Online survey results from the mock mold trial have been tallied. (See the March 25, 2002 cover story, “Mock Mold Trial Has Surprising Outcome,” for details and actual trial results.) The final online vote is:

Guilty: 74, Not Guilty: 21.

All comments received from survey respondents follow:


“While it is true the Johnsons are in a very small way responsible for some of the mold problems relating to their daughter’s illness, XYZ contractor had the greatest opportunity to offset the problems with the Johnsons’ daughter’s health. They should have replaced the ductwork, done a proper load calculation, and set the fan speed properly on the unit. XYZ had multiple opportunities to fix some of these problems and never completely or competently addressed them. I didn’t see in the article what specifically the Johnsons were asking for, but I believe XYZ should be responsible for all bills related to the daughter’s health, replacing the existing hvac system with a correctly sized system, eliminating the mold all through the house, and punitive damages for the pain and suffering the Johnsons have experienced as a result of this incompetent contractor.” — D. Adams, Petersburg, TN

“Two wrongs don’t make a right. Both the homeowner and the contractor were wrong. The contractor bent to pier pressure, same-size unit, cheaper job. The owner didn’t do his homework when warned of problems when he bought the home. They’re both guilty, but the contractor is an ‘hvac expert’ and should have had a heads up. No fine, but probation and community service (for XYZ). Take IAQ classes and speak to groups about IAQ.” — Skip Schembari, president, HVAC Performance Products, Inc., Pasadena, CA

“Any contractor should know by now to look for mold. Replacing all of the ductwork because of mold adds a lot of money to the bottom line but more importantly, it shows concerns for the welfare of your fellow man. Neglect is no excuse.” — Andy Morehead, service manager, Continental Mechanical, Honolulu, HI

“As an hvacr instructor, I hate to hear the argument that ‘That’s the way its always been done.’ Experience is not an indicator of expertise. I feel that it is the responsibility of hvac contractors to ensure that their technicians are properly trained and aware of the possible consequences of their actions (or inactions).” — Michael Chandlee, hvacr instructor, Tennessee Technology Center at Pulaski, Pulaski, TN

“XYZ saw the problem and then continued to let the problem increase. They did not clean and then seal the system properly. They did not size the system correctly, and they expanded the problem by increasing the cfm and putting in the high static filter. Guilty as charged.” — J.J. Smolen, Birmingham, MI

“Nobody wants to hear this — but a professional contractor is responsible for correct equipment sizing, correct airflow, and correct operation. A professional should never assume a mold problem will just go away.” — Dennis Gibbs, Rockford, IL

“This is a great way to point out the potential problems facing our industry today.” — Charles Wells, sales manager, Levy Service, Dallas, TX

“Seems like the company is more interested in making a quick buck than doing a proper job. It’s so easy for a contractor to take advantage of an unsuspecting client. The customer doesn’t understand the technical aspect of the installation and what can happen when it’s not engineered properly. The family should be compensated, but not for a million.” — Bill, pm administrator, Rochester, NY

“XYZ needs to get educated on how to help prevent the problems that occurred. If he doesn’t have the information, he should have called a mold remediation company to help solve the problem. As soon as he tried to solve the problem, and was paid for his service and didn’t get the problem solved he then became responsible for the whole situation. There are not a lot of guidelines out there for the hvac industry in this field, so it’s up to the contractors to educate themselves, by reading articles like this and then researching the solutions.” — Ron Getzschman, residential manager, Getzschman/Service Experts, Fremont, NE.

“There’s no excuse for not performing a heat gain study.” — John Gates, owner, JCG Burner Service, Maynard, MA

“Seeing this article now is kind of weird. Just this past Sunday, as I was scanning through the newspaper, there was a picture of a fairly new home with a big banner over the garage with the word “MOLD.” The owner placed the ad, with the picture, advertising the house as for sale. The guy even went as far as to state that the home was full of mold, and he had environmental statements to that effect. Curiosity got the best of me, so I drove by the house. It is in a new development, his is probably the first built in there. The house is only four to six months old, about 2,200 to 2,300 sq ft. Sure enough, above the garage, there is that big sign “MOLD,” but it does not appear anyone is living in the house now. The development is being built on what used to be a flat farm field. The house does have a crawl space. I thought about sending them this article, sort of anonymously, but only for about 2 seconds! I do not see much of a reason to pour gasoline on that fire. Thanks.” — Anthony Taylor, Owensboro, KY

