BBB Accredited Business since
Phone: (503) 646-6426 Fax: (503) 625-9668 19785 SW Cipole Rd, Sherwood, OR 97140
BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.
This company offers landscape contracting and designing services.
Request a Quote
View Business Review Inquiries
A BBB Accredited Business since
BBB has determined that All Oregon Landscaping Inc meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.
BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.
Reason for Rating
BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.
Factors that raised the rating for All Oregon Landscaping Inc include:
- Length of time business has been operating
- Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
- Response to 2 complaint(s) filed against business
- Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business
Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details
|Complaint Type||Total Closed Complaints|
|Problems with Product/Service||2|
|Total Closed Complaints||2|
Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews
|Customer Experience||Total Customer Reviews|
|Total Customer Reviews||1|
Licensing, Bonding or Registration
This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.
These agencies may include:
Washington Department of Labor & Industries
7273 Linderson Way SW, Tumwater WA 98501
Phone Number: (800) 647-0982
Type of Entity
Business ManagementMr. Craig Prunty, President
Landscape Designers Hardscapes Landscape Lighting Irrigation Systems & Equipment Contractors - Retaining Wall Landscape Architects Landscape Contractors
Alternate Business NamesAll Oregon Nursery LLC
Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Summary
BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview
19785 SW Cipole Rd
Sherwood, OR 97140 (503) 646-6426 Directions
What is a BBB Business Review?
We offer free reviews on businesses that include background, licensing, consumer experience and other information such as governmental actions that is known to BBB. These reviews are provided for businesses that are BBB accredited and also for businesses that are not BBB accredited.
About BBB Business Review Content & Services:
Some Better Business Bureaus offer additional content & services in BBB Business Reviews.
The additional content & services are typically regional in nature or, in some cases, a new product or service that is being tested prior to a more general release.
Not all enhanced content & services are available at all Better Business Bureaus.
Types of Complaints Handled by BBB
BBB handles the following types of complaints between businesses and their customers so long as they are not, or have not been, litigated:
- Advertising or Sales
- Billing or Collection
- Problems with Products or Services
- Guarantee or Warranty
We do not handle workplace disputes, discrimination claims or claims about the quality of health or legal services.
BBB Complaint Process
Your complaint will be forwarded to the business within two business days. The business will be asked to respond within 14 days, and if a response is not received, a second request will be made. You will be notified of the business's response when we receive it (or notified that we received no response). Complaints are usually closed within 30 business days.
What is BBB Advertising Review?
BBB promotes truth in advertising by contacting advertisers whose claims conflict with the BBB Code of Advertising. These claims come to our attention from our internal review of advertising, consumer complaints and competitor challenges. BBB asks advertisers to prove their claims, change ads to make offers more clear to consumers, and remove misleading or deceptive statements.
What government actions does BBB report on?
BBB reports on known government actions that are relevant to the business's marketplace dealings with the public.
BBB Reporting Policy
As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business.
BBB Business Reviews are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. Information in this BBB Business Review is believed reliable but not guaranteed as to accuracy.
BBB Business Reviews generally cover a three-year reporting period. BBB Business Reviews are subject to change at any time.
Complaint Trends - Last 3 Years
Customer Review Trends
BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview
BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.
|Customer Review Experience||Value|
|Positive Review||5 points per review|
|Neutral Review||3 points per review|
|Negative Review||1 point per review|
BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.
BBB Letter Grade Scale
Star Rating scale
BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.
