BBB Business Review

What is a BBB Business Review?

Consumer Complaints

This Business is not BBB Accredited

Premiere Roofing and Carpentry Inc.

Phone: (407) 578-6893Fax: (407) 292-8425

BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.

Customer Complaints Summary

2 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 2 closed in last 12 months
Complaint TypeTotal Closed Complaints
Problems with Product / Service2
Advertising / Sales Issues0
Billing / Collection Issues0
Delivery Issues0
Guarantee / Warranty Issues0
Total Closed Complaints2

Complaint Breakdown by ResolutionAbout Complaint Details

Complaint Resolution Log (2)
03/24/2016Problems with Product / Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Complaint
Roofing was replaced improperly/not up to code and patio frame was bent to point screen enclosure door will only open 16".
Roof was replaced in June 2014. Company was informed that the sheathing had been installed without proper supporting. Company denies wrong doing. Had licensed inspector review roofing and states that roof is not up to code due to several panels missing proper h-clip supporting. Insurance company claims may not cover any future claims if not properly repaired. Also patio screen enclosure frame was bent that the screen door will only open 16" because Premiere improperly supported this area during roof replacement.

Desired Settlement
Reduce balance of roof replacement charges to cover necessary repairs to roof and screen enclosure as well as inspection fees, income lost from work, as well as any future legal or additional inspection fees that may be needed or incurred.

Business Response
Contact Name and Title: Mike Morgan, President
Contact Phone: 407-578-6893
Contact Email: morgan@restoreteam.com
We have accepted the clients' offer to settle this issue in an effort to maintain our relationship and to allow the client to go forward with the repairs they have mentioned at their convenience.
We mailed a letter stating this (certified) and they signed as received on the 29th of January. We are awaiting their return letter and will work with them to get this done as quickly as possible.
Again, we have expressed our regrets that this has happened and that we didn't handle this complaint earlier, which may have put us all in a better place. We appreciate their efforts.

Consumer Response
This complaint was closed against our will prior to a settlement being made. However, at this time both parties have come to an agreement.

01/11/2016Problems with Product / Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Complaint
Extensive code violation repairs, has left us with water damage to six rooms, costly mold & asbestos remediation and no metal roof mfg. warranty.

Reroof Permit #********** 12/08/02010
*********** Standing Seam Metal Roof
********
Miami Dade NOA No.: **********
Florida Product Approval ******
Paid 03/30/2011 check/credit card

Contractor has failed to complete appropriate water damage repairs and contractor has failed to complete job to provide manufacture's warranty for customers.

Problems started with water intrusion from rain into guest bedroom, 08/20/2011. Final inspection of 02/11/2011 rescinded on 06/20/2012 by Orange Co. Bldg. Dept. Contractor notified of improperly installed sewer vent pipe boot flashings and failure to reinstall attic ventilation. Subsequent code violations: improper drip edge overlaps, improper metal panel attachment and improper valley metal laps.

Subsequent to leaky pipe boot flashing, more water intrusion occurred to five more rooms when contractor exposed roof decks to re-attach metal panels. Panels were removed, stored and reinstalled three or four times over the four year period. The Kynar finish is scratched & dented, standing seams have dents and excessive caulking was tracked on many panels. After an on site dispute erupted with David L**** about reinstalling dirty panels, Contractor agreed to wash panels to remove ant nests, spider webs and yard debris. We've lived with panels piled up at various locations around the yard and leaning on sides of house for nearly four years.

PRC Contract: Final inspection passed on November 3, 2014. Since Nov. 2014, I have requested ************************ manufacturer's warranty. Dan O****** revoked warranty due to major code violations. PRC has failed to finish a job that provides us with a manufacturer's material warranty as outlined in PRC contract.

Asbestos Abatement: PRC has failed to complete proper repairs. David L****, took photos of water damaged ceilings and has offered to paint them. At the time, we thought painting them was appropriate. I requested quotes from painting contractors who refused to give estimates for this renovation to textured ceilings without asbestos testing. Since then, test samples collected by***********************************. confirm spray applied ceiling texture material contains friable asbestos as tested by ********************************* recommends prior to any planned renovations, that the ceiling texture material be removed (scraped off) by a reputable and licensed asbestos abatement contractor.