“Because XYZ couldn’t match the old unit’s output, they should have run a load to get exact requirements. XYZ would have to take responsibility for the wrong blower speed and leaking ducts. They also should have put up a warning flag about the mold when the ducts were exposed during equipment changeout. The Johnsons should have told XYZ about the home improvements made and moisture problems prior to the equipment replacement. They should have done something about the moisture problem before buying the house. ABC Company should have made the owners aware, in writing, about the mold conditions in the ducts. The responsibility in this case should be shared by all parties, with XYZ getting the biggest piece.” — Jack Thompson, commercial service manager, James River Air Conditioning Co., Richmond, VA

“Contractor did not size the unit properly for their house.” — Roseanne Scutero, Sears, Winter Park, FL

“It was XYZ’s responsibility to prove to the homeowners there was mold problem that needed repair. He gave them the easy and cheap way to go and being uneducated about the mold, the Johnsons took it.” — Vicki Mengle, senior CSR, Habegger Corp., Cincinnati, OH

“Thought provoking, being responsible for the work you do and recommendations you make. Not a new concept, or is it? XYZ Co. sounds like an average company, not paying attention to the details. They didn’t fix the return problem when they knew it existed. XYZ could have come back to the customer after the fact, explaining the return problem, replacing the ductwork at extra cost. I think many companies in our industry have found themselves in similar situations. Maybe not as serious but definitely similar. Responsibility is the key, let the customer know the situation they are in, price out the proper repairs, etc. The customer and the contractor become part of the liability equation together. Indoor air quality is here to stay, customers want systems that keep them healthy. We should be in the business of providing these important services. Licensing for our industry is right around the corner, we’re dealing with quality of life issues here. We are the experts in this business and we can do the work correctly, charge accordingly, or we can go the way of XYZ Co., paying for your mistakes and getting a bad reputation.

“The mock trial has certainly brought to my full attention the need to better educate my staff to our new realities and then to purchase more insurance, just in case.” — Gerald Reilly, president, Maitland Air & Electric Co., Garfield, NJ “Every good contractor should take the time to perform a Manual J no matter what — even more so when the homeowners have preformed major home improvements like insulation and/or siding. The industry needs to make homeowners aware that any time this type of work is performed, the hvac system should be looked at to see if it still is working properly for the house after the improvements.” — Anthony McMurdo, technical outside sales, Johnstone Supply, Akron, OH

“Guilty, but not to the extent of $1 million. Although there should have been a load run on the structure and more importantly, the return problem should have been replaced and not taped. In this regard, XYZ is at fault. However, there was a moisture problem before XYZ got involved. We run into wet crawl spaces in the Atlanta/Carrollton area as well. When encountered, the entire duct system is replaces and sealed with mastic. If I were on the jury, I would have to place a great majority of the responsibility on the homeowner for not correcting the moisture problem before they moved into the dwelling.” — Don Thompson, Partner, Thompson Electric & Mechanical, Carrollton, GA

“XYZ failed to take enough care and followed up poorly. Homeowners contributed and are also somewhat responsible. Suggest that even if XYZ had done everything correctly that the ‘existing’ mold problem would still have continued and the daughter’s health problems may still have been evident. Would award only 25% or less of the amount requested.” — Dennis Klingele, Yakima, WA

“A load calc should have been completed. Never trust what’s there.” — Michelle Brown, HVAC Service Supervisor, ARS, Myrtle Beach, SC

“All companies in our industry need to adopt a simple policy of doing the job right the first time, don’t cut corners, and if you make a mistake, fix it and maintain your reputation.” — Chris Sturgis, Kansas City, MO

“It’s time for the contractors in this industry to be held strictly accountable for their actions. If they want to be paid a professional wage, then it is imperative that they give professional results and be held accountable to professional standards. The example used by Mr. Johnson’s attorney regarding the optometrist’s examination says it very well!” — Bob Lazarus, San Diego, CA

“The Johnsons gave the hvac company (XYZ) numerous chances to find the problem. They asked for a professional to do the job correctly and they did not get what they paid for. The load calc should have been done and they should have taken it more serious the second time.” — Tom Robinson, service manager, Climate Design, Clearwater, FL

