Katie Motz recalls going on foot through a Plain Township domestic, and she was buying and envisioning the necessary renovations. Joined by her husband, the 36-year-old toured the home with Choice One Contractors, explaining the sizeable improvement plan and asking the Canton place people in business whether they might cope with the work. Shannon M. Dishong, 43, of Canton, and Daniel M. Neil, forty-two, of Canton, assured the couple they were as much as the assignment. The employer had already efficaciously completed minor work on a Massillon home Motz and her husband had offered. But Motz’s preliminary enthusiasm became a nightmarish ordeal. She changed into a few of the victims who appeared in Stark County Common Pleas Court to look at Dishong getting sentenced to five years in prison this week.
Neil was sentenced in advance to 12 months to four years in prison. Both guys pleaded guilty to four counts of grand robbery and robbery counts. The costs are fourth- and fifth-degree felonies. Their victims have been from Louisville, Perry Township, Lawrence Township, and Canton, Stark County Assistant Prosecutor Kristen Mlinar stated. A restitution of roughly $63,000 has been ordered simultaneously for the co-defendants. Amounts paid with the aid of the victims to Choice One ranged from $2,300 to $18,000. Mlinar stated Dishong and Neil collectively ripped off the house owners. Full bills, partial bills, and deposits had been made. However, paintings weren’t even begun in all but one of the cases. And while carpentry work was performed on the Motzes’ domestic, it was botched and brought on more problems than if it hadn’t been finished in any respect, the assistant prosecutor stated. “People assume because it entails cash, it’s civil,” Mlinar said.
“It’s now not a city be counted while any person takes your cash through lying and misrepresenting to you. It’s against the law; it’s robbery.” “I suppose everyone is aware of that this will show up however studies, studies, research who you’ve got in your house and who you pay your money to,” she said. “You want to investigate as much as you can.” The assistant prosecutor recommended asking a contractor for references. Motz recommends doing a historical past check. “Do your studies,” she said. “I want. I could have finished that. I wish I would have Googled their names. I would have put them through the [Stark County Criminal Justice Information System].” Motz stated that seeking out patron evaluations online is any other choice, even supposing many don’t exist. “Sometimes, the absence of statistics may be just as alarming,” she said.
Mlinar stated Choice One’s office “wasn’t real,” noting rent hadn’t been paid. An eviction note was published on the official website online, she said. “The whole component turned into like a scam,” Mlinar said. The assistant prosecutor stated that making the commercial enterprise appear credible has been a billboard and a female who responded to cellphone calls on behalf of Choice One. Motz said she became worried through the dangerous line of work at her Plain Township domestic. She stated that nails had been strewn on the ground, and others had been sticking from floorboards. Trash changed into left behind, and the mission was not completed. A crimson flag came when the commercial enterprise stopped communicating with Motz. They additionally gave excuses for several delays, she said, adding that Dishong and Neil refused to provide a partial refund.
