Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consumer Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident says contractor letters about water compliance caused unnecessary expense
Summary
A Mount Clemens resident told the commission that form letters sent by HydroCorp about sprinkler-system compliance lacked address-specific details and led her to spend time and money on unnecessary repairs; staff said they will follow up to obtain contact information.
Get email alerts on the Consumer Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A lifelong Mount Clemens resident told the city commission that form letters sent by a contractor hired to check municipal water-system compliance led her to take unnecessary action at personal cost.
Nancy Mushenski told the commission she and her husband received a letter on May 1 from HydroCorp indicating their property was not in compliance with the Michigan Safe Drinking Water Act in connection with their sprinkler system. The letter presented two generic “alternatives,” one to relocate the pressure vacuum breaker and one to lower sprinkler heads. Mushenski said the letter did not include the inspector’s address-specific notes, which were kept in HydroCorp’s internal database, and that after following the printed guidance they later learned from the inspector that the actual issue was a faucet plumbed in parallel to the pressure vacuum breaker.
“These contractors generated letters on behalf of the city of Mount Clemens are misleading and cause unnecessary burdens to Mount Clemens homeowners,” Mushenski said. She said her husband spent several days digging and altering four sprinkler risers before they learned the correction they needed to make.
The chair asked that Mushenski leave her contact number for the city manager so staff could follow up. City staff later acknowledged the contractor’s inspection notes existed in HydroCorp’s database and agreed to contact the Mushenskis to clarify next steps.
The commission did not take formal action at the meeting but the exchange was logged during public comment and staff committed to follow up with the resident.