Problems with Product/Service
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: In April 2009, I contacted All Oregon Landscaping, Inc. ("All Oregon") and subsequently met with All Oregon representative Salesperson **** ****** at my home to discuss a few potential projects. One project involved removing and repairing/replacing a paving stone-based front entry patio and the connected front entry patio steps-both of which had settled. On 5/4/09, I signed a contract with All Oregon Landscaping to complete this project along with a few other projects unrelated to the patio and patio steps in the contract. I paid All Oregon's contract/ invoice total in full and in less than 30 days. This is a formal complaint about TWO aspects of All Oregon's work and service for the same patio/step project. The first complaint is regarding one of the contract-described project's failure "...to prevent any further settling". It is important to note that there is no mention whatsoever of a warranty, guarantee, limited warranty, limited guarantee, etc, specific to this complaint's projects as titled in the contract "Front Entry Patio" and/or "Front Entry Paver Work" (which are further described below). The only mention of any guarantee in the contract is clearly and specifically within the scope and description for a different project in the contract titled "Water Feature" and its "Aquatics". It states: "One year guarantee against any malfunction, etc. The second complaint is regarding All Oregon's inexcusable and possibly deliberate absence of communication, follow-up, follow-through and customer service since 5/12/14, the day ****** reviewed the front entry patio and steps settling problem and promised me a proposal. To the first complaint: Among the contract's "Descriptions of work", two of the descriptions are regarding the aforementioned "Front Entry Patio" and "Front Entry Paver Work" paver settling repair project. In the contract the two project descriptions are titled: 1. "Site Preparation for Front Entry Patio". This description includes the note (verbatim): "NOTE: If there is evidence of underground spring, or running water, additional measures may need to be evaluated and may need additional work above and beyond this proposal. To be discussed with ***** if needed." ("*****" is the homeowner filing BBB complaint). 2. "Front Entry Paver Work". This description details the project's materials and labor and includes a sentence that concludes with (verbatim): "...to prevent any future settling". An important fact regarding #1 above: All Oregon never identified, mentioned, or discussed anything whatsoever with ***** prior to, during, or after completion of the project related to the aforementioned "NOTE". Over the course of the last three years, I have noticed slight but continued settling of the front entry patio and steps pavers. In spring of 2014 the degree of settling became completely unacceptable, both in terms of aesthetics (e.g. neighbors have commented, seeing the settling from the street) and, more importantly unacceptable from a safety standpoint in that the steps' rise heights are uneven and are not to code. There is also a gap at the patio and top step front edge that can easily cause someone to trip upon leaving the patio to the steps. To the second complaint: In late April or early May 2014, I phoned All Oregon and spoke with ******, reviewing the contract and the settling issue. On May 12, 2014, ****** met with me at my house for at least 30 minutes where he viewed and reviewed the settling problem. In no uncertain terms whatsoever, ****** agreed that there is a patio and step settling problem. ****** concluded the meeting by saying All Oregon's project schedule was "booked until the end of July" and that he would reply back to me with a proposal/estimate to repair the settling of the patio and steps and he stated he would put my project on All Oregon's schedule to be among the first on All Oregon's project schedule after "the end of July". Since our meeting on May 12, after no communication from ****** (or any All Oregon representative), I phoned All Oregon on the morning of May 21 and was told by the receptionist that ****** was not available and does not have voicemail and that she would relay my message to ****** that I am waiting for the proposal. With no response, on May 22 I phoned and was given the same response by the receptionist and I didn't receive a call. Still with no response, on May 28 I phoned and was given the same response by the receptionist. Later that evening I received a voicemail message from ****** stating that he "would not be able to get back to me until after July 31." To date ****** has never attempted to contact me after July 31. Considering ******'s May 12 meeting's proposal promise, my messages left May 21, May 22, May 28 and ******'s voicemail message he left me the evening of May 28, I felt there could be no doubt I was expecting a response and proposal by July 31. Out of more than patience, as of September 23, having received no proposal or communication whatsoever from ****** or All Oregon I phoned All Oregon, asked for ******, was told he wasn't available and was told to leave a message. I briefed the receptionist on this issue and informed her I was going to contact the Oregon Landscape Board and the Better Business Bureau. The receptionist promised that I would receive a call back from All Oregon. As of the writing of this complaint (5:00 pm the afternoon of September 25) I have received no communication or proposal from All Oregon.
Desired Settlement: The settlement I expect from All Oregon is to promptly be contacted by All Oregon and to receive in writing a formal "Proposed Agreement" and "Work to be Done" description of a project to repair the settled front patio and patio step pavers and return both to meet or exceed code standards and industry acceptable aesthetics and quality. I would be satisfied if the project "Description of Work" used the same wording as the "Site Preparation for Front Entry Patio" and "Front Entry Paver Work" in the original contract. Due to the previous contract's wording "...to prevent any future settling" and the poor customer service and delays, I expect to not be charged for this repair. I expect work to be completed within an industry-reasonable time and to begin no later than October 30, 2014.
Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/10/10) */ In May of 2009, All Oregon Landscaping performed work at **** ****** ***** in West Linn Oregon for ***** *********. Proposal and work completed was done through a proposed agreement with proposal number 9411r1. There are two complaints issued from ***** dated 9/25/2014. #1 - Front entry paver work that was install in May of 2009, has had some settling issues #2 - Lack of communication, and follow up with ***** from our onsite meeting in May of 2014 First to address complaint #1. Per our contract, the existing paver entry at front door was removed, inspected, and new base installed, and pavers. During site demolition there was no visible signs of water intrusion on the exterior, or interior of the crawl space in the home. Crews were directed to re-install a proper base to prevent any further settling. The new base was installed above and beyond ICPI standards (Interlocking concrete pavement institute) in hopes that any future movement would be eliminated. Gravel base was installed in 2" lifts, plate compacted, then repeated until final finish gravel grade was completed and properly compacted. As an additional layer of support, Mirafi geo textile was installed as well. All Oregon Landscaping installed the front entry above and beyond a "normal" job. There is no reason for any settling to occur. Upon site visit with ***** in May of 2014, it was apparent that there was approximately 1-1.5" of settling that had occurred. With further investigation it was determined that the existing paver walk way to the work area All Oregon Landscaping had performed was draining directly to the front steps, and water had been entering into the front entry. This was a pre-existing condition. The front walkway was never any part of contracted work All Oregon Landscaping had performed. It is in my opinion that the settling that has occurred at the front entry is a direct result of water drainage from the walk way to the front stairs, and entry. *****'s desired resolution is that he is asking for All Oregon Landscaping to make repairs for "Free". Although we stand behind our work, there is no implied warranty for the paver entry work that was performed. Due to the fact that "other persons or company's prior work" has affected the job installed by All Oregon Landscaping, we will not make any repairs free of charge. We are happy to provide a quote with options to make any necessary repairs. The entire steps and front landing will need to be redone. I suggest concrete stairs, with a paver infill at the front door, or re-pour all front entry with concrete. The front walk drainage may need to be addressed as well. On the second complaint of lack of communication, and follow, I am totally guilty. It has been an extremely hectic and busy 2014. I have had little to no office time, as we are trying to accommodate as many clients as possible. I am happy to follow up with ***** with any proposal for work to rectify his front entry. Work will be proposed no later than 10/17/2014 to ***** (one week from today), and if accepted, work to begin no later than 11/14/2014 if proposed work is accepted by no later than 10/24/2014. **** ******, Operations Manager Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/10/16) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The response has not resolved my complaint. My response to AO's response to my first complaint: The AO defense is based on their complaint response of: "Upon site visit with ***** in May of 2014, it was apparent that there was approximately 1-1.5" of settling that had occurred. With further investigation it was determined that the existing paver walk way to the work area All Oregon Landscaping had performed was draining directly to the front steps, and water had been entering into the front entry. This was a pre-existing condition. The front walkway was never any part of contracted work All Oregon Landscaping had performed. It is in my opinion that the settling that has occurred at the front entry is a direct result of water drainage from the walk way to the front stairs, and entry". At the start of AO's site visit on May 12, 2014, AO proactively identified and described to me that draining of the existing paver walk way was the cause of the settling of the front entry patio. There was no "further investigation" as AO states: "With further investigation it was determined that the existing paver walk way to the work area All Oregon Landscaping had performed was draining directly to the front steps, and water had been entering into the front entry." In fact, on 5/12/14 AO identified to me the settling "problem" immediately upon approaching the settled front patio. Thus AO's May 12, 2014 visit comments to me are ironically consistent with the phrase in AO's complaint response that "This was a pre-existing condition". (More on this follows in my "RECAP") It is important to note that during the May 12 visit after describing to me the ("pre-existing") cause of the settling (i.e. "the existing paver walk way") AO said to me twice: (an unsollicted and direct quote) "Will you work with me on this?". This clearly indicated to me then and now that he should have fixed the walk way's "pre-existing condition" as part of their project. Because AO promoted itself as an experienced and professional landscaping firm I called AO for an initial site review and quote and hired AO to BOTH "fix" the cause of the settling AND "repair" the resulting settling damage. Why would a reasonably intelligent person hire AO or any professional landscaping firm to ONLY "repair" the settling DAMAGE and NOT "fix" the cause of the settling? In fact, when I initially reviewed AO's contract and read their phrase "...to prevent any future settling" I relied on this phrase that the CAUSE of the settling ("pre-existing condition") would ALSO be "fixed". It is quite reasonable that a homeowner's expectation of a project performed by a professional landscaping firm include FIXING the CAUSE as well as REPAIRING the DAMAGE. My response to AO's response to my second complaint: AO's response states: "On the second complaint of lack of communication, and follow(up), I am totally guilty. It has been an extremely hectic and busy 2014. I have had little to no office time, as we are trying to accommodate as many clients as possible." As I stated in my complaint it took 17 DAYS to receive a response message from AO after I made three phone calls and left three messages to AO after AO's May 12 site visit. On May 28 I finally received a brief voicemail reply message from Mr. ****** stating "I got your messages and I will call you back by the end of July when our project schedule opens up." On September 23, 2014, having yet to hear back from AO, I called AO and notified AO I would be contacting the BBB if I did not hear from AO. I was told I would hear back by the next day. To date the only communication I have received from AO is AO's 10/10/14 BBB response to my BBB complaint. That's 118 DAYS from my last call to AO and 56 DAYS since AO's July 31 promise with no call! AO states they "...had little to no office time, as we are trying to accommodate as many clients as possible." In other words, AO is saying they did not have FIVE MINUTES to spare to call me, a customer, over a 56 DAY TIME PERIOD to deal with their "Pre-existing condition" dilemma! Again, I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person so to me this is a preposterous statement. My response to AO's resolution: I've already stated my case previously in this response about the "pre-existing condition". To RECAP: 1)AO by default ironically admits the "Pre-existing condition" existed PRIOR TO and/or DURING the writing of the contract and and their work. If not the case, how can AO assert that the paver walk way was (and is) the "pre-existing condition" that in fact caused the front patio to settle AFTER they completed their work? Additionally, if AO next tries to claim they didn't notice the pre-existing walk way condition that caused the settling at the time of their contract writing and subsequent work, that then means AO failed to perform a reasonably-expected and obvious step and process of first identifying the cause of the settling (settling being the reason for my call to AO) as part of their initial site review and work. Also, if AO attempts to next claim that the "draining" nature of the approaching walk way is due to settling of the walk way itself after completion of AO's work, this was never mentioned in AO's complaint response. Also note that it is visibly obvious that it is the original and actual gentle slope of the walk way and NOT that the slope is due to any subsequent-to-AO-work walk way paver settling, as confirmed by other landscape opinions. 2)AO admitted the "Pre-existing condition" proactively to me DURING AO's 5/12/14 site review and discussed it in detail and in the same discussion asked me twice "Will you work with me on this?", and 3)Finally, CURRENTLY AO admits the settling problem is due to the existance of the "Pre-existing condition" in this complaint resonse. I've also stated: "I called AO for an initial site review and quote and I hired AO to BOTH "fix" the settling CAUSE and REPAIR the settling damage. Why would a reasonably intelligent person hire AO or any professional landscaping firm to ONLY "repair" the settling damage and NOT "fix" the CAUSE of the settling? In fact, when I reviewed AO's contract and read their phrase "...to prevent any future settling" I relied on this phrase that the CAUSE of the settling ("pre-existing condition") would ALSO be "fixed". Next, AO's response states: "We are happy to provide a quote with options to make any necessary repairs." and "...we will not make any repairs free of charge." After all the facts that I have provided in this case why would an average homeowner consider or even trust that a forthcoming profit-inclusive quote from AO to ONLY "repair" the settling would be a fair quote (i.e. a quote at less cost than what would be REASONABLY charged with no "Pre-existing condition" settling issues)? This question, plus the fact that the offer does not AUTOMATICALLY include FIXING the admitted pre- and post- project completion's "Pre-existing" cause of the settling. AO's response states: "The front walk drainage may need to be addressed as well."? "May" need to be addressed? Do they still not get it about fixing the CAUSE that they themselves identified regarding the three phases of this complaint? I do not consider this a reasonable response let alone a resolution to my ongoing problem: a known-in-advance "Pre-existing condition" causing the settling. Finally, AO states: "Work will be proposed no later than 10/17/2014 to ***** (one week from today), and if accepted, work to begin no later than 11/14/2014 if proposed work is accepted by no later than 10/24/2014." This requirement adds insult to injury. First, 56 days came and went with no call from AO as promised by AO and AO's only response to date is to my BBB complaint. Second, I filed my complaint on 9/25/14 and the BBB received no response from AO until 10/10/14 (that's 15 days later). Finally, the BBB did not provide me notice of AO's 10/10/14 response by email until 10/14/14 (19 days from when I sent my complaint). So AO has required that I respond to their "Work to be proposed" requirement "no later than 10/17/14" giving me three days compared to their 56 days!) A side note: On the day I first received the BBB's email notice of AO's response (10/14/14) I was ill and visited my primary care physician and on 10/15/14 I visited my cardiologist for the same illness. Proof of both visits and my condition are readily available upon request. Thus I am responding to AO's response on literally the first day possible and only three days after BBB notification. Based on all of the above facts I have presented, with the insult of AO's "hectic and busy" - caused 56-day excuse response, AO's profit-inclusive resolution offer, and my resulting lack of trust in any "fair" quote to ONLY REPAIR and NOT FIX THE "PRE-EXISTING"CAUSE, I seek a BBB-proposed resolution. If necessary I will seek a court-ordered resolution. Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2014/10/30) */ As noted, there was no warranty on the work performed at your residence in 2009 in regards to the front porch/ entry. At that time, all measures had been taken to verify that there was no water intrusion. The foundation was dry inside and outside. The settling that had occurred was believed to have been from improper installation by a prior contractor who had also performed the driveway and front walk. 5 years ago the existing walkway did not present any type of problem, nor was it ever discussed as being a problem. We have photos from April of 2009 to support that. The front walkway was never any part of our contract. *****, the owner, agrees with my comment during our meeting in May of 2014, that it is now obvious that the drainage of the front walkway has affected the work performed by All Oregon Landscape in April of 2009. Our simple hose test verified that on site. Water ran directly to the front steps and disappeared into the front porch. We are sorry you feel like we have not taken care of you as a customer. We have experienced a tremendous demand this year for new projects and have maintained the same level of staff for the last few years. We do our best to take care of every single job that comes in, and we failed with proper follow up with you. We are happy to provide a quote for any repairs that would be necessary to your walkway (installed by others) and your front porch. Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2014/11/04) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) All Oregon's (AO) latest response states: "At that time, (i.e. the time of AO's 2009 project), all measures had been taken to verify that there was no water intrusion. The foundation was dry inside and outside. The settling that had occurred was believed to have been from improper installation by a prior contractor who had also performed the driveway and front walk." My Responses to AO's Response: AO's earlier BBB responses refer to the "pre-existing condition" that caused the patio to settle. AO proactively pointed this out to me during their May 2014 visit. AO states in this latest reply: "The settling that had occurred was believed to have been from improper installation by a prior contractor who had also performed the driveway and front walk. My first response to this: When I hired AO in 2009 it was to both "repair" the settled pavers AND to "fix" the CAUSE of the settling (a.k.a. AO's "pre-existing condition" claim). AO can't have it both ways. If AO claims: "At that time (i.e. the time of AO's 2009 project)...The settling that had occurred was believed to have been from improper installation by a prior contractor who had also performed the driveway and front walk.", then why didn't AO INCLUDE this CAUSE in their contract and RECOMMEND AND QUOTE "fixing" the CAUSE? Then AO states: "At that time (XXXX) all measures had been taken to verify that there was no water intrusion." So AO says..."there was no water intrusion." But AO ALSO states there was in fact water intrusion: "The settling that had occurred was believed to have been from improper installation by a prior contractor who had also performed the driveway and front walk." And, if, as AO states,: "At that time all measures had been taken to verify that there was no water intrusion.", then this means at that time they underperformed in their basic and expected role to "...verify that there was no water intrusion." So which unacceptable performance would they prefer to defendthat in 2009 they failed to IDENTIFY and FIX the settling CAUSE? OR defend that they DID IDENTIFY the settling CAUSE in 2009 (a.k.a "pre-existing condition") but chose NOT TO QUOTE OR FIX the cause? Also note that both of the two landscape contractors who viewed the walkway and front porch a few weeks ago identified the cause as the walkway's slope drainage, in agreement with AO's statement "The settling that had occurred was believed to have been from improper installation by a prior contractor who had also performed the driveway and front walk." My Response to AO's Proposed Resolution: AO's resolution states: "We are happy to provide a quote for any repairs that would be necessary to your walkway (installed by others) and your front porch." My response to this: I believe any reasonable person who 1) reviews the facts of my claim especially with AO's own contradictions in their defense claims, and 2) reviews AO's own poor customer service admissions, including: "...we failed with proper follow up with you." and "On the second complaint of communication and follow(up), I am totally guilty.", then why would I want to pay AO again to resolve this problem? Thus the patio that has settled needs (again) to be repaired AND the CAUSE of the settling (i.e. sloping walkway) needs, finally, to be fixed by a landscape firm. AO should "do the right thing" and offer me a cash contribution that I can apply to my upcoming expense (that I shouldn't have in the first place).