“Both the contractor and the owner are guilty and share the responsibility. The contractor should have done a load calculation and owner should have not bought the house without having the moisture problems fixed.” — C. Sain, San Angelo, TX

“XYZ should have performed an accurate load calculation and been more particular about the return ductwork. There may have been other factors not presented, but based on what was given, I feel XYZ was remiss in their work.” — Robert W. Wood, owner, Ludlow Heating & Cooling Co., Bernardsville, NJ

“Guilty of ‘Contributory Negligence.’ If we’re going to hold ourselves out as professionals, then we must be accountable for situations like these.” — Richard Ciresi, president, Universal Installations, Inc., Louisville, KY

“As I read this I found this to be profoundly interesting in that being in the S.E. Texas area. A lot of the same circumstances can and do happen. At the company that I manage it is not only understood, but part of our policy that we are to never oversize any air conditioning system because of the problems that could occur as they did in this mock trial. This area (S.E. Texas) has been getting a lot of press about toxic mold problems. Toxic mold may not have been the problem here, but another type of mold was.

“Now the problem is, did XYZ Co. cause or add to the problem. Since the damp conditions did exist in the home at the time it was bought and the new homeowner was aware of the problem, does this prove that he was part to blame for this problem? Unfortunately ignorance of the situation does not excuse him (the homeowner) of some fault. Yet when XYZ came into the home to replace the system, they are the experts in both the public eye and the homeowners’ eyes. To not explain to the customer fully the condition of the home and what would happen if the system was not properly sized, even if you lost the job, would prove negligence on the part of XYZ. This would not only contribute to the problem but exasperate this situation to the point of causing an illness. Both parties would be to blame in this case, damages would be on both ends.

“Unfortunately, this is not how the law operates. XYZ would have, with the evidence provided, been found at fault. A finding of $1,000,000 would in my opinion be excessive. More likely would be the cost of the replacement of the equipment to proper size, the remediation cost of removing the mold, and medical treatment cost for the child until the child is certified in the best health possible, with some punitive award. I calculated that this cost would be in the approximate range of $300,000.

“Now something of interest. In my opinion the defense strategy was poor in concept. With no testimony from expert medical, toxicologist, engineering, etc., how could a jury have found anything different? What about the previous owners, did they have problems with air quality? Too many unanswered and open questions remain. This may have turned the preponderance of the evidence in favor of the defendant. Yet we can only go on what is presented.” — David Kunetka, president, DD Mechanical Services, Katy, TX

“The homeowner may have had some responsibility based on the home inspection report — but the hvac contractor is definitely at fault. Air conditioning by definition includes humidity control and IAQ. Installing an ‘air conditioning’ system without regard to the size, humidity problems, or correct airflow is certainly negligent and could easily be responsible for the health problems encountered. I hope this article serves as a real wake-up call to all contractors as to their real responsibility to their customers.” — David Garceau, Concord, NC

“I think $1 million is too much of a penalty for the hvac contractor. XYZ should install or pay for someone else to install a properly sized system as well as to replace the moldy ductwork. Also, all doctors’ bills should be reimbursed but that’s it. No pain and suffering for the family. The homeowner was aware of the mold and ductwork problems but was not discriminating enough.” — Greg Etheridge, Charlotte, NC

“XYZ should not have given Mr. Johnson the option to seal open ducts with high-quality duct tape. I never seen high-quality duct tape, nor have I seen duct tape stick to exposed ductwork for a prolonged period. It appears that XYZ wanted a job and they did not provide what the consumer needed (replacement of the return duct). Regardless of the oversized unit, they clearly were negligent in not providing Mr. Johnson with the proper information so he could make a sound decision. It is the responsibility of XYZ or any hvac company to inform the homeowner of any potential problems, and when these problems are not corrected properly, we are at fault.” — John Trecker, president, Aaron & Trecker Heating & Cooling Inc., Wheeling, IL

“XYZ hvac did not fix the leak in the return air duct, though they were paid for that service. This contributed to the daughter’s illness. The evaporator blower was set at the wrong speed, a responsibility of the installer is to provide a system that works as intended, they could have checked it the second time around. Insulating and sealing the house made it tighter, something XYZ should have taken into account by introducing more fresh air rather than oversizing the system. Contributory negligence on the part of the owner does not release XYZ from their professional and contractual responsibilities.” — Logan L. Cravens, director of Green Building Services, SERA Architects, Inc., Portland, OR

