On December 17, 2015 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Florida Peninsula Insurance Company,
and
Restoration Xperts Inc,
for * CC Damages >$5,000 - $15,000
in the District Court of Broward County.
Preview
*** FILED: BROWARD COUNTY. FL Howard C. Forman, CLERK 1/7/2016 10:07:00 AM.****
Case Number: COCE-15-26983 Division: 54
IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE 17
JUSICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR
BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
Case Number: COCE-15-026983
FLORIDA PENNISULA INURANCE COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
vs.
RESTORATION XPERTS, INC
DEFENDANT
Response to case number: COCE 15-26983
RESTORATION XPERTS accepted this job with Todd Gailboord, Crawford & Company and FPIC, to do the
agreed restoration work.
Florida Peninsula sent payment to Restoration Xperts, to make the agreed repairs on the residence. The
property owner paid Restoration Xperts $1,000 when a contract was signed for the repairs. This
payment represented the deductible amount, which was the responsibility of the owner.
The project was put on hold due to the customer not making timely material selection.
The customer, Mr. Gailboord, had requested certain upgrades. He refused the additional upgrades,
because of our pricing. The project remained on hold, waiting for the customer to give the go ahead
and schedule commencement of repairs. Mr. Gailboord had expressed that he had wanted his own
contractor to handle the property repairs.
Nearly five months after signing our contract, Mr. Gailboord cancelled the project with Restoration
Xperts..
On October 12, 2014, a refund was made to Mr. Gailboord on his credit card. This refund represented
his deducible amount. Which he had paid at the contract signing.
Restoration Xperts has repaid all the monies received from Florida Peninsula for this claim except for the
balance of $1,880.00.
At this point in time, Restoration Xperts believes that Florida Pen. owes Restoration Xperts a substantial
sum on multiple other projects. This sum far exceeds the dollar value of this suit. The failure of Florida
Y
HAT A CoP; HE ADOVE VAS MAILED TO THE
F1 ATTORNEDS
201g! T | ATTORNEY ON
JN fA
Ld VY
ATUR
Pen. to make payments to Restoration Xperts had put financial pressure on Restoration Xperts, and at
the time, the small balance on this refund had not been made, as the funds were not available.
Restoration Xperts has been advised that each particular project needs to be handled individually, and
that one should not affect the other.
Restoration Xperts agrees on this point, however, Mark Richardson, stated more than once in emails,
“No further payments will be issued to Restoration Xperts until Florida Peninsula receives all of the
monies owed for projects that either were not completed or performed by Restoration Xperts.”
It appears by this statement, that all projects are linked together, which is contrary to them being
separate issues.
Restoration Xperts has requested a face to face meeting, and believes that in a meeting of the parties,
an amicable resolution will be had. This request has been sent to Florida Peninsula, the attorney for Fla
Penn, and the dispute resolution department at Crawford Connection. The dispute resolution
department at Crawford Contractor Connection agreed that this would be the best approach.
At this point in time, the law firm representing FI. Pen. has directed Restoration Xperts to not
communicate with FI. Pen with regards to this matter, though communication with Fl. Pen would prove
to be the most expeditious manner to resolve this issue.
Restoration Xperts has not received a response to any correspondence that has been sent to counsel for
the plaintiff, Fl. Pen. and prays that the court direct the parties involved to settle this matter in small
claims court, or to mediate this matter.
RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION: SUMMARY OF FACTS
Number 1: Agree
Number 2: Agree
Number 4: Agree
Number 5: Agree
Number 6: Agree
Number 7: Agree
Number 8: Agree
Number 9: Agree
Number 10: Agree
Number 11: Agree
Number 12: Agree
Number 13: Agree
Number 14: Agree
Number 15: Agree
Number 16 Agreed
Number 17: Disagree
Number 18: Agree
Number 19: Agree
Number 20: Agree
Number 21: Disagree
Number 22: Disagree
Number 23: Disagree
Number 24: Disagree
Number 25 Disagree
Number 26: Disagree
Number 27: Disagree
Number 28: Disagree
Number 29: Agree
Number 30: Agree
Number 31: Agree
Number 32: Agree
Number 33: Disagree
Number 34: Agree
RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION: COUNT 1 - BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT
Number 35: Disagree
Number 36: Agree
Number 37: Agree
Number 38: Agree
Number 39: Agree
Number 40: Disagree
Number 41: Disagree
Number 42: Disagree
Number 42: Disagree
Number 43: Disagree
Number 44: Disagree
RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION: COUNT 2 - BREACH OF ORAL CONTRACT
Number 45: Disagree
Number 46: Agree
Number 47: Agree
Number 48: Agree
Number 49: Agree
Number 50: Disagree
Number 51: Disagree
Number 52: Disagree
Number 53: Disagree
Number 54: Disagree
RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION: COUNT III —- UNJUST ENRICHMENT
Number 55: Disagree
Number 56: Agree
Number 57: Agree
Number 58: Agree
Number 59: Disagree
Number 60: Disagree
Number 61: Agree
Number 62: Disagree
RESPONSE TO ALLERGATION: COUNT VI - BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY
Number 63: Disagree
Number 64: Agree
Number 65: Agree
Number 66: Agree
Number 67: Disagree
Number 68: Disagree
Number 69: Disagree
Number
70: Disagree
Number 71: Disagree
Number 72: Disagree
(M00 Nhrrac ie K pede Frc
