Photo via Shutterstock
After two dozen District residents were allegedly robbed by someone hired to clean their homes, the D.C. Attorney General’s office is suing the company who they say is responsible.
The suit argues that New York-based company Handy Technologies, Inc., better known as Handy via its website and app, “misleads consumers concerning the effectiveness” of the background checks it performs on contractors that it sends to clean people’s homes.
Between March 2015 and June 2016, 24 D.C. customers filed police reports with the Metropolitan Police Department alleging that cleaners booked through Handy stole property from their homes, according to the lawsuit.
One of the victims, Mark Schroder, told Fox 5 that weeks after someone he booked through Handy came to clean his Northwest apartment, he found charges on his credit card bill for purchases that he didn’t make. When he contacted police, Schroder was informed that the man “had been busted for ID theft before,” according to Fox 5, which reports that other cleaners have stolen things like computers and jewelry from customers’ homes.
Handy’s business model relies on persuading customers to let strangers into their spaces “and have full access to their personal belongings,” according to the suit. And the company acknowledges this on its website, which states that it hires top-notch, screened, and certified employees. But the AG argues that the company’s process for background checks is inadequate, and the company withholds the true nature of its contractors.
The lawsuit also says that while Handy has been servicing customers in D.C., it hasn’t legally registered to conduct business in the city, and the company “deceptively enrolls” customers into cleaning plans that bill them on a recurring basis.
In New York, more than 300 Handy customers filed grievances with the city’s Better Business Bureau in the past year, the Wall Street Journal reported in February. The BBB said it identified a pattern in Handy customer complaints “of those who felt caught in a subscription service difficult to cancel, stop charges or to reach customer service,” as well as issues with the company’s money-back guarantee claims.
Meanwhile in D.C., the AG is requesting that the D.C. Superior Court fine the company and make them pay restitution, among other punishments.
DC v Handy Technologies Complaint by Christina Sturdivant on Scribd
