Since November 2, 2016 we have not been able to live in our house
because Petersen Dean made it uninhabitable with super fine stucco
powder. Because my autistic son was already ill, they told their insurance
it shouldn't matter that they filled his bedroom and his lungs with powder
that triggered a horrible infection. Petersen Dean will say James was going
to die anyway, so what does it matter.
Petersen Dean's Mechanic's Liens also disrupted the mold remediation
that was in progress in our home. Our insurance company couldn't pay for
us to stay in a hotel while Petersen Dean was derailing our lives. I have had to
pay for our hotel. My son has been in a tiny hotel room, away from his toys and his
stucco powder contaminated room. If we spend one night sleeping there he will
probably die. He has recently fainted and gone by ambulance from our hotel
to the emergency room. He stopped breathing several times. I can only afford
to pay for the hotel until September 10, 2017 and then we have no place to stay.
But Petersen Dean says we are just going through all this to get something
for nothing.
Update: Petersen Dean wrote to their insurance company :
"Thus, this is ONCE AGAIN,
someone wanting something
for nothing."
My response:
Dear Cap Specialty,
Regarding the May 5, 2017 letter from Petersen Dean/Kenneth B. Tsang:
1. Petersen Dean's demands to circumvent HERO's financing rules ultimately
resulted in HERO refusing to finance the project. Petersen Dean is guilty of
breaching the contract and this is fully documented by Petersen Dean letters
and emails.
Mr. Tsang does not accurately describe the contents of our garage. Nothing was
safely boxed. We were not moving. We were preparing meals in the garage and
using the open file boxes. We were using the garage as a base during the mold
remediation because it was clean.
3. There is never a need to do stucco work in the garage. Stucco is on the
OUTSIDE of a building. It is not an indoor surface material. There was no
need to cut stucco inside the garage. Furthermore, Building & Safety has
informed me that Petersen Dean did not have a permit to alter my water
heater in the garage. When Peterson Dean opened my garage to do water
heater alterations without a permit, they could have prevented the massive
stucco powder incident that contaminated our house and air vents simply by
bothering to close the garage door.
4. Professional remediation services were immediately called but Petersen Dean
refused to pay Building Cleaning Services to do the job. They wanted me to allow
the electricians to use leaf blowers on our open file boxes of my son's medical records,
trays of fine gold trimmed China dishes from Macy's which Petersen Dean reduced to
"silverware" because somehow using a leaf blower to clean silverware sounds better
to them than referring to the actual contents of our garage being destroyed by leaf blowers.
At no time did Petersen Dean pay a licensed remediation service.
Petersen Dean attempted to loan me $500 for cleaning materials
and asked me to let unlicensed strangers clean our documents and toys,
dishes and air vents.
I am sending this from a medical clinic where I am being treated for a
serious lung infection. My autistic son James has had multiple lung infections
since 2016. I never had a serious lung infection like this before.
The stucco accident caused
my son a serious lung irritation which
quickly became infected.
My son did not have preexisting stucco powder clogging his lungs.
We are not trying to get something for nothing.
Our lives are on the line because of Petersen Dean's refusal to cooperate
with the HERO financing terms and their refusal to used licensed contractors
and their dishonesty about the cost of their product and their filing liens instead
of keeping their agreement with HERO to resolve the cost issue by removing the solar panels.
My son and I could die as result of what Petersen Dean is putting us through
just because they like to cut corners and use unlicensed contractors and fake inspections.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Marshall & son James
I have reported to CSLB that a brown liquid is draining off my roof and that
I suspect there is still rotten wood under the new singles because the roof is creaking
and there are photos posted on Yelp by other homeowners showing Petersen Dean
covering rotten wood instead of removing and replacing it. Petersen Dean told me that
some of the trim (facia) they didn't replace was "thirsty wood" to explain why it wouldn't hold primer.
I have made a Yelp review because it is clear Petersen Dean intends to make my autistic son and I homeless when in fact they committed the financial crime of FRAUD and breached HERO rules and tried to force me to sign off BEFORE competition of repairs and removal of the solar panels. They would not let me see the documents they were trying to force me to sign in advance. I never experienced a business that operated with such cloak and dagger secrecy, threats and requests to explain verbally instead of in writing. The police advised me not to meet the two men from Petersen Dean who wanted to meet me in the house, alone so they could explain verbally instead of sending an email or letter like normal businesses do.
I have contacted the California Attorney General and they are keeping my letters and my blog entries about Petersen Dean and Renovate America incase they open a case.
