Public Mediation

iHi vs. David Sonneborn

B. W. vs. David Sonneborn
3142 S. 1000 West, Syracuse, Utah, 84075-8959, United States
Amount Involved: $1,340.49
Complaint(s):
    • Claimant Seeks: View.
    • Claim #: 9674965
    • Amount Involved: 1,340.49
    • Filed On: Apr 05, 2016
    • Posted On: Apr 16, 2016
    • Complaint(s):
  • Review this case.
  • Propose your solution.
  • Win the reward (1,000)
Statement of Claim
Claimant says:
"Mr. David Sonneborn,

I have made several attempts to collect the money owed me for the Home Inspection that was performed for you on Oct. 29th, 2015.
On Oct. 12, 2015 I was contacted by your realtor of ReMax Realty to reserve a date at the end of the month for a possible inspection, located in Sula MT which consisted of a country store, 8 cabins and primary residence.
Oct. 20, 2015 I was called to cancel the inspection for Oct. 22 and hold open the 29th. Reason given was the realtor was waiting to receive the earnest money of $5,000 for potential purchase.
Oct. 28, 2015 I was given the go ahead for the inspection, radon and water testing. From the texting and conversation with you, Mr. Sonneborn it was your realtors understanding that you would be in attendance and would be able to sign the Inspection Contract and pay for the inspection.
Oct. 29, 2015 I arrive at the property (3 hour drive) at 9am and began the inspection and testing for you, David Sonneborn, at the Sula Country Store & Resort and property residence. The physical inspection was completed at 4pm. Mr. Sonneborn, you failed to show up for the inspection, as promised. You did not respond to any of my texts or calls.
Oct. 30th, 2015 the inspection reports were e-mailed to your realtor which she then forwarded on to you, Mr. Sonneborn.
Nov. 3, 2015 a text was received by your realtor from you, Mr. Sonneborn stating "Seems that there are a lot of things that need repair, fixing or replacement. See how I feel later today. Will call you back. Sorry for the delay. Initially the feeling I have is the asking price needs to be lowered relative to the cost of making repairs, replacing and fixing the place up." Your realtor responded, "That's why the business and house will be separated..."
Nov. 11, 2015 You, Mr. Sonneborn electronically signed a new buy-sell Agreement with the reduction in price for the property and also a reduction in the earnest money.
Nov. 19th, 2015 the inspection reports were again e-mailed to you, Mr. Sonneborn from your realtor with a reminder that payment for services is due.
Dec. 8, 2015 I received your phone number, Mr. Sonneborn from your realtor. I phoned you, Mr. Sonneborn requesting payment for the inspections.
Dec. 17th, 2015 reports were e-mailed to you, Mr. Sonneborn for the complete inspection, with contracts and Invoices. You responded via your iPad "This is the owners responsibility, mine. The property was not purchased and the owners are responsible for this bill." My response to you," I was contacted to preform an inspection for you, Mr. Sonneborn at the Sula Resort and residence. The inspection reports were sent to you, Mr. Sonneborn and invoicing for the inspections is billed to you. You are responsible for the payment of the inspections whether the property is purchased or not purchased." As stated on the invoice, "Should the property fail to close, the client is still responsible for the inspection payment."
Dec. 29, 2015 and invoice notice was sent via Certified mail to you, Mr. David Sonneborn. The postal service attempted to notify you on January 2, 6, 9 and 17th, 2016. That certified letter was returned to me as "unclaimed."
January 26, 2016 an invoice/notice was sent FedEx to your wife at her place of employment. Since you refused to sign for the certified letter and refuse to answer calls, it left me no alternative but to send it to you, Mr. Sonneborn via your wife. Included in that certified letter were the invoices dated Dec. 28, 2015 and a late payment fee notice. It included a new invoice dated January 26th, 2016 with finance charges added. That letter also stated that payment is due by Feb. 5, 2016 or further action will be necessary.
January 28, 2016 a message was left on my voicemail threatening to sue if I send anything else to your wife.
Feb. 12, 2016 a new letter was sent to your home address stating that further action will be pursued for the collection of your bill.
March 14, 2016 another invoice was sent with late pay fees and finance charges updated. Total to date is $1, 340.49.

