Steri Clean,Crime Scene,Hoarders, Cory Chalmers Kristen Folding Steri Clean NC Steri Clean SC Sempre Avancando Bene Vivere Hoarders-exposed.com Rancho Cucamongo,Raleigh, Columbia CA, NC, SC California, North Carolina, South Carolina

The only way to address the Steri Clean rebuttal is each untrue statement line by line. In the first paragraph it states that I “attempted” to file a lawsuit, I did file a lawsuit against Steri Clean, Cory Chalmers, Kristen Folding, Martin Folding, Marty Folding, & the 2 franchises involved in the sale of my franchise. You can reference that through the NC Business Court case # 18 CvS1472 & 18 CvS1436. The case is still going through the court system. Following is a small parsing of 1 of the complaints filed.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Breach of Contract)

 

91. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through the paragraph

immediately preceding this paragraph.

 

92. The Franchise Disclosure Document of defendant Steri-Clean, Inc. contains

the following TERRITORY clause and guarantee that plaintiff would have an exclusive

territory and defendant Steri-Clean, Inc. would not authorize any other franchisee to

operate in plaintiff’s territory:

 

In the franchise agreement, we will grant you an Exclusive Territory

for your Service in which, except for the rights reserved below, we will not

 

authorize any other franchisee or affiliate to operate, operate any company-

owned Service, or allow any other STERI-CLEAN® franchisee, affiliate or

 

company-owned Service to operate. You will have the exclusive right to

provide service at sites within your Territory and the exclusive right to use

advertising or marketing communications that are primarily directed to

clients within your Territory, subject to our rights reserved below. We may

not modify your territory without your written consent.

93. In North Carolina and many states, every contract has a covenant of good

faith and fair dealings. Defendants breached the covenant of good faith and fair

dealings. The Steri-Clean Franchise Agreement contains an express covenant of good

faith, which was breached by defendant Steri-Clean, Inc. with the cooperation and

inducement of the Foldings.

94. All defendants, directly or by virtue of piercing the corporate veil, are liable

to plaintiff, directly or by virtue of piercing the corporate veil, agency, as co-conspirators

or co-ventures, or otherwise under the legal theory of breach of contract for all losses

and damages sustained by plaintiff, which losses and damages were the direct,

proximate and foreseeable result of defendants' breach of contract and which include

incidental and consequential damages in an amount in excess of $25,000.00.

 

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Wrongful Termination of Franchise Rights)

 

95. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through the paragraph

immediately preceding this paragraph.

 

15

 

96. Plaintiff Rodney Etheridge purchased from defendant Steri-Clean,

Inc. for $35,000 the right to a Steri-Clean franchise with exclusive rights to service

Steri-Clean customers and a large portion of North Carolina from the coast

through Alamance County. Plaintiff also paid defendant Steri-Clean $1,000 for

technology rights. Plaintiff also invested a great deal of time, effort, and monies

into developing the franchise territory.

 

97. Plaintiff and defendant Cory Chalmers, owner and President of Steri-

Clean, Inc. had differences on occasion, especially related to marketing matters

 

and Google AdWords.

98. Defendant Cory Chalmers, owner and President of Steri-Clean, Inc.,

had the Steri-Clean attorney threaten plaintiff with termination of his franchise

rights and send to plaintiff on February 17, 2017 an improper, incorrect “stay of

termination”—when there was no termination in effect. The Steri-Clean

Franchise Agreement contains a procedure for dispute resolution, plaintiff denies

he was in default, and Steri-Clean failed to use any of required Direct Negotiation,

Mediation, or Arbitration rights to resolve differences. The “stay of termination”

was conditioned on plaintiff complying with defendant Chalmers demands that

plaintiff sell his franchise rights to another existing Steri-Clean franchisee for the

sum of $35,000.

99. Under threat of the “stay of termination” letter, plaintiff and

 

defendants arrived at an agreement, whereby plaintiff would sell plaintiff’s Steri-

Clean North Carolina franchise rights to another existing franchisee for $35,000,

 

being less than the $36,000 plaintiff paid at the outset for no less than its value

based on money and time invested.