This is the blog:
I believe Petersen Dean is breaking the law. They are putting our lives on the line in the process. They have tortured us for almost a year now, completely disrupting our lives and destroying our health. They did not get paid because HERO promises customers they don't have to pay until the job is done, repairs are made and disputes are settled. Petersen Dean demanded in writing that I sign off with HERO before they would finish work, repairs and removing the panels. They refused to pay a licensed stucco remediation contractor and made ludicrous offers to clean an entire house with one bucket of water and leaf blowers. They cannot produce a reputable, licensed remediation contractor that will testify that I refused them because I would not refuse a LICENSED remediation company. They can produce licensed remediation contractors that they talked to but refused to hire because they didn't like how much licensed remediation companies charge. They tormented me with creepy phone calls and bizarre requests to meet me alone face to face instead of putting their bizarre solutions in writing.
Attorneys I consulted found out Petersen Dean lied about proof of service and attempted to steal my home behind my back by default. If I had not been informed by these two attorneys, I never would have known Petersen Dean sued me. Petersen Dean is guilty of crimes. They are trying to destroy my son and me to keep money they are not legally entitled to and to bury their criminal acts by burying us. They are killing my autistic son. They know they made him sicker and they told me it would be a shame for him to have to suffer what their legal department would do to us if I did not sign the HERO documents BEFORE the work was done. In my heart this is murder. Petersen Dean is murdering my son because they saw an opportunity to steal a $500,000 house when they got caught red handed trying to steal $10,000 in a tax credit scam. H&R Block reviewed Petersen Dean's documents and revealed I would not save money by going solar with Petersen Dean, that I would in fact be buried in debt that would cause me not to be able to afford my house payment in a year when the deception was going to be discovered. That is how most home owners find out..a year later when they have signed away their rights as Petersen Dean bullied me to do.
I owed Petersen Dean approx $32,000 and after the promised $10,000 tax break it would be $20,000, which was all I wanted to spend of the $76,000 equity KEEP YOUR HOME CALIFORNIA paid on my home loan in 2016. HERO tried to get all my equity but I refused their crooked Home Depot contractor and their air conditioning contractor. When I found out from H&R Block that Petersen Dean was deceiving me, Petersen Dean agreed to remove the solar panels. They would only receive $10,000 from me through HERO for the roof shingles.
The real reason Petersen Dean filed the Mechanics Liens was they did the math: after they paid $4000 for a remediation contractor to clean the stucco and repaired the electrical they damaged in my garage and paid Buildings & Safety for the permit they failed to get to alter my water heater...by the time they did the right thing they would probably have a few hundred dollars of profit instead of the $32,000 they would have gotten if HR Block had not revealed the tax credit scam. At the last minute, the week Petersen Dean had
Helena Shi (510) 946-2338
Peterson Dean Solar
hshi@PetersenDean.com working with me to arrange to remove the solar panels, Peterson Dean could not resist going for $500,000.00 instead of settling for $500.00. They knew they made James sicker and they knew taking his home away might be too much for him, but they did it anyway because they though we wouldn't be able to get help in our condition and with no money for a retainer to pay an attorney. They saw how ill James was. They used it as leverage. They mocked my cries for mercy. If James dies, Petersen Dean should go to jail for murder.
Here is another Petersen Dean customer who expressed on Yelp that Petersen Dean left rotten wood on their roof:
I don't want my son James to die because of Petersen Dean. I would be crazy not to use
social media to try to save our lives.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Marshall
Ms. Marshall:
Petersen-Dean forwarded their February email to the CSLB in response to my inquiry about
removing the solar panels. Please see the email below. In essence, it explains why they have
not removed the solar panels from your roof.
As we previously explained coverage under the bond is triggered by a violation of the California
Contractor License Law which can be found in the Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code beginning at §7000.
You have confirmed Petersen-Dean was not paid for any of the work they have performed and
we have no evidence the work performed was not in accordance with industry standards.
Petersen-Dean has also filed a lien as a result of nonpayment and they have advised they have
commenced a lawsuit to enforce the lien. Based on the information we currently have this appears
to a contract dispute and it is not the role of the surety to settle disputes.
As a reminder, we also previously explained that resulting damages, such as stucco dust, are not
covered by the bond pursuant to the Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code beginning at §7000.
If you disagree with our decision you may have the matter reviewed by the California Department of
Insurance Claims Service Bureau; 11th Floor; 300 South Spring Street; Los Angeles CA 90012;
Telephone: 1-800-927-HELP.
If you have other information you would like us to review, or you receive a determination from the CLSB
that there was a violation, please provide it with the understanding that Platte River Insurance Company
reserves all rights and defenses in this matter.
