ComplaintsforGreen City Pest Control

• Initial Complaint

  06/14/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Customer Service Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Date of service: 6/14/22 We hired green city pests to assess and treat a ********* ant problem discovered on the exterior of our house. We went with this company because they claim to be family friendly and use only eco friendly products. We were told they would only need to spray exteriorly. When they arrived, the technician/owner *********************** said that they would need to spray in the house as well. I was not prepared for this and had to find a different place for my dogs and move some things around quickly. ***** and his trainee came into the house with my permission and while I was asking questions about the treatment the trainee started spraying chemicals in my kitchen with me only 2-3 feet away. I was not wearing a mask. I am 16 weeks pregnant. I was concerned they started spraying without warning me and left to go upstairs as quickly as I could. I figured they must be using some very safe chemical if they dont wear masks, have any ventilation (doors and windows were shut) and dont ask the homeowner to leave the room or at least warn them that spraying would begin. My husband called and asked what chemical they used. The active ingredient they used deltamethrin has been associated with cognitive defects and neurodevelopmental delays with exposure during pregnancy. I called the company upset that they used this potentially teratogenic chemical with no counseling and without any warning or guidance to me to vacate the room. I was transferred to ***** who then told me I was being ridiculous and asked if I was really a medical doctor if this was something I was seriously concerned about. I am a medical doctor, an OB/GYN. He also said it was my fault because I did not disclose that I am pregnant. I am concerned about the owners lack of safety protocols, lack of information and consent to using this product. I do not feel that the company abides by its family and eco friendly advertising.

  Business response

  07/21/2022

  In regards to **************** complaint.
  
  I am confused as to how she is asking for this issue to be resolved.  Is she asking us to change our advertising language based on her experience?  If that is her demand, then there *** be other facts that should be considered.
  
  What ************** didnt share in her testimony is that she and I talked through the safety concerns regarding the potential interior treatment while outside her kitchen sliding glass door before any applications were made.  I recommended treatment on the interior because when the outside wall void is treated that often causes more ants to appear inside frustrating the client.  Treating the inside was advised but certainly not required, and she was left with the option to not do it if she didnt want to.  We discussed how pets and people should be away from the area for about 2 hours or until the product dries.  Understanding this she approved of the treatment and didnt express any additional concerns that she might have (medical or otherwise).  She was present as we moved their pet items (and other things) away from the baseboard of her kitchen.  She was over 5 feet away from the technician when he started a limited spot treatment on the baseboards in her dining room.  She didnt ask him to stop or to hold off, or allow us to give her a chance to excuse herself.  The technicians treatment was limited to only the area where it would be appropriate for such an application to be made (along the inner wall of the back of the house).  The treatment was done about 6 to 9 inches above the ground, significantly limiting any exposure to anyone in the area.  Children and pets are asked to not be in the area because they are close to the ground and could inadvertently touch the product when wet.  Masks are not required in making such an application because the hazard of this product is extremely low when applied in such a way.  Special ventilation also would not be considered because of the little amount of product applied, and the manner in which it was applied.  While technical data sheets and SDS *** show the active ingredient in higher concentrations, the product was applied at ****% concentration as per label instructions.
  
  ****************** comments about our conversation the next day are also not completely accurate.  I believe what I stated was this is silly, you are better than this.  I was taken aback that she didnt start the conversation by stating that she should have mentioned her medical concerns to us prior to the application (when we were discussing health concerns for pets and children).  There was no ownership on her part and that somehow we should have just known that she was pregnant and taken extra precautions beyond what is normally expected.  Incidentally the label of the product does not require special precautions to be made for women who are pregnant or to wear masks when applying the product.  The study that ************** *** be referring to could have been https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6131609 and in this study they stated that lower doses of exposure had no impact on the offspring (only at 9mg/kg of a rat was there a concern).  If you consider basic physics, the size of droplets and what could be the potential exposure rate of an adult a few feet away with such a procedure, the exposure rate is now close to a microgram or even picogram amount of product for a full grown adult.  This would be hundreds of thousands (if not millions) less than the amount mentioned in the study.  It is so small, it is likely not detectable by GC/HPLC analysis or other scientific measures.
  
  My comments to ************** were not meant to be derogatory in any way, but rather to try to gently challenge her to rethink her position on this subject.  Both of us were exposed to to these concepts of statistical risks and hazards through our freshman classes of Physics and Chemistry.  We both were taught about human detoxification enzymes and systems (which are more advanced than a rat) in our biochemistry and immunology classes.  And while ************** *** not have been exposed to LD50 rates and deeper statistical analysis that I got while working on my masters degree, she has been trained that in the midst of an emotional situation to step back, carefully analyze the data and while there is always risk in any procedure (of any kind) it doesnt mean that it is statistically significant.
  
  As to whether as a company we abide by the "family friendly and eco friendly" advertising I would state that such a claim is very consistent with how we approach most pest issues with our customers.  In general, we use significantly less pesticides when compared to our competitors (on average an 1/8th or less) and we strive to set the standard in the industry by focusing on IPM and targeted applications.  I have personally developed low chemical pest control programs for schools, multiple zoos, hospitals, and even NIH research centers.  While a ********* ant treatment generally requires some pesticide application (you have to kill the satellite colony and repel the ants from the parent colony), we typically use much less product and apply it in a manner with less risk compared to our competition.
  
  I regret that **************** experience *** not have been ideal. The application that was made certainly followed product and industry safety standards, although if we had been made aware of any medical concerns we would have taken further steps for the clients peace of mind.  We will ensure in the future that our staff will be trained to allow clients more opportunities to exclude themselves from the area, if they feel the need to do so, prior to an application being made.  
  
  Thank you for your time.
  
  Scott 
  
  ***********************, MS **********************

  Customer response

  07/28/2022

   
  Complaint: 17426319
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  *********************** continues to not express the truth of what happened in the situation.  I was not given a chance to vacate the premise before spraying had began.  I did not feel I needed to divulge my private medical information (pregnancy) because I assumed that he and his trainee would take universal precautions around all potentially vulnerable individuals.  The trainee started spraying with me less than 5 feet away without any warning that they were starting or giving me any opportunity to leave the room.  The trainee sprayed areas that were not only the outer baseboards of the kitchen.  This was after the services we booked specifically stated that they would not need to do an interior work.  ******* initial response to my complaint was demeaning and inappropriate. 

  I understand that the overall risk of exposure is low.  However, in pregnancy women usually prefer to avoid any potential risk or exposure at all, no matter how low.  

  My hope is that he would learn from this experience, accept responsibility that he made a mistake in not letting me/asking me to leave the room during the spraying, and agree to take better precautions in the future.  It seems like he is not willing to do that so my original complaint stands.  

  
  Sincerely,
  
  *************************, MD

*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. ↩