Mold Remediation: Due to the persistent leak in guest bedroom, our suspicion for the presence of mold was confirmed from air samples taken by **************************************** and testing by ********************* reveals high levels of Aspergillus/Penicillin mold spores actively growing in the wall. Mold remediation protocol requires a procedure that will take at least 3 days to remove the mold, clear the air in the room and repair the wall.

I have offered the Contractor the opportunity to repair water damage/mold removal using the appropriate repair proposals. Here is the latest response from PRC 09/17/2015: "Premiere Roofing and Carpentry will not be submitting quotes for any abatement or repairs you have claimed. We are prepared to deal with the stains by sealing and painting as we have tried to do before. This is the extent of our commitment to your interior repairs and only because we offered to do so. Our warranty specifically states that we are not responsible for interior damages."

We contend Contractor's warranty does not exclude Contractor's responsibility for interior damage. Exposed violations reveal Contractor's shady attempts to cut material and installation costs and the failure to comply with FBC Code including installation specifications.

Displacement: In order to fix the water damage/stains, we must pack, remove and store all household contents for at least three days, then all items must be moved back in. We have many household items and we have pets, so this will be no easy chore.


From: *************************************************
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 7:38 PM
To: ***********************
Cc: '****************************
Subject: BBB Case #************** Complaint Premiere Roofing & Carpentry

Ms. **********,

Pursuant to our conversation today, October 28, 2015, I am sending the supporting documents for the above subject complaint.
****************. signed copy - Rescind final inspection letter from Orange County
Deficiencies on **** residence from *********, Orange County Inspector
*************************** -Notification of Third Code Violation, letter March 12, 2013 from *************, Orange Co. to Premiere Roofing and Carpentry
Mrs. ****'s Roof - Contractor sent us notification from insurance carrier that we believe is a letter of intimidation. The letter was attached to a long string of email communications.
PRC Workmanship Warranty - **** 24 ga Standing Seam Metal Roof (Certainteed Finlastic SBS Membrane has been replaced with low slope metal roof by **************)
****, PRC Permit, NOA (installation details) and final inspection of February 11, 2011 that was later rescinded
Final Inspection November 3, 2014
PRC Contract Metal Roof signed December 2, 2010
**** 35 Year Material Warranty
**** no material warranty - **** letter, June 27, 2014, PRC letter July 1, 2014 - PRC promises material warranty when roof is completed.

***** and I would like a response from Premiere Roofing and Carpentry. If you need information for the mold remediation and asbestos abatement, I will be glad to send you. Please contact me should you need further information.

******** ****

Desired Settlement
ADJUST PRC WORKMANSHIP WARRANTY TO CONFORM TO COMPLETED APPLICATION OF ROOF WORK NOVEMBER 3, 2015: Completed application of roof work was on the final inspection date of November 3, 2014. The final Inspection was issued nearly four years after permit issued on December 8, 2010.

COMPENSATION ESTIMATES FOR REPAIRS:
Mold Remediation $3,470; Asbestos Abatement $11,600

DISPLACEMENT FROM HOME: Pack, move, and store contents from 4 bedroom/2 bath home. Estimated cost $1,500; PODS Storage minimum rental for one mo. $180,Public Storage $111/mo, Lodging est. $300($100/day) TOTAL $17,161

PROVIDE METAL ROOF SYSTEM THAT MEETS MANUFACTURER'S WARRANTY STANDARDS"
1) Premiere Roofing and Carpentry has failed to properly finish the job, failed to provide manufacturer's warranty as outlined in PRC Contract.
2) Premiere Roofing and Carpentry has failed finish the job by installing metal roof system that meet ***** Custom Sheet Metal Manufacturer's Warranty requirements D.C.S.M. VS 150 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF SYSTEM Cost $20,280.00 ($18,850.00 + 1,430.00 Change Order #1)

Estimated Water Damage $17,161
Standing Seam Metal Roof $20,280

Total $37,441


From:**************************************************
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 7:38 PM
To: ***********************
Cc: *****************************
Subject: BBB Case #************** Complaint Premiere Roofing & Carpentry

