A dry cleaning business owner was ready to retire and sell their company—until a poorly written environmental clause in their lease paired with an improperly collected sample created a false indication of contamination.

An inexperienced firm, not following environmental protocols and ignoring important details, used incorrect sampling methods, triggering a false positive for volatile contaminants in soil and groundwater in their Phase Two ESA report.

The business owner contacted AEL for a second opinion.

AEL’s Role in Solving Their Problem:

• Referred them to an experienced environmental lawyer
• Conducted proper testing aligned with O. Reg. 153/04 standards
• Provided a clear, defensible, well documented report, where the results clearly indicated the site did not contain the contamination previously thought by others to have been in the soil and groundwater

Outcome

The properly collected samples and guidance of a seasoned environmental lawyer enabled the client to exit their contract with his landlord. Our client sold their business, and their retirement plans were restored.