 

100. There never was a termination prior to April 25, 2017, when Steri-

Clean’s attorney sent a termination letter “effective immediately,” and it was

 

illogical to “stay” a termination that had never occurred. But the February 17,

2017 “stay of termination” letter, by a Steri-Clean attorney, would lead any lay

person to believe and it led Mr. Etheridge to believe that the termination had

taken place, he had already lost all rights under the franchise agreement for

which he paid $35,000 plus $1,000 plus additional costs and efforts, and out of the

goodness of his heart, Cory Chalmers was staying the termination if but only if

Mr. Etheridge sold to Kristen Folding—for the $35,000 figure and with closing

within thirty (30) days.

 

16

 

101. An oral agreement was reached between the proposed seller and

 

proposed buyer, and a contract by Steri-Clean’s attorney was prepared by Steri-

Clean’s attorney in complete, agreed form. On the very eve of the actual sale,

 

after all contracts were readied for signing and funds were ready for filing, before

any termination of plaintiff’s Steri-Clean North Carolina franchise rights,

defendant Cory Chalmers, acting for defendant Steri-Clean, sold to plaintiff’s

buyer plaintiff’s Steri-Clean North Carolina franchise rights.

102. Defendants had no lawful right whatsoever to sell to plaintiff’s buyer

the franchise rights Steri-Clean had already sold to plaintiff for $35,000, and

defendants expressly agreed to the stay of termination of plaintiff’s franchise

rights. Those rights were contract rights, rights to territories, intangible property

rights, intellectual property rights, and rights to income producing property.

Defendant Cory Chalmers himself talked of a Steri-Clean franchise having a value

of $250,000 to $350,000. Defendants, by virtue of wrongful termination of

plaintiff’s franchise rights, are liable to plaintiff for wrongful termination of

plaintiff’s franchise rights. The acts of defendants were deliberate, intentional,

willful, wonton, malicious and wrongful, and made with reckless disregard for the

assets and property rights of plaintiff. Defendants are liable to plaintiff for

compensatory damages and punitive damages in excess of $25,000.

 

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

 

(Fraud and Misrepresentation; Fraud in the Inducement)

103. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through the paragraph

immediately preceding this paragraph.

104. Defendants engaged in fraud, fraud by omission, negligent

misrepresentation and reckless misrepresentation.

105. Defendants Steri-Clean, Inc. and Cory A. Chalmers as its owner and

President, through oral and written statement and representations, fraudulently

induced plaintiff Rodney Etheridge to become a franchisee. They did so by

misrepresenting orally the reasonably expected revenues and profits of the franchise,

misrepresenting the time before substantial revenues and profits would be produced by

the franchise, misrepresenting the amount and quality of training and support

Steri-Clean would supply in order for a franchisee to be successful early on and recoup

the initial investment and continued capital requirements, and misrepresenting the

value of the franchise.

106. Defendant Chalmers orally boasted to plaintiff that defendant Steri-Clean,

Inc.’s least-producing franchisee was doing $250,000 per year, and Steri-Clean’s biggest

was doing $600,000-plus per year, leading plaintiff to believe he could recoup up-front

fees very quickly.

 

17

 

107. Defendants also failed to disclose the ease with which defendant

Steri-Clean, Inc. could “pull the plug,” keep the franchisee’s upfront $36,000 in fees, and

resell the same franchise to another, instead using language like “good faith” and          

resolutions of disputes by “Direct Negotiations” and “Mediation.”

108. These misrepresentations, especially about how quickly revenues and

profits from the franchise would be coming in, induced plaintiff to buy the Steri-Clean

North Carolina franchise rights, pay $36,000 he did not have, and use nine (9) credit

cards to pay the initial $35,000 franchise fee and the $1,000 technology fee.

109. Defendants knew about plaintiff’s inadequate capital from the outset as

Steri-Clean accepted the $36,000 in payments from plaintiff on nine (9) different credit

cards. In addition, defendant Cory Chalmers spoke extensively with plaintiff about use

of the cards, exchanged emails with plaintiff about use of the cards, pressed plaintiff to

get all credit card payments made by a deadline, and discussed with plaintiff who at

headquarters could process the credit card payments. Defendants have since denied

knowing plaintiff used to pay the franchise fee the very credit cards that defendants

accepted.

110. When in fact plaintiff’s Steri-Clean franchise, predictably, did not promptly

produce sufficient funds to pay all new and continuing expenses or to repay the $36,000

plus, high credit card interest rates and did not produce the revenue to pay required

$3,000 per month marketing contributions, defendants responded by cutting off

plaintiff’s supply of leads. Ultimately defendants put sufficient pressure on plaintiff

that plaintiff agreed to sell his franchise rights to another existing franchisee, with prior

defendants’ approval and indeed as suggested by defendants. Then, on the eve of the

sale, unbeknownst to plaintiff, defendants did a direct sale of plaintiff’s rights to the

would-be buyer from plaintiff, leaving plaintiff with nothing to sell and no Steri-Clean

franchise to make back his $36,000 investment, additional invested capital, and for all

of his time and effort.

111. Defendants fraudulently induced plaintiff to enter the Steri-Clean

Franchise Agreement as stated above and also fraudulently represented they would act

in good faith and use an orderly manner of resolving problems and disputes. Plaintiff

reasonable relied upon these representations in entering the Steri-Clean Franchise

Agreement, in working the territory, in paying the up-front $35,000 plus $1,000, and

in using credit cards to do so.

112. Defendants induced plaintiff to believe they intended to have the Foldings

buy plaintiff’s Steri-Clean North Carolina franchise rights for the distressed price of

$35,000. In fact, defendants falsely so represented and defendants had no intention of

approving such a sale. By falsely representing their intent to broker, facilitate, and

approve a sale of plaintiff’s franchise rights in North Carolina, defendants received the

full and complete cooperation of plaintiff in transferring valuable opportunities and in

 

18

 

coordinating with defendant Cory Chalmers and defendant Cory Chalmers’ attorney.

 

Most importantly, the Foldings were able to move quickly into plaintiff’s exclusive Steri-

Clean North Carolina territory much earlier, without any objection by plaintiff. Then,

 

on the eve of closing and with a new Steri-Clean franchisee having operations under way

in North Carolina, defendants no longer needed plaintiff’s cooperation or feared reprisal

for having the Foldings operating in plaintiff’s territory.

113. The subsequent conduct of the defendants as detailed in this Complaint

reveal that the representations made by defendants Cory Chalmers and Steri-Clean,

Inc., and agents and co-conspirators were made with defendants having no intent of

complying with them, and those representations were falsely made with defendants

knowing of the falsity of those representations at the time they were made or were made

with reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the statements.

114. Defendants made these false promises and representations and fraudulent

inducements with the intention that they be relied upon by plaintiff.

115. Plaintiff reasonably relied upon these false promises and representations

in entering into the Steri-Clean Franchise Agreement and the Asset Purchase

Agreement to sell plaintiff’s Steri-Clean North Carolina franchise rights to defendant

Steri-Clean, Inc.’s hand-picked buyer for $35,000 and then cooperating with defendants

and the Foldings and allowing the Foldings to operate in plaintiff’s North Carolina

territory.

116. As a result of plaintiff's reliance upon the representations and promises of

defendants and the fraudulent inducements, plaintiff has been damaged in an amount

in excess of $25,000.00.

117. Defendants allowed plaintiff to enter lengthy negotiations leading to a

contract and give up valuable exclusive franchise rights in North Carolina while

believing plaintiff was entering a contract with Kristen Folding to be paid $35,000 for

plaintiff’s rights and said defendants did nothing to inform plaintiff that defendant Cory

Chalmers would thwart the sale and plaintiff was not going to get $35,000, if in fact he

was not. Under the circumstances there arose a duty to speak, and the failure to do so

by said defendants was a fraud by omission. Furthermore, said defendants were

negligent in so acting, and the negligence of said defendants was the proximate cause

of plaintiff’s reliance and subsequent losses.

118. The acts and omissions of defendants Cory Chalmers and Steri-Clean, Inc.

and their agents and co-conspirators and co-ventures, through piercing the corporate

veil or otherwise were deliberate, intentional, willful, wanton, malicious and wrongful,

or made in reckless disregard for their truth or falsity and plaintiff is entitled to recover

from defendants’ punitive damages in a sum in excess of $25,000.00 as a result of the

promises, representations, and misrepresentations set forth above and in this Complaint.

 

19

 

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Conversion of Franchise/Property Rights)

 

119. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through the paragraph

immediately preceding this paragraph.

120. Plaintiff Etheridge paid $36,000 on June 6, 2016 for his valuable exclusive

Steri-Clean North Carolina franchise rights, and he spent many hours and much money

developing his business. Defendant Cory Chalmers, owner and President of defendant

Steri-Clean, Inc. himself stated that an up-and going Steri-Clean franchise has a value

of $250,000 to $350,000.

121. When defendants knowingly conspired with others to take, convert, and

unlawfully acquire or allow and facilitate another in taking, converting, and unlawfully

acquiring the valuable exclusive Steri-Clean North Carolina franchise rights of plaintiff

Etheridge, including his exclusive rights in the valuable North Carolina territory desired

by defendants, and when $25,000 was paid to the defendants for doing so, defendants

converted and aided and abetted others in converting the valuable intangible intellectual

property rights of plaintiff Etheridge.

122. Defendants directly, by virtue of piercing the corporate veil or otherwise as

agents, co-ventures, co-conspirators, or otherwise are liable to plaintiff Etheridge under

the legal theory of conversion for the improper taking and aiding and abetting the

improper taking of property and intellectual property rights as detailed in this

Complaint and as otherwise shown at trial. The acts of defendants were deliberate,

intentional, willful, wonton, malicious and wrongful, and made with reckless disregard

for the assets and property rights of plaintiff. Defendants are liable to plaintiff for

compensatory damages and punitive damages in excess of $25,000.

 

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Conspiracy to Defraud)

 

123. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through the paragraph

immediately preceding this paragraph.

124. On information and belief, defendants conspired with each other and others

as described in this Complaint to deny to plaintiff the agreed $35,000 or the full value

of plaintiff’s Steri-Clean North Carolina franchise rights, the defendants conspired to do

unlawful acts or to do lawful acts in an unlawful manner. The conduct of the defendants

as alleged in this Complaint constitute acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.

 

125. As conspirators, the acts of each conspirator becomes the acts of each co-

conspirator.

 

20

 

126. Defendants Cory A. Chalmers and Steri-Clean, Inc. are liable to plaintiff

for conspiracy to commit torts (conversion, fraud, defamation, intentional

interference) and unfair and deceptive acts and for acts in furtherance of the conspiracy

for an amount in excess of $25,000.00 for all expenses, losses, and damages plaintiff has

suffered as a result of defendants' acts in furtherance of the conspiracy, and defendants

are liable for punitive damages.

 

SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Intentional Interference With Contract/

Intentional Interference with Prospective Advantage)

 

127. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through the paragraph

immediately preceding this paragraph.

128. A valid oral and written contract existed between the plaintiff and Kristen

Folding and her just formed limited liability company, Bene Vivere, LLC, defendants

had knowledge of the valid contract, defendants intentionally induced breach of the said

 

contract, defendants acted without justification or privilege, defendants acted out of self-

interest and greed, and received $25,000 for their tortious actions, and defendants’

 

conduct caused the plaintiff actual damages.

129. If indeed no contract between plaintiff and Kristen Folding or Bene Vivere,

LLC existed, defendants remain liable for intentional interference with prospective

advantage as their intentional, tortious misconduct causing plaintiff to lose the $35,000

he would have received from the sale to Kristen Folding or Bene Vivere, LLC.

130. Defendants intentionally and without justification interfered with the

contract between plaintiff and Kristen Folding and Bene Vivere, LLC with full

knowledge of the existence of said contract, and defendants induced Kristen Folding and

Bene Vivere, LLC to terminate the contract with plaintiff. The acts of defendants were

deliberate, intentional, willful, wonton, malicious and wrongful, and made with reckless

disregard for the assets and property rights of plaintiff. Defendants are liable to plaintiff

for compensatory damages and punitive damages in excess of $25,000.

131. Defendants directly, by virtue of piercing the corporate veil or otherwise,

as agents, co-ventures, co-conspirators, or otherwise are liable to plaintiff Etheridge

under the legal theories of inducing wrongful termination of franchise, intentional

interference with contract, and intentional interference with prospective advantage as

detailed in this Complaint and as otherwise shown at trial. The acts of defendants were

deliberate, intentional, willful, wonton, malicious and wrongful, and made with reckless

disregard for the assets and property rights of plaintiff.