I expect payment for services rendered on Oct. 29, 2015...This included 2 invoices late fees and finance charges."
Reply Have a similar problem?
Additional Communication Between Claimant and David Sonneborn Hide
  • Apr 05, 2016, David Sonneborn (responding party) added:
  • There is no signed agreement that I would pay for the inspection. I do
    I not show up for the he inspection because it was cancelled. I did not promise to be t the inspection. I was never told when the inspection was scheduled.Yes the relator asked for the inspection as part of the due diligence for purchasing the property. As the due diligence failed and the purchase did not happen, the inspection fees are the owners responsibility.i did not respond to your texts or emails because until you call my wife at her work,I had not heard from you or the relator. As your comment about the asking price, is partially right. The bank would not loan on the property without more down payment,concerns of the property being in a flood zone, had to be resolved, and like you mentioned,there were a great deal of rePairs that needed to be done.
    There is again I want to mention, anything said or mentioned,that I agreed to paying for the inpection. You keep saying that you contracted with me for the
    Inspection. WHERE IS THAT? I've look through and expected all the information
    and paperwork and find nothing that shows me I contracted with you to do the inpection. I had no contact with you until the phone call to my wife's work.
    The relator set everything up relative to the banks requested needs.
    The inpection is part of the owners cost of selling the property.
    I do not owe you for the inpection.
    .

  • Apr 05, 2016, Claiming party added:
  • Mr. David Sonneborn, you authorized your realtor to establish a date with a “go ahead” home inspection. I have a copy of your text that confirmed a date for the inspection. It was the understanding of your realtor that you would be present at the inspection.

    The inspection was rescheduled from Oct. 22 to Oct. 29th because the earnest money had not yet been remitted, per the Buy- Sell agreement. This is noted on the time line, dated October 20th.

    Per your realtor, there was never any discussion that the sellers would be responsible for the inspection payment. Neither the sellers’ agent, nor your agent were aware that the sellers are responsible for the inspection. I will need for you to provide documentation that states the sellers are responsible for the inspections. This will need to be verified by the sellers, as well.

    Mr. Sonneborn, you mentioned that I called your wife at her place of employment. Your wife was contacted via FedEx overnight mail that included the certified letter that was unclaimed and your current invoices for services rendered. She was never contacted by phone.

  • Apr 05, 2016, Claiming party added:
  • Mr. David Sonneborn, you authorized your realtor to establish a date with a “go ahead” home inspection. I have a copy of your text that confirmed a date for the inspection. It was the understanding of your realtor that you would be present at the inspection.

    The inspection was rescheduled from Oct. 22 to Oct. 29th because the earnest money had not yet been remitted, per the Buy- Sell agreement. This is noted on the time line, dated October 20th.

    Per your realtor, there was never any discussion that the sellers would be responsible for the inspection payment. Neither the sellers’ agent, nor your agent were aware that the sellers are responsible for the inspection. I will need for you to provide documentation that states the sellers are responsible for the inspections. This will need to be verified by the sellers, as well.

    Mr. Sonneborn, you mentioned that I called your wife at her place of employment. Your wife was contacted via FedEx overnight mail that included the certified letter that was unclaimed and your current invoices for services rendered. She was never contacted by phone.

What Claimant Wants Hide
1. Payment due: 102915-1 Sula Country Store & 8 cabins Apr 20, 2016 $885.08
2. Payment due: 102915-2 primary residence Apr 20, 2016 $455.41
Cash total : $1,340.49
  • 0
Do you agree with the claimant’s demands?  (If you are a party to this claim, click here.)
Respondent's Counteroffer Hide
The claimant's settlement terms were rejected with no explanation. This claim will remain posted until resolved.
  • 0
Do you agree with the respondent’s Response?  (If you are a party to this claim, click here.)
Refresh
  • Show:
  • Sort by:
  • 1
  • Contributed Solution: by Jim Wicks On 04-29-2016
    Sonneborn should pay appraiser his fee interest More...
If you are a party to this claim, click here.
Is this a fair resolution?
  • Comment: by J Petaluma (1519 points) — 40 Years In Business. Curious About Everything, Love Helping People Figure Things Out.
  • On: 04-19-2016
  • Always something interesting on Peopleclaim...