Best regards,
Patricia A. Framke
Senior claim specialist
1600 Aspen Commons, Suite 300
Middleton, WI 53562
direct 608.829.4256
Platte River Insurance Company/Capitol Indemnity Corporation reserves all rights and defenses in this matter.
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify me immediately. It is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that
this e-mail is free of any virus or other defects that may affect a computer system and no responsibility will be accepted by CapSpecialty, Inc.
or its companies relevant to same.
Lidia:
It was a pleasure speaking with you today. As discussed, please allow this correspondence to serve as
Petersen-Dean, Inc.’s (PDI) written statement concerning Ms. Jennifer Marshall.
PDI contracted with Ms. Marshall to perform reroof services, as well as a main panel upgrade and
solar system installation. Of course, we first performed work for the reroof and Ms. Marshall was content
with our work. In order to commence with the main panel upgrade, our subcontractor, Triple C Electric,
performed a stucco cut. When this stucco cut was performed, Ms. Marshall’s garage door was apparently open,
as well as her son’s bedroom window. Ms. Marshall complained the stucco dust appeared all over her china dishware,
her garage, and her son’s toys. Ms. Marshall also claimed that the stucco dust affected her son’s lungs and lead to
an infection. However, she later conveyed that the son’s respiratory infection existed prior to Triple C’s stucco cut.
As a result of this, Ms. Marshall was upset. She also informed the relevant parties that concurrent with the reroof/main
service panel upgrade/solar system installation work, she was having mold remediation performed in her kitchen and
her kitchen was therefore “all torn out.” Therefore, she could not clean the stucco dust. In order to appease her
concerns, Triple C Electric offered to send a crew to clean her garage. She refused. Triple C Electric then offered to
rent air purifiers (totaling to approximately $500) to be placed in Ms. Marshall’s garage and her son’s room.
She refused.
Ms. Marshall expressed that the only option would be to have the premises professionally cleaned
(approximate cost: $2,000).
As the stucco dust issue specifically concerned Ms. Marshall and Triple C Electric, she wanted PDI to
commence the solar system installation. PDI installed the solar system on Ms. Marshall’s home, and she expressed
her contentment with said system via social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook. As PDI focuses on maintaining
excellent client relations, and as it did not seem that Triple C Electric and Ms. Marshall were reaching an understanding,
PDI proposed options to appease Ms. Marshall’s concerns with the stucco dust. An important point to note is that the
reroof, main panel upgrade, and solar system installation was being funded through one of PDI’s financing partners,
HERO. In order for HERO to disburse the funds owed to PDI for its work on Ms. Marshall’s home, it was necessary for
Ms. Marshall to provide HERO with a signed Completion Certificate. This way, PDI could be paid for its work, which
Ms. Marshall had only expressed contentment with. Ms. Marshall again refused to provide us with the signed
Completion Certificate, indicating that she wanted money for her home to be professionally cleaned. She even
suggested that we not pay Triple C Electric, and provide her with the money that was owed to Triple C Electric.
Of course, we told her we could not do that.
Ms. Marshall then asked for information concerning her savings from the solar system. A PDI sales representative
performed an analysis and provided Ms. Marshall with the same. Ms. Marshall then took this analysis to her accountant,
who opined differently. Ms. Marshall then became upset with PDI based on her accountant’s opinion; she alleged that
PDI “sold her something she did not need.” She then told PDI to take the solar system off her roof. We informed her that
we would do so but per protocol, an agreement indicating the terms of the solar system being taken off would need to be
reviewed and signed, and that she would need to complete the Certificate of Completion so that PDI could at least be paid for the
main service panel upgrade and reroof work. Ms. Marshall refused to review and sign any agreement, and refused to sign the
Certificate of Completion. PDI engaged in multiple attempts to work with Ms. Marshall to obtain both objectives. Each time, she refused, would express harsh words to PDI representatives, and would often state that she did not trust “the men of Petersen Dean,”
(although she had no issue with female personnel) and that PDI personnel could not be near her home unless escorted by the police.
At this point, HERO has cancelled her loan. PDI has not been paid for its reroof and main panel upgrade services as Ms. Marshall
refused to sign the Certificate of Completion. A lien has been filed for the amount owed to PDI. Ms. Marshall is not willing to follow basic protocol of reviewing and signing documentation solidifying the terms of the removal of the solar system so that the removal process can commence. Rather, she has sought to post allegedly defamatory statements about the company on various social media sites.
Overall, although the initial issue was between Ms. Marshall and Triple C Electric, in good faith PDI expended significant efforts in order to appease Ms. Marshall’s concerns. Ms. Marshall has not been reasonable in working with either Triple C Electric or PDI towards a solution.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. Thank you.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete