Katie Motz recalls walking through a Plain Township home she become buying and envisioning the needed renovations. Joined via her husband, the 36-year-old toured the home with Choice One Contractors, explaining the massive improvement plan and asking the Canton location businessmen whether they may take care of the work. Shannon M. Dishong, forty-three, of Canton, and Daniel M. Neil, 42, of Canton, confident the couple they had been as much as the project. And the enterprise had already efficiently completed minor paintings on a Massillon home Motz and her husband had offered. But Motz’s initial enthusiasm becomes a nightmarish ordeal. She was a number of the sufferers who appeared in Stark County Common Pleas Court this week to observe Dishong get sentenced to 5 years in jail. Neil changed into sentenced in advance this 12 months to 4 years in prison.
Both men pleaded guilty to 4 counts of grand theft and two theft counts. The prices are fourth- and 5th-degree felonies. Their sufferers were Louisville, Perry Township, Lawrence Township, and Canton, Stark County Assistant Prosecutor Kristen Mlinar. Restitution of roughly $63,000 has been ordered together for the co-defendants. Amounts paid by way of the sufferers to Choice One ranged from $2,300 to kind of $18,000. Mlinar stated Dishong and Neil collectively ripped off the owners. Full bills, partial payments, and deposits had been made, but paintings weren’t even begun in all, however, one of the cases. And while carpentry paintings became completed at the Motzes’ home, it becomes horribly botched and triggered more problems than if it hadn’t been finished at all, the assistant prosecutor said. “People suppose because it includes money, it’s civil,” Mlinar said.
“It’s no longer a civil matter while anyone takes your money by using lying and misrepresenting to you. It’s a criminal offense; it’s theft.” “I suppose everybody is aware of that this may appear but studies, research, studies who you have got in your home and who you pay your money to,” she stated. “You want to analyze as an awful lot as you can.” The assistant prosecutor recommended asking a contractor for references. Motz recommends doing a heritage test. “Do your studies,” she said. “I desire I would have executed that. I desire I might have Googled their names. I wish I could have put them through the [Stark County Criminal Justice Information System].” Seeking out patron reviews online is some other alternative, Motz said, although many don’t exist. “Sometimes the absence of information can be simply as alarming,”
she added. Mlinar stated Choice One’s office “wasn’t real,” noting hire hadn’t been paid. An eviction observes changed into published at the workplace website, she said. “The whole issue became like a rip-off,” Mlinar stated. The assistant prosecutor stated that making the commercial enterprise appear credible were a billboard and a woman who responded to cellphone calls on behalf of Choice One. Motz stated she became worried through the terrible satisfaction of labor at her Plain Township home. Nails were strewn at the ground, and others had been sticking from floorboards, she stated. Trash changed into left in the back of, and the mission became never finished. A red flag got here when the enterprise stopped speaking with Motz. They additionally gave excuses for numerous delays, she said, including that Dishong and Neil refused to give a partial refund.