Problems with Product/Service
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: On March 16, 2014 I purchased 8 Arborvitae's from All Oregon Landscaping for $544.00. In June one of the Arborvitae's started turning brown and died even with normal yard watering as the other 7 are still alive and healthy. When I purchased these Arborvitae's All Oregon Landscaping did not provide me any care or warranty paperwork, not even a receipt as the landscapers just took my check, cashed it and never sent an invoice. I called All Oregon Landscaping on July 7, 2014 and they told me that since I didn't follow there warranty policy, which I never received or could find online, then they would not replace the Arborvitae.
Desired Settlement: I would like for the Arborvitae to be replace or a full refund, since there was no care instruction or warranty policy provided when the transaction took place.
Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1010, 5, 2014/07/08) */ ******* ******* contacted All Oregon Landscaping via e-mail on February 28, 2014, inquiring if our company could plant 6 - 8 arborvitae in his backyard to provide privacy. On March 4, ***** ******, owner of All Oregon Landscaping, responded via e-mail, providing him with a price scale based on the size of tree installed. Again, ******* responded via e-mail asking if All Oregon Landscaping could install 8 trees priced at $68.00 each on March 10, 2014. All Oregon Landscaping responded affirmatively and requested his address and indicated that he could pay the crew with a check for $544.00 upon completion of the project. An e-mail was received from ******* on March 5, providing his address, telephone number, and a confirmation that the work should be performed. On March 10, the (8) arborvitae were installed in the location specified by ******* ******* and a check in the amount of $544.00 was received at the completion of the project. No further communication was received from ******* ******* until All Oregon Landscaping received a telephone call on Monday, July 7, 2014, indicating that one of the trees was brown. ***** ****** indeed talked with ******* and requested he send a picture so he could see if it was struggling or dead. After seeing the picture, ***** replied that it was definitely dead. ******* was asked if he had been watering the new trees regularly. *******' response was "No, I didn't know I needed to water the plants." ***** ****** indicated that the trees were not under warranty because they did not have an automatic irrigation system and there was no implied warranty on the emailed acceptance of the planting. ******* was told that All Oregon Landscaping could replace the tree, only charging him for the cost of the new tree ($68.00) and waiving the $95.00 Service Charge. ******* was unhappy with the response and immediately filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau. It is very simple, All Oregon Landscaping met is contractual obligation by installing the (8) arborvitae. The company had no additional obligations or commitments to ******* ******* and there was no written or implied warranty. Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/07/09) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) ***** ****** quotes about my response are incorrect espically the quote "No, I didn't know I needed to water the plants" my response to ***** ****** was "NO, I DIDN"T KNOW THEY NEEDED ADDITIONAL WATTERING BEYOND THE TYPICAL LAWN WATTERING" after he told me they did in the first year. ***** ****** asked if I had given the tree's additional wattering as required in the first year per their instructions which I never received and if I would of known this the trees would of been given additional wattering. As ***** could see from the pricture I sent him of the trees have been watered through normal yard wattering as 7 of the 8 are still alive.
Customer Reviews Summary