    As a Realtor in the Atlanta, GA area, I ordered and attended multiple home inspections. I'm not sure whether the custom is different in Utah but in Georgia (and Nevada, where I've personally sold property) the prospective homeowner orders the home inspection via the agent so as to try to ensure that they're making a sound investment. It's like ordering a subscription to the WSJ prior to dabbling in the stock market...not guaranteed to pay off, but helps you to make a better investment.

    Occasionally a seller orders a home inspection, but that's usually prior to putting the house on the market; in most cases, the buyer would not accept that and would order their own home inspection. I've never known a prospective buyer take the homeowner's own home inspection as 'good to go.' Why would you?

    In some cases the buyer would ask for a home inspection, survey, septic inspection, radon testing, etc. and then the deal would fall through because the inspection uncovered some problem. I have never once had a buyer dispute the fees for those services. I have never even had one question the costs, even if they were upset that the deal didn't work out...it's part of the cost of buying property. I was almost always the one to schedule the inspection; there was never a 'signed agreement,' yet never, ever, any dispute. In most cases the prospective buyers did not attend (because of work or because of being out-of-town buyers). It is in fact extremely common for the prospective buyer not to attend, in my personal experience.

    It seems clear from both the OP and the David Sonneborn response that the prospective buyer was informed of the results of the inspection and benefitted from those results, by initially re-negotiating the contract and ultimately not purchasing the property. In my personal opinion it's quite outrageous and unethical to refuse to pay the bill, unless the facts are substantially different from what's been presented here by both parties.

    I cannot give any advice, unfortunately, for some equitable compromise as it seems clear to me that the invoice should simply be paid. It will be unfortunate if the dispute ends in small claims court, but if I were the OP that's where I'd go next. It's a very sad world.

Get fast access to our Resolver community, for...
  • help with a PeopleClaim or any other complaint
  • assistance with a purchase or contract
  • expert advice
Other PeopleClaim resolvers
Get Free alerts when claims post in your area.
Get Alert

Need help resolving a dispute? Learn more.

Public Mediation

The shortest path from your problem to its resolution.
1
Peer to Peer

Engage the other party and use powerful tools to negotiate the best resolution.

Free
If Unresolved
2
Community Resolution

Post your case online and get help from legal professionals, industry experts, consumers & advocates competing to find the best resolution to your claim.

$14.99 + optional reward for best resolution
Full refund if not resolved to your satisfaction
If Unresolved
3
Private Mediation

Lets you mediate your case privately with the help of our professional mediators and industry experts.

Free to claimant. Mediator fees negotiable.
If Unresolved
4
Engage a Professional

Find the best community-reviewed professionals near you to resolve your issue in private online mediation or traditional court/mediation.

Resolution

A wonderful serenity has taken possession of my entire soul, like these sweet mornings of spring which I enjoy with my whole heart.

I am (not) alone, and I feel the charm of existence in this spot, which was created for the bliss of souls like mine...~ Goethe

Get a public verdict — create an online trial $50 public trial / $50 reward for successful resolution
Important: All information contained herein is the opinion of the posting parties, who are solely responsible for its content. PeopleClaim offers both free and paid services to help consumers, patients, employee, tenants, and others resolve disputes without lawyers or courts, through negotiated online settlement and public disclosure of wrongdoing or unfair treatment.
Claims against parties operating under bankruptcy protection, by law must be processed solely through the appropriate US bankruptcy court. Any claims against this party currently posted on PeopleClaim are available for purposes of public business review only and are not an attempt to collect money or recover assets subject to protections under the United States Bankruptcy Code.
*IMPORTANT: PeopleClaim is a public dispute resolution system, independent of the BBB, small claims court, or other dispute resolution services. PeopleClaim is not a law firm and does not provide legal services, opinions, or advice. PeopleClaim facilitates peer-to-peer negotiation and resolution and crowdsourced input on issues of fairness to help resolve complaints. Users should contact professional legal counsel on any matters of law or regulation regarding their claims. PeopleClaim does not review or evaluate the merits of claims submitted through its site, and users are solely responsible for all content filed in their claims.
© reserved by PeopleClaim