132. As a result of the wrongful interference by defendants with the plaintiffs'

contract with Kristen Folding and Bene Vivere, LLC, defendants are liable to plaintiff

under the legal doctrine of tortious interference with contract and otherwise as set forth

 

21

 

above for all losses, expenses, damages and injury, including mental and emotional

anguish and distress, that plaintiff has suffered as a result of said defendants deliberate

and intentional tortious interference with contract and otherwise as set forth above. As

a direct and proximate result of the wrongful interference, plaintiff sustained losses in

excess of $25,000.00 as described in this Complaint. Plaintiff is further entitled to

punitive damages in an amount in excess of $25,000.

 

SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Defamation–Libel & Slander)

 

133. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through the paragraph

immediately preceding this paragraph.

134. The statements by defendants Cory A. Chalmers, Steri-Clean, Inc., and

their agents, co-conspirators, and co-ventures accusing plaintiff Etheridge of

misappropriating funds from the Marla Ainspan job, violating the Franchise Agreement,

misuse of business opportunities in the Steri-Clean name, all for his personal benefit and

to the detriment of defendant Steri-Clean, Inc. were libelous and slanderous, and each

repeating and re-publishing of those statements was a new libel and slander.

135. Defendants and their agents, co-conspirators and co-ventures made and

published and continued to make and publish and re-publish false statements to the

effect that plaintiff misappropriated funds from the Marla Ainspan job, violated the

Franchise Agreement, misused business opportunities in the Steri-Clean name, all for

his personal benefit and to the detriment of defendant Steri-Clean, Inc. Those

 

statements and others were libelous and slanderous, and each repeating and re-

publishing of those statements was a new libel and slander. These statements resulted

 

in damage to plaintiff’s employment and profession and position in the community. The

effects of the false statements and accusations were to cause plaintiff great mental and

emotional distress, shame, humiliation, and embarrassment and to injure him in his

credit, reputation and business.

 

136. On information and belief, defendants communicated and published and re-

published among themselves, orally and in writing, and to others the untrue statements,

 

claims, allegations, and characterizations, directly or through their agents, among

themselves and to others; and as a direct result of these statements made by the

defendants, plaintiff was to unable continue as a Steri-Clean franchisee or to obtain

employment of the like and kind he had held prior to the statements made by

defendants.

137. With all of the undisputed facts at his disposal and with Kristen Folding

knowing her own company did the Marla Ainspan job, with Kristen Folding’s own

company records and royalty payments no doubt reflecting her company did the Marla

Ainspan job, defendants Cory Chalmers and Steri-Clean, Inc. and its agents repeated

 

22

 

and republished time and again the fabricated “Marla Ainspan” story over and over for

a period of months, all to justify keeping $25,000 of the proceeds of the sale of plaintiff

Etheridge’s territory and franchise rights. The false, derogatory, and defamatory

statements, oral and written, about plaintiff Etheridge and the attacks on his integrity

have caused tremendous emotional distress, pain and suffering to plaintiff Etheridge

and damage to his business and personal reputation.

138. Steri-Clean and its President, owner, and agents created pretextual

reasons for having terminated the Franchise Agreement with plaintiff Etheridge, his

franchise rights in the North Carolina territory having already been transferred to

Kristien Folding or Bene Vivere, LLC, an LLC owned or controlled by Kristen Folding.

139. Defendants and their agents, co-conspirators, co-ventures made and

repeated for months, vicious, false statements about plaintiff Etheridge and accused him

of improper conduct, lacking in integrity, and essentially stealing from defendant

Steri-Clean, Inc. a business opportunity. The false, defamatory statements about the

“the Marla Ainspan job” were made and published among the participants in the March,

2017 sale of plaintiff’s franchise rights to justify seizing and keeping the bulk of the

$35,000 that was under the February 17, 2017 offer accepted by plaintiff to be paid to

plaintiff Etheridge for his legal rights in his franchise territory in North Carolina.

Those false statements were made for the purpose of avoiding the agreement under the

terms of which plaintiff Etheridge was to sell to Kristen Folding’s company for $35,000

his lawful interest as a franchisee of Steri-Clean, Inc. with a desirable territory in North

Carolina

140. The statements made by Defendants were untrue, were made with malice,

and were made for the purpose of justifying the irrational firings of the Plaintiffs were

per se slanderous and defamatory, subjecting the Plaintiffs to ridicule, odium, contempt

and disgrace, and as a direct result thereof, Plaintiffs were prejudiced in their business

and damaged in their character and reputations. Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs for

slander and defamation for compensatory and punitive damages in an amount in excess

of $25,000.00 to be proven at trial.

