Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Division of Agricultural Environmental Services, Bureau of Compliance Monitoring. Harassment,

7th of Dec, 2011 by User116578

Today, an "FDACS" Inspector shows up at my place of business to do an inspection based on a "tip" from an internet chat forum on "LinkedIn" regarding bedbug treatment. The inspector was really a decent guy and I had no problem with him Personally as he was just following orders and doing his job. The basis of the "complaint" that brought the "investigation" was a "tip" from someone on the internet that I "advised the off label use" of a pesticide in that forum. The product mentioned was Nuvan Prostrips. Keeping in mind that the powers to be in Tallahassee never bothered to actually read the product label in question, or to print one out and/or attach one to this "complaint". The inspector told me he was not familiar with this product, and did not even know if it was registered for sale or use in Florida. What?? The compliance inspector does not know this?? I guess his boss and/or the director of this agency doesn't know either. In summary, nobody bothered to actually do even a preliminary investigation of the facts BEFORE wasting taxpayer dollars in sending out an investigator to harass me and disrupt my business activities. I am a Licensed Pesticide Dealer in the State of Florida under Florida Statute 487, license # DL4359. This license is required for anyone dealing in RESTRICTED USE PESTCIDES, as listed in F.S.487. (Nuvan Prostrips is NOT a "Restricted Use" Pesticide under the provisions of F.S. 487), THEREFORE the State of Florida REALLY had no legitimate reason under the law to waste taxpayer dollars on this "complaint" or "tip". This "investigation" was PURE HARRASSMENT or was due to PURE INCOMPETENCE. Either way, I'm not letting this go. I am going to file complaints on this act of harassment all the way to the Governoor's office, and into civil court to recover damages. I even see a chance that there may be criminal charges to come here as this was clearly an abuse of authority under the law, because they acted outside the scope of authority they have in the enforcement of my license. I never instructed anyone to use the product "off label". I was simply having conversation with idiots in a public chat forum, AND, those participants were not even in the United States! One is in the UK, and one is in Canada! Jurisdictional issues? Constitutional issues? When this goes to court, and it will, I am going to have fun with the "right to confront my accuser". Let the games begin. Freedom of speech and expression is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT here in the United States of America, or so at least I thought! My "comment" was clearly taken out of context, and only a portion of the original comment was provided as the basis for the complaint, and subsequent investigation. I made this clear. Furthermore, had anyone taken the time to actually read the product label, they would have seen that the comments I made actually fall within the allowable use of the product according to that label. I have now suffered damage to my business and reputation due to this harassment and/or incompetence, which must now be recovered. The "Notice of Inspection" File Number is 111-235-3057, executed on 12/8/2011. I also made it clear that the comments made on that forum were NOT given as a "recommendation" of the use of the product, and the comment was not made in conjustion with the sale or use of said product. There was no misrepresentation. None. The "Pesticide Enforcement Work Request" Log number is also 111-235-3057. Originated by S. Cotto Febo on 12/5/2011. The notes given to me on the "case" by this inspector referenced F.S. 487.031 as the subsection I was allegedly in violation of. The specifics of the allegation was in reference to my (joking) definition of a "crawl space" as related to bed bug treatment. Keeping in mind that the label only specifies the handling, storage, and use of the product in relation to the end user of that product, along with manufacturer info, etc. THEREFORE, my comment about a "crawlspace" has NOTHING to do with the label, so it could not be a "recommendation" to use a product not in accordance with the label! (Common sense here). In fact, Nuvan Prostrips CAN be used in the manner I described, AS PER THE LABEL (which nobody bothered to read before engaging in harrassment of me and disrupting my business operation, and reputation). Now, someone must pay. I just need to determine who that someone is. The inspector told me that it was the bureau chief that gave the order for the inspection even after the inspector and his supervisor argued against it (for the reasons I mentioned, I would assume). I'll keep you all posted, and if anyone has had a similar experience with this agency, please post it here as I will need it for my lawsuit against the State of Florida, and/or its agents, individually.

Track this Report 0 Comment | Post a Comment