original system was not segregated and

there was no discussion to segregate the system when the replacement holding

tanks were installed. After the holding

tanks were installed the cabin owners has a disagreement as to the frequency of

the holding tanks pumping. The plaintiff

then paid the 2nd cabin owner’s half of the expense and demanded

[redacted] disconnect his service to the holding tanks. [redacted] does not have the authority to

alter the original system design without proper written authorization from all

parties involved. And it is not [redacted] practice to cause hardship on

anyone. We did meet with the 2nd owner and discussed his options.

[redacted] agrees to segregate the system, at the owner’s

expense, with proper written agreement by both parties and the condo

association.

Consumer

Response: