Register free!

The Green Industry's Resource Center



Reply
 
Thread Tools   Display Modes
  #101  
Old 05-16-2012, 10:00 AM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
So $80,000 is for the 9 trees and care and $12,000 is the 15% time and trouble?

So the real value of the 49 ft trees at $8889.00 each?

So much is being changed on the dupont site. There is nothing about replacing the soil now and nothing about activated charcoal.
http://www.imprelis-facts.com/wp-con...ing-Trees1.pdf

Originally said replace soil and use activated charcoal and tree and soil had to go to approved landfill? I'd like to know more about Dupont removing the trees and no I haven't seen a compensation offer yet so I don't have details. Is the removal money an additional payment w/out the 15%. Anybody have an offer with details? Are they digging up the trees, cutting them and grinding the stump? Filling in the hole with topsoil? So many questions.

now:

Quote:
The property owner should ensure adherence to best management practices consistent with the geographic area in which it is performing this work, taking into account any unique environmental and climate conditions, and any state, regional or local ordinances.
Best management practices? Who sets those, the EPA or Dupont.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 05-16-2012, 11:51 AM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Hi Cindy. Well this thread has around 6000 views as of now, yet so few of us participating but it's probably because we all seem to be in the same boat waiting on Dupont.

I've really tried to dig deep into getting answers and have contacted some city officials directly that I know have received offers. Here's some information about compensation for the removal part of the proposal. One city that had 5 tree to be removed told me that Dupont itemized the removal cost for them at $4200 and that is not included in the total that the newspaper reported nor part of their settlement compensation because Dupont offered to hire the contractor at that price. In speaking with Dupont, I told them I will reject that kind of arrangement since I will be the one in charge of who comes onto my property to do the removal and I want that part of the compensation included in with the rest. They agreed and have that noted in the account. Now it will be up to me to find someone who will do it at the price they fix as if they were contracting a third party. Property owners have the last say in how they want the removal to be done and whether that compensation goes directly to you or Dupont pays someone. Dupont is trying to lean everyone toward them hiring the workers based on option 1 that LCO's had, but that is not what I prefer and they have noted it in my claim notes in their system. In the packet most people will receive, it will spell out that Dupont takes care of removal and therefore you won't see that compensation added (but the value is shown for your information). They said those who don't accept that will have to reject the offer and state reasons and detail that you want compensated directly, if that's what you choose, for the removal so you will contract that work instead of them paying the thrid party. But, I had them note my demand before I receive the offer. Hopefully the claims person follows through on that otherwise I will automatically reject it for sure. I want full control over what company comes onto my property. I will not allow the LCO, who chose option 1, to do any work since I don't trust them (I'm not one of their customers anyhow). That LCO really just wanted in on getting some money from this and I understand that, but I'm putting that to a stop going forward. They got their $500 for sending in the claim (even though it had already been done by Stericyle first).

The city I spoke to feels the same way and wants the tree removal compensation directly paid to them instead of Dupont sending it to a third party. They had the same reservations about that when they examined the 15 page legal settlement/resolution offer from Dupont. They are taking that up with the board for a decision on how to proceed.

As far as Dupont removing the info they had originally on their site about using activated charcoal, it may be because I did hear that all efforts others have had in using it had no results and if the soil was still saturated with Imprelis the activated charcoal and soil removal did not help, especially where lawns slope into the tree/shrub bed. You'd have to dig up most the lawn adjacent to the tree/shrub bed to stop that kind of migration. It seems it's going to be a long wait for some of us with sloping land before we can replant. I will be posting a couple photos soon to show at least one example of before and after Imprelis. I'm glad we have photos of all our landscape before this Imprelis devastation occured. That will certainly help me in court if it comes to that.

Last edited by Starbuy; 05-16-2012 at 11:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 05-16-2012, 12:42 PM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
Thanks Star again, and for this Lawnsite board for the information. Without this board, I would have almost no information on how Dupont is handling. Not seeing alot of information in Ky, don't know if the LCO's didn't use it or something else.

Quote:
They had the same reservations about that when they examined the 15 page legal settlement/resolution offer from Dupont
15 pages, guess its gonna take some time to read the fine print but they want us to accept w/out an attorney.

I'm still concerned about long time damage. Was out trimming my roses last night, they were one of my first signs that something wasn't right. My Hydrangia is coming back slowy. Still watching my blackberries. Wondering about my hardwoods and what happens later.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 05-16-2012, 01:47 PM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by cindyb View Post

15 pages, guess its gonna take some time to read the fine print but they want us to accept w/out an attorney.
Where did you hear that? Attorneys can certainly be consulted about Dupont's offer and in fact city officials I've spoken to that are involved in this process are consulting their attorneys before accepting the offer. You just can't file suit and collect the settlement from the direct offer.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 05-16-2012, 01:48 PM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by cindyb View Post

15 pages, guess its gonna take some time to read the fine print but they want us to accept w/out an attorney.
Where did you hear that? Attorneys can certainly be consulted about Dupont's offer and in fact city officials I've spoken to that are involved in this process are consulting their attorneys before accepting the offer. You just can't file suit and collect the settlement from the direct offer. That's my understanding and what is lawful, at least in Ohio.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 05-16-2012, 01:51 PM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starbuy View Post
Where did you hear that? Attorneys can certainly be consulted about Dupont's offer and in fact city officials I've spoken to that are involved in this process are consulting their attorneys before accepting the offer. You just can't file suit and collect the settlement from the direct offer. That's my understanding and what is lawful, at least in Ohio.
Quote:
The city I spoke to feels the same way and wants the tree removal compensation directly paid to them instead of Dupont sending it to a third party. They had the same reservations about that when they examined the 15 page legal settlement/resolution offer from Dupont. They are taking that up with the board for a decision on how to proceed.
The 15 page legal settlement post is part of your post. I added the attorney part. My opinion that they want homeowners to settle w/out bringing in a lawsuit, of course its our right.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 05-16-2012, 01:54 PM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
I see your getting the same error "Error connecting to mysql" and double posts.

The attorney's that I have talked to would love for me to hand it over, I'll sit down and read it myself. If I can't understand it, I may have to consult an attorney.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 05-16-2012, 02:07 PM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Yea, the site today is having issues isn't it. It's also very slow to come up due to the ad popups that have to be looked at before you access the site. Annoying.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 05-16-2012, 02:16 PM
Starbuy Starbuy is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Summit County, Ohio
Posts: 335
Here's a before/after photo of just one Imprelis-killed Thuja occidentalis on my property. This is the typical destruction Imprelis has created on my property. This one was a thick, beautiful, healthy growing 14' green emerald before the Imprelis was applied to the adjacent yard. These are known as "tree of life" but now it's just a tree of death. Thanks Dupont.
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 05-16-2012, 02:18 PM
cindyb's Avatar
cindyb cindyb is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 354
OH WOW, how many treatments? We only had one to toast ours. That kinda resembles my Japanese Maple.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:57 PM.

Page generated in 0.08282 seconds with 10 queries