Taking Action
RC: How many companies, at this point, have you filed against?
JZ: We have settled with six.
RC: Why did you settle and why do you think they settled?
JZ: I will never know exactly why they settled. My hope is that they’re all deciding and choosing to amend their practices so that they’re not violating the Consumer Protection Act and are selling in a nondeceptive way. That’s my hope.
RC: In most cases you have suspended the actual penalty payment in lieu of compliance. Why?
JZ: It goes back to us wanting to get the industry righted and to foster compliance as opposed to going out and punishing companies. At least with this go-around. The other reason is that, unlike some businesses we go after ? like the loan modification industry, where people have paid a lot of money and gotten nothing ? here you actually got something, namely windows. We see a marked difference.
RC: Why not go after the one-truck guy rather than large well-known window replacement companies? Aren’t the majority of consumer complaints originating with sole proprietors and their often unprofessional practices?
JZ: I hear variations of that question as a defense or plea. Why me? Everyone else is doing it. Just because everyone else is speeding doesn’t make it right for you to do it. I think there is much worth in getting the companies out there selling a lot of windows to realize they need to be in compliance with the Consumer Protection Act. And as far as the small independents ripping people off, we have dealt with them, too. There is a case here in Spokane where we had a guy offering to install alarm systems. All he was installing were empty black boxes. We got on to him, realized it was a criminal operation, referred him to the Spokane prosecutor’s office, and he was convicted of theft. There are any number of examples of people taking deposits, not doing work, and getting convicted.
Monitoring Compliance
RC: How do you monitor companies that have settled, to ensure that they’re complying?
JZ: We generally use the same tools that we used to initially spot companies. It’s also defendant-specific as to what we may or may not do to check on compliance. It depends on what we find or don’t find.
RC: One company that agreed to settle has said that its competitors bring your press release into the home and use it to get homeowners to cancel their order with the company. Is that legal?
JZ: I would love to hear about that. I would love for them to call me up and give me specific examples, and we will definitely do something.
RC: What would you do?
JZ: I’m not going into the hypothetical. But we would surely give it due consideration.
RC: How far do you intend to go in pursuing companies in Washington?
JZ: I am hoping that the message has been loud and clear from the beginning and that it is only getting louder as we resolve issues with each company. Our message hasn’t changed. As far as where we are going to go, we are continuing to identify and target companies. And for those companies not heeding the word, how long do you think it will be until one or another regulatory agency gets involved?
RC: Of the big drops, the claim of 40% energy savings that are not substantiated, of scaring clients with mold, etc., which in your view is or are the most egregious?
JZ: It’s not so much the particular practice I find egregious. What I find is that some of these companies have preyed on people. There are horror stories involving seniors on fixed incomes being sold a home full of new windows that eat up over half of their fixed monthly income. I find that appalling. No good business does that. That’s the thing that bothered me the most ? where they create this false sense of urgency, use scare tactics, use the big drop, and victimize people who simply can’t afford the windows. They’re using emotion to sell windows.