Master Spas's reply to:
Master Spas - Lawsuit between Master Pool and Spa or BBQ show
Master Pool and Spa, inc dba Spa Pool and BBQ show is suing me and I have counterclaim against them.Here is the information filed with the court.IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GARLAND COUNTY, ARKANSASCIVIL DIVISIONCASE NO.
CV - 13-218COUNTERCLAIMComes now the Defendant, Harlan Yother, and for his Counterclaim against Plaintiff Master Pool and Spa, INC and d/b/a Spa Pool and BBQ Show, alleges and states:Mr. Duane Chapman and his supervisor Dan, sales representatives for Master Pool and Spa, INC and d/b/a Spa Pool and BBQ Show held at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center, on September 22, 2012 misrepresented and falsified to the Defendant the contracted product information agreed too at the time of signing for the customized HTX Force Spa pool to be ordered directly from the factory. Also, Plaintiff purposely withheld vital warranty details that would have stopped the Defendant from entering into a contract for said pool. Plaintiff did not deliver the contracted product.
The facts are as follows:Breach of Contract: Defendant and spouse were told the HTX Force Spa pool ordered would only need the one EcoPur filter that would make the pool chemical free and no other chemicals would be needed because this “special one-of-a-kind filter” patented system was designed especially for their products and in fact other added chemicals could potentially damage the EcoPur filter.Defendant and spouse were shown what the EcoPur filter looked like when the salesman displayed it on a table. The HTX Force Spa pool delivered on November 16, 2012 has a different filter system and there are two types of filters instead of one. Plaintiff sales representatives demonstrated to the Defendant where the EcoPur filter would enter from a top opening compartment and the ease of having to replace the one filter. Defendant was told that this type of compartment model would be ordered to be installed in the factory HTX Force Spa pool.
This same filter compartment is not on the pool that was delivered.Mr. Duane Chapman clearly “marked out” the square box on the signed contract, where the filter/skimmer box was first checked, at the specific request of the Defendant in agreement that the pool ordered would not have a skimmer and would only have one EcoPur filter like the model demonstrated at the show and viewed by both parties. Unfair and Deceptive Business Practices: Defendant and spouse were told that no pool chemicals would be needed with the use of the “special” EcoPur filter system. The pool arrived with six different chemical bottles and test strips from a “starter kit” to check the water chemicals in the pool.
The pamphlet in the box with the chemicals instructed that one bottle of chemicals was supposed to be used at initial water filling of the pool. Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Fraudulent Concealment: Master Pool and Spa, INC and d/b/a Spa Pool and BBQ Show sales representatives gave false statements about the service warranty on the contracted pool. When asked about local service providers, Defendant and spouse were informed that Master Pool and Spa, INC had “local service” people to handle any problems that would occur for five years for parts and labor. Defendant found out later, they did not manufacture the pool but another company called Master Spa, Inc.
does and the warranty was actually covered by the second company. Master Pool and Spa, Inc. salesmen failed to tell the Defendant that Master Spa, Inc. is a different company than Master Pool and Spa, INC and d/b/a Spa Pool and BBQ Show.The Master Pool and Spa, INC salesmen held back at the time of contractual commitment vital information about the warranty, in that a local service provider selected by Master Pool and Spa, Inc.
could charge a “reasonable fee for travel” from their company office to the location of the pool. Defendant was informed after the signing of the contract that the cost for travel alone could be between $3.00 to $5.00 per mile and travel expense is not included as part of the labor cost in the pool warranty. The service provider that contacted Defendant, due to a large broken jet on delivery that needed repair, was located in Fort Smith, AR which is 150 miles away from the location of the delivered pool. This would have been an extra unexpected expense burden to the Defendant of approximately $750.00 one way, or $1,500.00 roundtrip.
That particular warranty information would have stopped the Defendant from signing the contract. WHEREFORE, the Defendant prays that the Court will enter judgment in favor of the Defendant and against Plaintiff as follows:1. Plaintiff is to reimburse in cash the fully prepaid deposit of $15,852.75 by the Defendant. 2.
Defendant’s just and proper relief and damages incurred herein at a value of 3 times the cost of the contract, $92,115 due to the unfair deceptive business practices and fraud demonstrated by the Plaintiff in concealment of actual product details.3.For such other and further relief as the Court seems just in the premises.
Reason of review: Problem with delivery.