“Mold is one the top issue of IAQ, because 50% of the homes have mold. Contractors need to be more aware of IAQ problems and concerns.” — Lonnie Moore, Bruceville, IN

“XYZ was not negligent in replacing the unit with a 3-ton unit. They were replacing an existing unit at the homeowner’s request. XYZ was not necessarily made aware of the improvements made that reduced the load. The same goes for the high fan speed. Their shoddy repair work on the return duct constituted contributory negligence. XYZ was negligent in that they were called in to fix a mold problem and made recommendations to resolve the problem which the homeowner followed. Guilty — award plaintiff $200,000.” — Bill Marshall, New Hope, MN

“Upon finding mold, the duct system should have had a through inspection and corrections should have been made. Also, there should have been a heating-cooling load run on the home. Failure to do these things is criminal.” — James Contratto, Magnolia, AR

“I hate to give a guilty vote, especially when the owner opted for the low bid. He was given the information from the first contractor, that the size and the ductwork had problems. He could have done more homework on his own, and he aggravated the problems by sealing up the house and making it tighter.” — Grant D. Bowman, vice president, Bowman S/M Heating & A/C, Buffalo, MN

“As a homeowner, I rely on the ‘experts’ for an accurate appraisal and quality work, whatever it is that’s being done. This contractor took the easy way out by installing the same-size system and in a haphazard manner, at that. I’m reminded of a similar situation in which three contractors quoted me for three different-size units from the same oem (3-, 4-, and 5-ton) system for a new, whole-house a/c system. Who are we supposed to believe?” — John J. Williams, Long Valley, NJ

“The company should have performed a load calc on the house knowing that there was a humidity problem for the ductwork needing to be replaced.” — Dennis Hagerman, president, Comfort Design, Owensboro, KY

“I feel the contractor was guilty, but the homeowner should be held partially responsible as he was aware of the moisture problems from the start and failed to investigate or repair them.” — Paulette Hamel, construction administrator, Blackwell Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc., Pensacola, FL

“Guilty, but not for the entire problem. Homeowner should have taken care of damp crawl space.” — Grant Elder, estimator, ServiceMaster East, Wichita, KS

“XYZ has a responsibility to perform when paid for its service. Failure to properly do a load calculation was only their first mistake. Their [decision to] replace with like equipment is no defense. Companies like this are a detriment to responsible contractors everywhere.” — Frank Trapani, service manager, Service Refrigeration, Houston, TX

“This situation is caused by the dealer not providing or taking advantage of training. Times have changed and direct replacement is causing a lot of problems in the industry.” — Rick Goelz, sales manager — east TN, Apex Supply Co., Knoxville, TN

“It is contractors like XYZ that give all contractors a bad name. It is simple, They did not do their job. A heat load must be done on every job, no exceptions. How else can you truly do what is in the best interest of that customer. Shame on XYZ and any contractor who practices this same way.” — Chris Hukill, Comfort Consultant, Comfort Experts Inc., Ft. Worth, TX

“I believe more should have been done to control the obvious mold problem to begin with. Better return air quality would’ve solved most of the problem, plus lower fan speed. XYZ clearly is at fault for not upgrading the entire system or at least advising the Johnsons’ of their options.” — Gary Wade, HVAC service tech, Ceres, CA

“No assumptions should be made when assessing a structure. Everything we do can be checked and calculated.” — Brian Hobson, production manager, Comfort Experts, Fort Worth, TX

“Prescription without diagnostics is malpractice. We must stop selling boxes and start looking at the whole house. You can’t expect what you don’t inspect. Our firm is doing 40 plus mold inspections a week (for the last 24 months). Over 90% of what we find is installation and maintenance related. We performance test the hvac system using static pressure gauges, flow hoods and blower doors. Manual J load calcs are also done. Real air-infiltration rates are used (not a guess ). Duct leakage is measured and taken into account. Low airflow is so common it’s embarrassing. The most common question asked of me is, why didn’t the installing contractor tell me about this when they put it in?” — Thomas R. Mooney, Systems Analysis Consultant, CCAC Inc., Corpus Christi, TX

“Prescription without diagnosis is malpractice.” — Scottie Duvall, Consultant, Comfort Experts Inc., Ft. Worth, TX

“While the contractor should have performed a good! Manual J calculation, I believe the homeowner shares a small portion of the blame as he knowingly bought a house with moisture problems. I vote 90/10.” — Tom Schaefer, CMS, RSES & Controlled Environment Co., Kenmore, NY

“Been there, will never be put in that position again.” — Will James, service technician, Salem, OR

Not Guilty:

“Environmental health and safety is an area which most heating and air conditioning men are not qualified to advise. Although guilty of several infractions having to do with the quality of his craft, or lack thereof, Mr. Jones cannot be held up for $1,000,000 to cover the problems the homeowner has with the health of his family. In many cases, we find contractors who take short cuts and some who just don’t know very much about the trade they’re in. I have even known a couple of hvac guys who couldn’t read. (However), the homeowner took short cuts too, by accepting the lowest bid rather than taking the advice of a contractor who was obviously more knowledgeable than Mr. Jones. (The homeowner), too, was looking for the cheapest way out. Mr. Jones was hired to replace the heat pump, not practice medicine. The only thing Mr. Jones is guilty of is, not being very good at what he chooses to do for a living. I believe a lot of the responsibility is the homeowner’s, and, as always, let the buyer beware, even of himself.” — L.D. Thomas, project manager, Peoria, IL

“Did XYZ Company know, ahead of time, about the improvements to the home’s envelope?” — Keith Porter, Dallas, TX

“The homeowner knew the problem when he bought the house. Everyone wants to find a scapegoat these days and then sue the pants off them. Why don’t we start taking responsibility for ourselves and stop blaming others. I think that company tried their best to help the situation. We are all human and we can all make mistakes, just like Mr. Johnson buying this house with a mold problem.” — Laureen Coleman, Norwich, NY

“Once mold enters an area, it continues to grow. Mold can only be removed or neutralized. Seal or repair to the return duct would not have stopped the mold from growing in the rest of the ductwork system. Even if the portion of the return duct had been replaced by ABC Company, the system was already contaminated with mold. The higher fan speed has nothing to do with the contamination of the ductwork. Higher fan speed is recommended from most a/c manufacturers. XYZ Company replaced what the Johnsons wanted: a 3-ton air conditioner. XYZ Company made a reasonable effort to remedy a lost situation within the Johnsons’ economic situation. A-OK Company found air leaks in other areas of the ductwork (including elbows). The Johnsons should have been more educated about mold and its complications from their doctors. The Johnsons should have demanded removal and neutralization of the ductwork for the mold. It is up to the Johnsons to make the right decision about their home. They chose to spend less money for the problem. Neither, ABC, XYZ or A-OK ever recommended the Johnsons to replace or neutralize the ductwork system. XYZ Company did nothing wrong intentionally.” — Wilfredo N. Jose, president, Aircool Mechanical System, Inc., Miami, FL

“The mold and wet crawl space were pre-existing conditions in the residence, and even if the contractor had cleaned and sealed the duct, and correctly sized the a/c, there is no guarantee it would have removed the mold.” — Louis Stately, president, Urbana Aired, Inc., Ijamsville, MD

“XYZ company did the work as described in their estimate form, and the customer signed their approval. The ABC Company said the return duct should be replaced, as well as the system capacity could be reduced. Obviously ABC did a thorough evaluation of the system and cooling requirements of the house. The Johnsons probably chose XYZ company because their work was at a cheaper price. What this industry needs more than anything is for the customers to be presented with all the facts so they can make the right decisions when service is performed on their equipment. When this happens, liability should be removed from the contractor, and the companies that perform thorough evaluations and estimates can receive the compensation they deserve for these services.” — Brian Behan, Washington, MO

“The homeowner was fully aware of an existing moisture problem under his house. He was also informed of the duct irregularity with mold being noted. When given the choice of a free patch job verses having to pay $400 more to properly correct the problem, he chose to try to get something for free.” — James Cherry, a/c supervisor, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA

“I don’t think the XYZ Company should be held totally or responsible at all; the homeowner should not have been so ignorant of his house’s condition as far as having a wet crawlspace and holes in his ductwork. Since they made his house tighter with less infiltration of outdoor air did they make a new way to get that fresh air. It seems like nowadays, everybody wants to put the blame on someone other than themselves. The XYZ Company was there to replace an air conditioner and not to solve a mold problem; maybe if the customer said upfront, ‘Hey we have a mold problem, could you help,’ XYZ could have helped.” — Morris, service tech, Yakima, WA