Ms. **********,

Pursuant to our conversation today, October 28, 2015, I am sending the supporting documents for the above subject complaint.
****************. signed copy - Rescind final inspection letter from Orange County
Deficiencies on **** residence from *********, Orange County Inspector
****************./********* -Notification of Third Code Violation, letter March 12, 2013 from *************, Orange Co. to Premiere Roofing and Carpentry
Mrs. ****'s Roof - Contractor sent us notification from insurance carrier that we believe is a letter of intimidation. The letter was attached to a long string of email communications.
PRC Workmanship Warranty - **** 24 ga Standing Seam Metal Roof (Certainteed Finlastic SBS Membrane has been replaced with low slope metal roof by **************)
****, PRC Permit, NOA (installation details) and final inspection of February 11, 2011 that was later rescinded
Final Inspection November 3, 2014
PRC Contract Metal Roof signed December 2, 2010
**** 35 Year Material Warranty
**** no material warranty - **** letter, June 27, 2014, PRC letter July 1, 2014 - PRC promises material warranty when roof is completed.

***** and I would like a response from Premiere Roofing and Carpentry. If you need information for the mold remediation and asbestos abatement, I will be glad to send you. Please contact me should you need further information.

******** ****

Business Response
Contact Name and Title: Mike Morgan, President
Contact Phone: 407-578-6893
Contact Email: morgan@restoreteam.com


As a limited response to the complaint issued by Mr. and Mrs. **** and without disparaging words to darken this situation any further, we submit the following information.
Originally, we contracted to install a standing seam metal roof on the home owned by Mr. and Mrs. ****. We installed this roof per code that was available to us at that time with some caveats. The first caveat is that we were of the opinion that there was no need for ventilation on the roof per codes that we read in the Florida Building Codes. We were informed differently once the original, final inspected and passed, permit was viewed under complaint from the ****s through Orange County Building Department. Also, we did not do a good job on the plumbing vents according to the manufacturer, but were told by an engineer that it was acceptable. Once the county rescinded our completed permit for the two items that were deemed incorrect, we began to schedule those repairs and due to our installers' schedules and other issues with material that had to be ordered, the repairs took some time to complete. They were completed as planned and the permit was once again signed off by Orange County Building Dept. The building department was on site for a good portion of the repairs to help us communicate with the ****s in making sure it was all done to proper specifications. We were also delayed by other workers (another roofing company) doing work on an adjacent roof on the home.
We have made many attempts to obtain written warranty for the manufacturer here in Florida and have been promised it for a long time. The warranty was never rescinded per our records and we believe that **** would gladly respond to any requests for warranty coverage if there were any. We have paid them in full for not only the original roofing material, but for all subsequent materials needed to complete the job. We have also bought materials for other jobs since this one and this company continues to warranty all of these materials. We just cannot get a written warranty from them for the ****s and again, the warranty is in place because we bought and paid for those materials. Period. We do not provide the material warranty. The material manufacturer provides the warranty on the material.
The roof panels have no damage to the finish that would affect the warranty.
We have been back to the home on many occasions in an attempt to make the ****s happy with the final product, which is a good and good looking roof which will last a very long time with minimal maintenance. It is outstanding in the neighborhood and I would be proud to have it in mine.
There were NEVER extensive code violations. If that were true, Orange County would have notified us and never given a final inspection as they did twice. We have a good understanding, reputation and relationship with Orange County building department to this day and strive to maintain it.
In reference to the interior damages, our contract specifically excludes any liability on our part to repair interior damages. That is for the homeowners' insurance to take care of. That is what it is there for. If their insurance company has any idea that we were responsible for the damages and if they were extensive enough, they would fix the damages and go after our carrier for repayment. This is how it works and it has not been done this way as the damages do not warrant the repairs that the ****s have requested/demanded. The asbestos claim is unwarranted as is the mold claim. We have plenty of photos to show otherwise and we have seen the damages personally and they are minimal and could have been repaired with proper painting procedures which we have offered to do over a period of at least two years or more. We have made numerous attempts to gain access to repair the water damages and have NEVER been allowed to do so.
Asbestos ceiling content is not a questionable material in a residence in Florida and is almost never seen as a threat of any kind. It did not need to be disturbed in any case.
One of the leaks on the roof was from a pipe boot that we installed and this was subsequently corrected. The other leaks occurred during the course of roof corrections. The roof was without panels for a long period of time per the client's demands. The roof, without panels, was exposed to foot traffic other than our people.
The guest room leak occurred "ONCE". It was not a persistent leak and there was no more than a ceiling stain.
During the project and afterward, there were many complaints about inappropriate materials being used by us on the roof. There claims were ALL disproven by the manufacturers and building officials when they were involved and notified of these issues. We worked closely with all of these folks to make sure we had done the proper work with the proper material.
In the end, we have put our best foot forward on all occasions to make this all come to an end and it has not done so because the client is not happy with anything we have ever done for them. We simply cannot make them like us or what we do.
I am sorry that it turned out this way, but I do believe that just knowing we have been totally responsive to their calls for over four years should show our commitment and consideration in this situation. We never want an unhappy client. It is the worst of all problems in our business. We have many wonderful, appreciative and happy clients that keep us going while striving to do the best that can be done.



