Hempfield contractor faces more charges
A Hempfield contractor already in the Westmoreland County jail, was slapped Thursday with additional charges for allegedly swindling a Herminie couple in 2011 by never installing two sewer line tap-ins after being paid $4,375 to do the work.
William E. Rager, 34, was charged by Westmoreland County detectives with home improvement fraud for failing to tap in two sewer lines at the home of Theresa and David Weaver Jr.
The Weavers paid Rager's company, B.R. Excavating of Cannon Drive, Hempfield, the money on Dec. 21, 2011, according to the affidavit filed against Rager before West Newton District Judge Charles Christner.
Rager was in jail in lieu of $7,500 bond on charges of possession of drugs and drug paraphernalia, which were filed in August. He is scheduled for a preliminary hearing on those drug charges on Nov. 12 before Hempfield District Judge James Falcon.
State police previously filed charges in Fayette County in September and again on Tuesday against Rager for allegedly swindling more than $18,000 from Washington Township residents for sewer line installations he never did.
Belle Vernon District Judge Jesse Cramer placed Rager on $50,000 cash bond for each of 10 separate counts of theft by deception and receiving stolen property filed by Washington Township police.
Rager is accused of taking checks from residents to install sewage line tap-ins from July 26 to Oct. 29, 2012. The payments ranged from $400 for a tap-in on Nagy Street to $7,950 for two tap-ins along Perry Avenue.
Rager faces a preliminary hearing Friday before Cramer.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.