“By the letter of the current (law), this company should be found not guilty because Mr. Johnson had the choice to go with The ABC Company.” — Stephen Hagerman, vice president, Comfort Design, Owensboro, KY

“I feel Mr. Johnson did what many homeowners would do, took the bigger unit for a cheap price. ABC quoted return trunk repairs, XYZ was going to ‘tape’ the return duct. ABC noted that ‘portions of the return duct were contaminated with mold.’ Mr. Johnson was aware of a pre-existing mold problem from the homeowner’s inspection. With this knowledge, Mr. Johnson accepted a proposal to tape the return duct.

“Problems I see with the sizing of the unit and the installation: It is typical to replace an existing unit with one of similar size. (Our company does 98% industrial-commercial work. When ‘big shots’ need a unit replaced, we usually put in the same size we took out. It would probably take me a week to find my load forms.) Most small air handlers come prewired for high-speed fan operation in cooling. By the time this got to the point of installing the filter, I would have recommended replacing the return ductwork.” — J. Koncz, service manager, Binsky & Snyder Service, Piscataway, NJ

“More info is needed for a guilty verdict. If the info was more complete then it could very easily go the other way, though. I would be more than happy to tell you the points that are lacking to this case, but time and space here does not allow it.” — John Worrell, president, Southwest Air Technologies, Inc., Norman, OK

“A moldy condition doesn’t cause asthma, it reveals that a person has asthma. The condition existed before and all inspections showed it, also XYZ tried to fix the problem. The homeowner is more negligent than all because he knew the condition and the effect to Tricia.” — Emmett E. Bills, hvac tech, Davis Applied Tech. College, Roy, UT

“The recommendation for mold abatement made by ABC Company amounts to anecdotal information unless they are a ‘certified’ IAQ specialist. If the customer had concerns about the mold, why did they wait unit it became a serious problem? To what degree did the customer’s lifestyle contribute the severity of the problem?” — Dean Dyatt, hvac tech, Davis Applied Tech. College, Fruit Heights, UT

“You can find fault on both sides of this case.” — Bobby Butcher, Lafayette, LA

“Although I voted not guilty of gross negligence, the installing company was very guilty of poor prep work and thorough follow through after the problem was made know to them. Very similar to a lot of companies doing business on today’s market. The get-the-money-and-run approach to the hvac market gives the more reputable companies a hard way to go. When bidding against companies that fully intend to take the short cuts, even if they know they are not delivering the best service, the more reputable company will loose. People seem to take the lower price in this bargain-based world. Of course I have a hard time feeling sorry for them when they get what they pay for and are left holding the bag. ‘Let the buyer beware’ is still true.” — Mike Burns, operations manager, Weinkauf P&H, Alpena, MI

“Everyone makes mistakes.” — Jamie Widrig, Ripplemead, VA

“ABC obviously did a more thorough inspection of the system however the mold issue was The Johnsons responsibility to tell XYZ. XYZ was obviously unaware of the mold problem but they were aware of the duct leaks which they fixed as a good Samaritan to the customer. The gash in the duct could have been made by a person or animal long after XYZ fixed the duct leaks. XYZ replaced the unit with a comparable unit based on common industry practices. Again, XYZ doesn’t know the history of what improvements the Johnsons made to the home. The Johnsons could have went with ABC. Nobody twisted their arm to hire XYZ, showing that they trusted XYZ and they were looking for the better deal. If there was concern about health issues, the Johnsons should have had a home inspector or an expert in the field of indoor air quality make a suggestion as to what should be done and the Johnsons could then relate that information to any company giving them an estimate.” — Antonio Poccia, field supervisor, Perfection Contracting, Newton, NJ

“A simple guilty verdict is too one-sided and harsh on the contractor. A guilty verdict with a light settlement cost would be fair (not the million dollar reward to the plaintiff).” — Christopher Jean, Santa Barbara, CA

“The contractor had three chances to find the real problem. The fact that he used industry-standard duct tape on the bad piece of duct just isn’t enough unless told to repair in that manor by the customer and then he still had the chance to walk. If I, a customer, ask you to do less-than-good work, you can walk rather than lower your standard of work or ethics.” — Jesse Knoll, owner, Jesse’s Service, Sault Sainte Marie, MI

Publication date: 03/25/2002