Consumer Response
From: ******** ****
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 4:49 PM
To: ***********************
Cc: '******** ****'
Subject: RE: BBB Complaint Case#********************************************

Ms. **********, Here is **** response to Mr. Morgan of Premiere Roofing and Carpentry, Inc. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

***** ****


***** and ***** **** do not accept the response from the contractor.

Mr. Michael Morgan is the licensed contractor for Premiere Roofing and Carpentry, Inc. (PRC) who pulled the permit for our roofing project. Our primary contact for the project has been Mr. David L****. We want potential customers to know about the shoddy work this contractor has provided us. We find Mr. Morgan and Mr. L**** of Premiere Roofing and Carpentry, Inc. to be untrustworthy.
The permit authorizes removal of the existing shingle roof and installation of the metal roof to comply with 2007 Florida Building Code. The permit package contains Orange County Florida Product Approval for the Miami Dade Notice of Acceptance (NOA). The NOA governs specifications for the **** VS 150 Standing Seam Metal Roof; a product approved and designed to comply with the Florida Building Code including the high Velocity Hurricane Zone of the Florida Building Code.
Mr. Morgan has indicated in his response that "We installed this roof per code that was available to us at that with some caveats. The first caveat is that we were of the opinion that there was no need for ventilation on the roof per codes that we read in the Florida Building Codes" Mr. Morgan and Mr. L**** should have taken the time to read the permit package. Information regarding code is available to Mr. Morgan on the Orange County Product Approval Cover Sheet. Information about Florida approved products are listed online at *********************** or can be obtained from the local product supplier. The NOA contains specifications to install deck attachment, underlayment, valleys, metal panels and accessories such as attic ventilation, penetration flashings, and drip edges. These details were to be constructed in compliance with Roofing Application Standards RAS 133/RAS 111. See attachment entitled **** PRC Permit, NOA
We started having problems with Mr. L**** when water leaked into the guest bedroom October 8, 2011 and over the course of time, we contacted him since we suspected the roof was not installed per the permit requirements. The attached email, entitled Workmanship Issues, contains communication about our concerns that the project was not installed properly. Additionally, there is communication back and forth during the numerous times water leaked into the guest room that includes L****'s failed attempts to fix the sewer pipe boot fitting.
The following response from L****, March 22, 2014, is why we are having problems with water damage today. His explanation goes to the root of the contractor's choice to circumvent the required regulatory process. "I really appreciate the determination you are putting into the research of the metal roof installation, but I want to assure you that we have been doing roofing for many years and are skilled in all types of roofing. Although we are not fault free, I know we have installed your roof properly regardless of your efforts to prove differently. The information you provided below in reference to the NOA and RAS 133 only apply to Miami and Broward counties. We are not bound by these regulations in the Orange county."
Mr. Morgan mentioned two code violations in his response. Five code violations are officially documented by the Orange County Building Division. See attachment entitled Deficiencies on **** Residence from *********, Orange County. The magnitude of our problems escalated when all metal roof panels and repairs were removed and reinstalled as many as three times. Shuffling around of metal on this project took four years to complete and currently we are left with no manufacturer's material warranty.
The CertainTeed Flat Roof System PRC was taking a beating during the repair process of the metal roof. Additionally, PRC failed to properly terminate rear deck panels that were cutting into the soft CertainTeed cap of the low slope roof. Water leaks started in the back porch, May 2011. PRC damaged this roof by stacking panels that cut into the soft CertainTeed cap. PRC crew used a chain saw on the low slope roof that left circular marks where they worked on west side. Sealant was tracked, tools were dropped and we pulled out embedded screws and other fittings. We made a decision to replace the roof system and in July 2014 ****** ******* installed a low slope metal roof.
The second final inspection failed on October 6, 2014 since valley metal laps did not meet 6" lap. New attic ridge ventilation and deck panels were removed to repair front and rear valleys. While not mentioned in official code violation notification, front and rear valleys were not attached properly. Orange County inspector required installers remove screw heads used to attach valley metal and attach valley metal with clips.
Our material warranty was issued by *********. We state again that since November 2014, we have requested **** material warranty be re-issued. It is Morgan's responsibility to provide us with a product that meets regulatory standards and **** specifications so we can get the warranty. Again, we attach the letter you sent to us including manufacturer's letter to PRC indicating a warranty will be issued when the roof is 100% complete and meets all **** specifications. It's been over a year since repairs were completed so if *********** was going to re-inspect work for warranty purposes, he would have done so by now. We believe multiple removals and re-installation of the metal panels and accessories has compromised the integrity of the roof system. PRC has failed to provide us with a product that meets **** specifications. See attachment **** No Material Warranty June 27, 2014.
Five year PRC Workmanship Warranty needs to be updated to completion date of November 3, 2014 to warranty expiration of November 3, 2019. See attached PRC Workmanship Warranty
We have every right to complain about products used on our roof such as rusty roofing nails, incorrect application of adhesive and the installation of multiple underlayment products. Deck nails PRC used to do repairs are called Grip-Cap EG Ring w/Round Metal Cap. They meet minimum industry standards; however, as I indicated in an email to L****, the nails have been stored outside in the rain in a broken bucket that looks as if it fell out of a dump truck on its way to the Orange County landfill - see attached photo entitled Rusty Deck Nails. L**** explained to us in great detail about the Polystick TU Plus underlayment product he was going to use on the deck and then submitted data for WeatherMaster TU Ultra to Orange County after repairs started. Exposed decks revealed a patchwork of Polystick TU Plus and WeatherMaster TU Ultra. While doing repairs, the installers used another type of WeatherMaster underlayment. I questioned using RT-600 adhesive to install and repair roof and accessories. OSI RT-600 Roof Tile Adhesive does not adhere to metal to metal applications confirmed by ****************************. At my urging, Orange County recommended Morgan use WeatherMaster Metal Roof Sealant that adheres to Kynar paint finish.
Morgan indicates the asbestos claim is unwarranted as is the mold claim. We respond to this because Morgan is not professionally qualified to provide mold remediation and asbestos abatement assessments or services. On September 17, 2015, I sent PRC laboratory analyses of mold and asbestos results. See attached test results.
Morgan is incorrect in that we never have allowed PRC access to repair. We have received PRC's offer to paint the ceilings. On September 17, 2015, I invited Mr. L**** to come by. See attached email entitled Mold/Asbestos Remediation. Message to L**** is as follows: "You indicated 'we have never been allowed access to provide any type of remediation or repairs to these purported damages.' I have never denied you access so I invite you to come by." They are more than welcome to provide a proposal.
We have started the claim process with Premiere Roofing and Carpentry's general liability insurance provider. At the end of the day, L**** and Morgan have exposed us to an unsafe home environment. They have failed in their professional responsibility to provide us with a roof that meets manufacturer's specifications.