 

EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

 

(Chapter 75)

 

141. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through the paragraph

immediately preceding this paragraph.

142. The actions of defendants Cory Chalmers and Steri-Clean, Inc. in coercing

plaintiff to sell his valuable Steri-Clean North Carolina franchise rights to the Foldings

by using and misusing threats of defaults and by falsely claiming to “stay termination”

by Steri-Clean attorney letter was an unfair and deceptive act or practice.

143. Defendant Steri-Clean, Inc. purported belatedly and after the fact to

“terminate” the franchise agreement with plaintiff Etheridge and then to justify the

 

23

 

direct sale of plaintiff’s lawful franchise rights by repeating the defamation. The

“termination” itself was a continuation of the unfair and deceptive acts and an effort to

hide the fact that on March 24/25, 2017, defendant Cory Chalmers and Kristen Folding

cemented a deal they obviously had worked out in earlier days and weeks and before the

“termination.”

144. After the false story about the “Marla Ainspan job” was fabricated and

made the pretextual reason for refusing to approve the very sale defendant Cory

Chalmers had brokered, Kristen Folding’s company in fact bought the territory from and

paid defendants Steri-Clean, Inc./Cory Chalmers and acquired from it/him the very

franchise territory in North Carolina that was in fact at that time the lawful franchise

territory of plaintiff Etheridge. It was not until a month after the Steri-Clean-Folding

sale on March 24, 2017, being April 25, 2017, that the alleged “Termination” of plaintiff

Etheridge’s rights occurred.

145. The conduct of the defendants--including but not limited to the willful and

deliberate breach of contract, the fraud and misrepresentation, conversion of

franchise/property rights, the conspiracy, the defamation to justify their tortious conduct,

the intentional interference with contract and wrongful termination of a franchise, and

the inequitable assertion of the defendants' power and positions--exhibit bad faith, offend

established public policy, were unethical, oppressive and substantially injurious to

plaintiff, constitute intentional wrongdoings and deception and substantial aggravating

circumstances, and constitute unfair or deceptive acts and practices in or affecting

commerce as are declared unlawful under North Carolina General Statutes Section 75-

1.1.

146. Plaintiff is an entity who was and continues to be injured by reason of the

acts and things done by the defendants in violation of the N.C.G.S. Chapter 75 and is

thus, entitled to a cause of action for injury done, and pursuant to N.C.G.S. Section 75-16,

treble damages of the amount fixed by the verdict and pursuant to N.C.G.S. Section 75-

16.1, reasonable attorney fees.

147. Defendants are liable to plaintiff for unfair and deceptive acts for all

expenses, losses, damages, and injury plaintiff has suffered because of their acts and to

treble damages.

148. Plaintiff is entitled to attorney fees as a) defendants violated N.C.G.S.

Chapter 75, b) defendants willfully engaged in the act or practice complained of, c) there

was an unwarranted refusal by defendants to fully resolve the matter which constitutes

the basis of the Chapter 75 complaint, and d) plaintiff suffered actual injury as a result

of the Chapter 75 violation.

 

24

 

WHEREFORE, the plaintiff demands judgment:

1. That the Court disregard the corporate entity as to defendant Steri-Clean,

Inc., as appropriate to avoid injustice, and declare defendant Cory A. Chalmers

 

personally, liable for the contract and other obligations of corporate defendant Steri-

Clean, Inc.

 

2. That defendants, jointly and severally, be required to pay plaintiff a sum

in excess of $25,000.00 for compensatory damages.

3. That defendants, jointly and severally, be required to pay plaintiff a sum

in excess of $25,000.00 as punitive damages.

4. That the conveyance of plaintiff’s Steri-Clean North Carolina franchise

rights be set aside, all revenues earned be paid to plaintiff Etheridge as the proper owner

of the franchised territory in North Carolina, and are that the court enter a preliminary

injunction and permanent injunction enjoining all defendants from operating in

plaintiff’s North Carolina territory.

5. That defendants pay plaintiff treble damages pursuant to N.C.G.S. Chapter

75.

6. That defendants pay plaintiff fair and reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant

to N.C.G.S. Section 75-16.1.

7. That the Court grant plaintiff such other relief as the Court shall deem just

and proper.