J130 2 Gosentne Ry FHyo)
Deenfeh Rend FL. 79992
TU-78 7 8b 28
Document Filed Date
January 07, 2016
Case Filing Date
December 17, 2015
Category
* CC Damages >$5,000 - $15,000
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
*** FILED: BROWARD COUNTY. FL Howard C. Forman, CLERK 1/7/2016 10:07:00 AM.**** Case Number: COCE-15-26983 Division: 54 IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE 17 JUSICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA Case Number: COCE-15-026983 FLORIDA PENNISULA INURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, vs. RESTORATION XPERTS, INC DEFENDANT Response to case number: COCE 15-26983 RESTORATION XPERTS accepted this job with Todd Gailboord, Crawford & Company and FPIC, to do the agreed restoration work. Florida Peninsula sent payment to Restoration Xperts, to make the agreed repairs on the residence. The property owner paid Restoration Xperts $1,000 when a contract was signed for the repairs. This payment represented the deductible amount, which was the responsibility of the owner. The project was put on hold due to the customer not making timely material selection. The customer, Mr. Gailboord, had requested certain upgrades. He refused the additional upgrades, because of our pricing. The project remained on hold, waiting for the customer to give the go ahead and schedule commencement of repairs. Mr. Gailboord had expressed that he had wanted his own contractor to handle the property repairs. Nearly five months after signing our contract, Mr. Gailboord cancelled the project with Restoration Xperts.. On October 12, 2014, a refund was made to Mr. Gailboord on his credit card. This refund represented his deducible amount. Which he had paid at the contract signing. Restoration Xperts has repaid all the monies received from Florida Peninsula for this claim except for the balance of $1,880.00. At this point in time, Restoration Xperts believes that Florida Pen. owes Restoration Xperts a substantial sum on multiple other projects. This sum far exceeds the dollar value of this suit. The failure of Florida Y HAT A CoP; HE ADOVE VAS MAILED TO THE F1 ATTORNEDS 201g! T | ATTORNEY ON JN fA Ld VY ATUR Pen. to make payments to Restoration Xperts had put financial pressure on Restoration Xperts, and at the time, the small balance on this refund had not been made, as the funds were not available. Restoration Xperts has been advised that each particular project needs to be handled individually, and that one should not affect the other. Restoration Xperts agrees on this point, however, Mark Richardson, stated more than once in emails, “No further payments will be issued to Restoration Xperts until Florida Peninsula receives all of the monies owed for projects that either were not completed or performed by Restoration Xperts.” It appears by this statement, that all projects are linked together, which is contrary to them being separate issues. Restoration Xperts has requested a face to face meeting, and believes that in a meeting of the parties, an amicable resolution will be had. This request has been sent to Florida Peninsula, the attorney for Fla Penn, and the dispute resolution department at Crawford Connection. The dispute resolution department at Crawford Contractor Connection agreed that this would be the best approach. At this point in time, the law firm representing FI. Pen. has directed Restoration Xperts to not communicate with FI. Pen with regards to this matter, though communication with Fl. Pen would prove to be the most expeditious manner to resolve this issue. Restoration Xperts has not received a response to any correspondence that has been sent to counsel for the plaintiff, Fl. Pen. and prays that the court direct the parties involved to settle this matter in small claims court, or to mediate this matter. RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION: SUMMARY OF FACTS Number 1: Agree Number 2: Agree Number 4: Agree Number 5: Agree Number 6: Agree Number 7: Agree Number 8: Agree Number 9: Agree Number 10: Agree Number 11: Agree Number 12: Agree Number 13: Agree Number 14: Agree Number 15: Agree Number 16 Agreed Number 17: Disagree Number 18: Agree Number 19: Agree Number 20: Agree Number 21: Disagree Number 22: Disagree Number 23: Disagree Number 24: Disagree Number 25 Disagree Number 26: Disagree Number 27: Disagree Number 28: Disagree Number 29: Agree Number 30: Agree Number 31: Agree Number 32: Agree Number 33: Disagree Number 34: Agree RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION: COUNT 1 - BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT Number 35: Disagree Number 36: Agree Number 37: Agree Number 38: Agree Number 39: Agree Number 40: Disagree Number 41: Disagree Number 42: Disagree Number 42: Disagree Number 43: Disagree Number 44: Disagree RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION: COUNT 2 - BREACH OF ORAL CONTRACT Number 45: Disagree Number 46: Agree Number 47: Agree Number 48: Agree Number 49: Agree Number 50: Disagree Number 51: Disagree Number 52: Disagree Number 53: Disagree Number 54: Disagree RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION: COUNT III —- UNJUST ENRICHMENT Number 55: Disagree Number 56: Agree Number 57: Agree Number 58: Agree Number 59: Disagree Number 60: Disagree Number 61: Agree Number 62: Disagree RESPONSE TO ALLERGATION: COUNT VI - BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY Number 63: Disagree Number 64: Agree Number 65: Agree Number 66: Agree Number 67: Disagree Number 68: Disagree Number 69: Disagree Number 70: Disagree Number 71: Disagree Number 72: Disagree (M00 Nhrrac ie K pede Frc J130 2 Gosentne Ry FHyo) Deenfeh Rend FL. 79992 TU-78 7 8b 28