Final Consumer Response
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
See email response sent to Ms. **********.

Final Business Response
We believe that once again, we have made every effort to satisfy this complaint. The demands made by this client are not going to be considered. We have given this client the roof she paid for and it is, per Orange County, installed per code in every way. The client simply will not try to end this situation and we cannot make them do so.
The BBB is not a forum for a continued disagreement like this and we will not use this forum to argue about what has happened in the past.
Therefore, we will not be responding to this complaint again on this website. We appreciate your consideration and help with this situation.
Sometimes there is no real conclusion available.
Thank you.

Industry Comparison| Chart

Roofing Contractors

As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business.

BBB Business Reviews are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. Information in this BBB Business Review is believed reliable but not guaranteed as to accuracy.

BBB Business Reviews generally cover a three-year reporting period. BBB Business Reviews are subject to change at any time.

X

What is a BBB Business Review?

We offer free reviews on businesses that include background, licensing, consumer experience and other information such as governmental actions that is known to BBB. These reviews are provided for businesses that are BBB accredited and also for businesses that are not BBB accredited.

X

BBB Reporting Policy

As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business.

BBB Business Reviews are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. Information in this BBB Business Review is believed reliable but not guaranteed as to accuracy.

BBB Business Reviews generally cover a three-year reporting period. BBB Business Reviews are subject to change at any time.