John A. and Bonnie W. Stepan, residents of Palm Beach, have initiated arbitration proceedings against Terminix/Rentokil, accusing the pest control giant of failing to complete termite remediation work at their home since 2020. The arbitration complaint, filed on behalf of the Stepans, alleges that the company's negligence has left their loggia dining room unusable for approximately six years.
According to the complaint, the Stepans first reported termite damage in 2020, and despite multiple contractors being hired and dismissed, the work remains incomplete. The complaint details a pattern of alleged misconduct, including defective work by One Stop Inc., a Coral Gables contractor, which reportedly used improper materials and violated electrical codes. The Stepans also claim that official communications from the Town of Palm Beach were sent to a former Terminix/Rentokil contractor and were not acted upon.
The arbitration seeks damages for breach of contract, systemic fraud, intentional infliction of mental distress, and violations of Florida consumer protection and elder abuse statutes. The Stepans, aged 79 and 80, are requesting punitive damages exceeding $13,000,000, alleging that Terminix/Rentokil engaged in a pattern of conduct targeting vulnerable elderly customers. The complaint references a separate arbitration involving retired Alabama school teachers who reportedly received a $2.8 million award after similar allegations.
Attorney William D. McCann, representing the Stepans, stated, "This company has tortured the Stepan family for years. Mr. Stepan made literally hundreds of calls to various Terminix/Rentokil personnel, only to experience no callbacks, untruthful excuses, and repeated delays regarding completion of the work." McCann further alleges that after the Stepans retained legal counsel, Terminix/Rentokil agreed to pay for complete remediation but later conditioned payment on the execution of a general release, continuing a pattern of alleged bad faith.
The arbitration remains pending, and the allegations have not been adjudicated. The case highlights concerns about corporate accountability in serving elderly homeowners and the effectiveness of consumer protection laws in Florida.
