Jeannette contractor charged over garage project
A Jeannette contractor has a preliminary hearing Nov. 14 on charges of duping a Mt. Pleasant Township woman out of $9,000 for a building project never completed.
James M. McClintock, who does business as James McClintock Contracting, is charged by Westmoreland County Detectives with home improvement fraud.
According to an affidavit of probable cause filed by Detective Will Brown, McClintock accepted $9,000 from a woman in Calumet to construct a one-car garage last July. The entire project was expected to cost $16,000.
Brown wrote in the affidavit filed before Norvelt District Judge Roger Eckels that the woman repeatedly telephoned McClintock after making the down payment to ask about the construction delay, and McClintock made numerous excuses.
According to Brown, McClintock gave the woman reasons for the delay on four occasions: he had to attend the funeral of a nephew, he couldn't start because of the death of an aunt in North Carolina, he couldn't locate a company to deliver gravel to the construction site and he was hospitalized for kidney stones.
McClintock then refused to accept the victim's numerous telephone calls, Brown wrote in the affidavit.
McClintock was released on recognizance bond pending the hearing before Eckels.
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.