Exp publicly advertises that it is inability to act as a contractor to provide home repair or renovation services to the list of agents representing. Doing so could create conflicts of interest in inflated work costs, but Amman claims that his agent, Megan Featherston, did.
Ammann sought a default ruling in the case as EXP and its leadership were unable to respond to complaints within the time frame set by the court. He represents himself.
However, Judge Jose Martinez of the US District Court in Miami tolerated that the defendant could not respond within the time limit, as he determined that EXP was not a properly provided document, as there was still a representative of customer service.
Martinez also ruled that Amman’s complaints did not contain sufficient specific facts to link EXP to the accused action. As the dismissal was not biased, Amman gave him 14 days to file an amended complaint. If he does not do so, the case will be dismissed with prejudice.
Whether or not an amended complaint has been filed, EXP has not yet heard Amman’s final lawsuit.
He filed the names Karla Sanders and Sarah Ford of Exp as defendants in March. Amman accused one or more of the accused of breaching fiduciary duty and misrepresentation of negligence. In that case, EXP and the individual defendants filed an application to dismiss for procedural reasons.
