ComplaintsforAcucut Lawn Care & Design Inc

• Initial Complaint

  09/28/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Date of Services/Transaction: 6.27.2023 - 6.27.2023 Total Amount paid: $4403.00 Disputed Amount: $3000.00 Description of the dispute: In selling us landscaping services (including materials and labor), Acucut touted a 30-day guarantee for all work done. The dispute centers specifically around the installation of sod on our front yard. The only conditions were that mentioned in the invoice were that 1. the sod was properly watered via an irrigation system and 2. the lawn was sprayed for pests. Prior to services, we, at no small expense, installed an irrigation system, and such irrigation system was inspected by Acucut and was deemed to provide adequate coverage of the sodded area. Also, following the installation, we immediately scheduled lawn spraying services with Acucut's recommended service provider. Around 20 days after installation, we notified Acucut the lawn was thinning out and likely dying. They agreed that "something was going on," however after email exchanges, Acucut refused to replace the dead or dying areas of our lawn in accordance with their guarantee. I believe they installed defective sod and are trying to get out of replacing it. I also thing Acucut has misrepresented their warranty and has committed an unfair business dealing that I hope the BBB can resolve.

  Business response

  10/22/2023

  We value our customers and take our warranties very seriously. However, our warranty for sod does NOT cover damage from insects that attack the sod after it is laid and also stated that the sod must be treated IMMEDIATELY, which it was not. In fact, the sod was not treated until 22 days after it was installed. The statement on the part of the customer that they contracted with the pest control service for lawn treatment immediately is completely false. They did obtain a QUOTE from ******** **** ******* the day after installation, but did not have the sod treated until they realized that the sod wasn't looking so great. It was around this time that they contacted us and they also insinuated that they had already had the sod treated by saying that they were in a contract with ******** but they were not in a contract, nor had they had the sod treated. They were, however, in a contract for INDOOR/HOME pest control, but NOT yard spraying services. Again, they only obtained a quote for treatment. At the time of the quote, there was no insect activity observed, so the accusation that the sod was defective does not hold any weight whatsoever. Insects, in this case specifically, sod web worms, are the larvae of moths, and they can fall from trees around the yard. There is absolutely no proof the sod was defective and the customer was negligent in their duty of having the sod sprayed immediately. Furthermore, it appears that luckily the sod has mostly recovered, despite the negligence on the part of the customer and surely thanks to the spray treatements that they finally procured. I have attached a letter from our attorney with even more specifics to this case, which was in response to a letter we received from the customer's attorney. To date we have not heard anything back after our response. I have also attached 2 pictures of the sod from October 11th, which prove that the sod has mostly recovered. I am happy to provide anything needed to exonerate us from this frivolous claim. 

  Customer response

  10/24/2023

  [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

   Complaint: ********

  I am rejecting this response based on the following:

  First and most importantly, Acucut incorrectly anssumes insects were the sole cause of the damaged lawn. After speaking with a lawn care technician (from a company recommended by Acucut), the cause of the defective lawn could have just as likely been because of the time and conditions of installation. There was a recognized heat wave throughout the region during the time of install and Acucut, by not placing corresponding conditions on its warranty, assumed the risk that the sod installation would be unsuccessful and replacement would be necessary due to the heat drying out the sod, preventing it from rooting properly. 
  

  Second, Acucut has presented an ambiguity in form and substance of the documentation they provided. The sod care instructions provided to us by Acucut’s installation team did not contain any mention of the word “immediately” or any other term suggestion time was of the essence. It only mentioned that the lawn be sprayed properly. According to the lawn spraying technician, it was sprayed properly and in the appropriate timeframe for any pests.

  In any case, Acucut communicated to us that “immediately” was defined as “without [an] interval of time [passing].” Unless Acucut has discovered a technique for stopping time, this provision is impossible to comply with. 

  It is universally accepted that when a contract contains an ambiguous term, the language must be construed against the drafter. Further, any impossible terms must be disregarded.

  Based on the above, Acucut should be held to the promises it made under our agreement.

  Regards,

  **** *****

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