8. That the Court grant plaintiff injunctive relief and such other relief as the

Court shall deem just and proper based on all claims for relief recognizable at law under

the facts alleged in this Complaint, as further developed through discovery or at trial.

 

Next is the statement” why he couldn’t advertise on Google”. I did advertise on Google which I have the receipts to prove that, so that is untrue. I did fall into 5th place for 1 week and was put in default for that, which I corrected. Also, “why he wouldn’t hold a grand opening” during a conversation at corporate headquarters in California, Mr. Chalmers agreed that it was not mandatory to do a grand opening. So, that was the reason for no grand opening.

All of the defaults that we were sent were cleared but 1 and that was solely due to lack of funds. The defaults were voided by Mr. Chalmers when he decided to Broker a deal for my franchise and he “Stayed the Termination”, which there was no Termination so how he stayed it has many lawyers puzzled.

Mr. Chalmers then makes a claim that I opened a mirroring company to pocket the money. In fact, the company he is referring to was owned by my son & wife. The company was for home repairs and staging homes to sell. So yet again, another false malicious lie was made up about me and has been put on the internet. The slander has not stopped since Mr. Chalmers decided to cut me out of the sell of my franchise and leave me with all of the debt.  “The customers that were sent estimates out of the Steri Clean system,” that is what the original reason Mr. Chalmers stated was why he took over the sell and cut me out. However, through a sworn affidavit it was proven that in fact the customer that Mr. Chalmers accused me of doing and taking the money-it was documented that the purchaser of my franchise Mrs. Folding in fact, did said customer and I assume paid Mr. Chalmers his fees. Again, slanderous lies stated about me to degrade my character and try to force me to back off.

As far as our estimate contact information and forms of payment. First, contact information listed on our invoices was our independent franchise email that we used due to our company email did not work because of software issues, which we corrected. Addressing the forms of payment, we used 2 forms of payment PayPal and cash avoiding charge backs on checks. I believe that our payment requirements were very reasonable and are inline with multiple other national franchises. (You cannot write a check at Chick-fil-a) Just because someone does not take checks does not mean they are taking money.

I will not repeat hearsay, or state anything I cannot document-so no what I am saying is not “unbelievable manufactured lies”. I can only speak of my experience with Mr. Chalmers and Steri Clean. If you are considering purchasing a franchise from Mr. Chalmers, I could NOT and would NOT recommend that you do so.

The claims made against Steri-Clean Inc., its owners and one of its franchises are completely untrue. Mr. Etheridge attempted to file a lawsuit, but it had no merit and he has not won anything from us. Mr. Etheridge did purchase a franchise for us to clean hoarding homes, as well as death and trauma scenes in an amazing territory. Unfortunately for Mr. Etheridge he did not believe in following a proven business model which is what a franchise is all about. He continually made excuses why he couldn't get his email to work, and why he couldn't advertise on Google, and why he wouldn't hold a grand opening. All of these things, plus many more, are part of the franchise agreement he signed. He has made multiple claims that are not only untrue, but quite honestly, unbelievable manufactured lies.

Mr. Etheridge did tell the truth when he stated we sent him default notices, but only after our team tried relentlessly to get him to comply. The default notices were due to serious breaches of the contract he signed. We have sold over 30 franchises and only 3 have ever been given default notices. 

Mr. Etheridge claims to be the victim when in fact only a few months into opening his franchise, he completely breached the contract when he opened a business exactly like the franchise he purchased. Why else would he do this unless he was doing jobs on the side, directly competing with our company, or taking leads from Steri-Clean Inc. and doing them on the side with his own business? We even found estimates that were sent to customers completely out of the Steri-Clean system with his personal email and cell phone as the way to contact him, again outside of how Steri-Clean does business. The estimate also stated PayPal or cash only as forms of payment, which would also indicate skirting the Steri-Clean system. 

To summarize, Steri-Clean Inc. is a solid company that consistently produces successful franchises, but only if they follow the system. For those that want to circumvent our proven business model, compete againsts us, and refuse to do what they signed an agreement for, they will in fact be sent defaults to cure, and if they don't, they will eventually be terminated. There is new owner of this same territory now, and they are very successful, so was it Steri-Clean Inc, or was it Mr. Etheridges inability to do what we have proven to work dozens of times over throughout the country?