BBB Accredited Business sinceAdditional Locations
BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.
Request a Quote
A BBB Accredited Business since
BBB has determined that Davis Roofing & Construction meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.
BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.
Reason for Rating
BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.
Factors that raised the rating for Davis Roofing & Construction include:
- Length of time business has been operating
- Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
- Response to 1 complaint(s) filed against business
- Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business
Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details
|Complaint Type||Total Closed Complaints|
|Problems with Product/Service||1|
|Total Closed Complaints||1|
Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews
|Customer Experience||Total Customer Reviews|
|Total Customer Reviews||1|
Licensing, Bonding or Registration
This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.
These agencies may include:
Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation
100 W. Randolph, 9th Fl, Chicago IL 60601
Phone Number: (312) 814-4500
Type of Entity
Business ManagementMr. Daniel Davis, President Mr. Wolfgang Damsch, Superindent Ian Robinson, Superindent
Number of Employees
Roofing Contractors Construction & Remodeling Services Roofing Equipment & Supplies Roofing Materials Roofing Contractors (NAICS: 238160)
Alternate Business NamesDavis Roofing & Construction, Inc.
Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Summary
BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview
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.
About BBB Business Review Content & Services:
Some Better Business Bureaus offer additional content & services in BBB Business Reviews.
The additional content & services are typically regional in nature or, in some cases, a new product or service that is being tested prior to a more general release.
Not all enhanced content & services are available at all Better Business Bureaus.
Types of Complaints Handled by BBB
BBB handles the following types of complaints between businesses and their customers so long as they are not, or have not been, litigated:
- Advertising or Sales
- Billing or Collection
- Problems with Products or Services
- Guarantee or Warranty
We do not handle workplace disputes, discrimination claims or claims about the quality of health or legal services.
BBB Complaint Process
Your complaint will be forwarded to the business within two business days. The business will be asked to respond within 14 days, and if a response is not received, a second request will be made. You will be notified of the business's response when we receive it (or notified that we received no response). Complaints are usually closed within 30 business days.
What is BBB Advertising Review?
BBB promotes truth in advertising by contacting advertisers whose claims conflict with the BBB Code of Advertising. These claims come to our attention from our internal review of advertising, consumer complaints and competitor challenges. BBB asks advertisers to prove their claims, change ads to make offers more clear to consumers, and remove misleading or deceptive statements.
What government actions does BBB report on?
BBB reports on known government actions that are relevant to the business's marketplace dealings with the public.
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.
Additional Phone Numbers
- (888) 766-3881(Phone)
Complaint Trends - Last 3 Years
Customer Review Trends
BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview
BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.
|Customer Review Experience||Value|
|Positive Review||5 points per review|
|Neutral Review||3 points per review|
|Negative Review||1 point per review|
BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.
BBB Letter Grade Scale
Star Rating scale
BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.
Problems with Product/Service
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: Insurance paid $19,781.80 in 2012 for hail damaged roof. The roof has 3 valleys. One side of the valleys is covered by shingle and other side is covered by cedar siding. The Davis company took all the money, but replaced only shingle part of the valleys. As the results, the roof became leaking from the bottom of the these valleys this year. The Davis company refuses to fix these leaking problem, saying: "The company only responsible for shingle part of roof", ignoring the 10 year warranty promise.
Desired Settlement: I don't trust the Davis company any more in fixing the roof leaking. The ******** Roofing found the big mistaking in previous repair by the Davis company and willing to fix that problem in a cost of $9,000. The Davis company should also pay our internal wall repairs caused by roof leaking.
Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2014/08/25) */ ***** roofing was contracted to replace the hail damaged shingles at Mr. ***** house but was not contracted to do any work to the metal pans which run under the siding and do not have any shingles on them. As a service to mr ****, we did cover one pan with a modified bitumen roofing, as one of our technicians noticed that it had some surface rust on it. The main cause of mr ***** problem comes from the horrendous winter that we had and the ice damming that resulted. Had we been contracted to replace the metal pans we would have done so, but neither mr **** nor his insurance company made any mention of replacing the pans. We did not hear that mr **** had any problems with the work that we were contracted to do, and we will still warranty any work we have done at his house, but we cannot be held liable for work which we did not perform. Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2014/08/26) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Davis Roofing & Construction is a roofing company, not a shingle company. It took all my insurance money for hail damaged roof, should at least gave me a non-leaking roof. after 2 years of the their work, the roof of my house became leaking in 4 places. Please look at my faxed letter and evidences. Final Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2014/08/27) */ Dear sirs- again, ***** Roofing and construction was not contracted to do any work on downspouts, satellite dishes, or siding and valley pans. If you look at the contract that was signed, it makes no mention of any of the aforementioned issues. This is paramount to bringing your car for tires and complaining that the shop didn't do the shocks for the same price. As for the price differential, Mr. ***** house is a vey large and steep roof which would explain the cost. We do not know the size of his rental house and therefore cannot guess as to the cost, but the smaller the roof, the smaller the cost. As we have mentioned before, most of the damage at mr ***** house comes as an after effect from the massive ice damming we experienced this winter. It was the worst winter in Chicago history and caused long-term damage on many roofs in the area. We did not, however, have any problems with the shingle portion of the roof. Also the customer signed our contract which clearly states that ***** Roofing and Construction is not liable for damage from ice damming. We are more than happy to continue to warranty the work we did on the roof, but will not be liable for issues out of our control. Business Response /* (4000, 19, 2014/09/05) */ again-as we have stated before, Davis Roofing and Construction was not paid to replace the metal pans on the house. His insurance also did not pay to replace the pans, and Davis Roofing and Construction did not propose to replace the pans to Mr. ****. If Mr. **** would look through his insurance paperwork the pans are not included. Mr **** is confusing valley with pan, and they are different altogether. Also, Davis roofing and construction is not liable for any damage caused by ice damming, as it is beyond our control. Mr. **** agreed when he signed the contract with us that we are not liable for any interior damage caused by acts of god. The metal pans in the dead valleys were damaged by ice from last winter; we did not hear from mr **** the summer of 2013 when there was record rainfall in the Chicago area. Again, to sum it up, we were not paid to replace the pans and are not liable for damage inside or outside his home due to ice damming, but will gladly honor our warranty on work we were contracted to do. NOTE FROM THE BBB: Please confirm whether or not your roof has been inspected and if so , please provide a copy of the inspector's report for our review. If the roof has not been inspected, we recommend that it be inspected in order to determine the exact nature of the leak. Please ask the inspector to put his findings in writing on the letterhead. ***** ****** Assistant Manager-Home Services BBB-Chicago & Northern Illinois ***** ****** Assistant Manager-Home Services BBB-Chicago & Northern Illinois Consumer Response /* (4200, 21, 2014/09/16) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The roof inspection report shows that Davis Roofing & Contruction didn't do flashing correctly. As the result, the water can go under flashing, causing roof leaking. Also three downspouts dropped to the groud due to their poor work quality. The roof inspection report is attached. Business Response /* (4000, 23, 2014/09/26) */ After reviewing the information provided by Mr. **** and his inspection of our work by an independent inspector hired by Mr. **** it is clear that Davis Roofing and Construction has no liability and has done nothing wrong at Mr. ***** residence. The only problems that an inspector, hired by Mr. **** himself, could find is that some gutters were installed in the wrong places and that downspouts were loose; the inspector also noted loose roof to wall flashing. As for the gutters, Davis Roofing and construction did no gutter work whatsoever on Mr. ****'s house. Regarding the roof to wall flashing, it is clear that the ice damming from last winter got underneath the flashing and loosened it. Ice can wreak havoc on structures, even cracking brick. In this case, we are sure that the ice loosened the flashing and caused the leak over the winter as there were no reports of leaking at any area of Mr. ***** house prior to the winter of 2013-2014. This is proven by the fact that the spring and summer of 2013 had the most rain on record and some of the heaviest downpours recorded in chicago history and Mr. **** did not report any leakage. When the ice damming occurred in the winter of 2013-2014 it was massive and caused many problems in the Chicago area, including the problems at Mr. ****'s house. To sum it up, Davis Roofing and Construction is not responsible for work it did not perform, I.E. any gutters on Mr. ****'s house, and is not liable for acts of god and ice damming, and the results thereof, on Mr. ****'s house. While we can sympathize with Mr. ***** situation, it must be noted that ***** Roofing and Construction has made no errors or omitted any work or materials relating to the work performed at Mr. ****'s residence and that this fact has been verified by an inspector hired by Mr. **** himself. This should bring an end to this complaint and an end to the continuous slander we have endured during the course of this situation. ***** Roofing and Construction does not bear Mr. **** any ill will but we do, however, feel completely exonerated by the findings of Mr. ****'s inspector and consider this matter closed. Consumer Response /* (4200, 25, 2014/09/29) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Davis Roofing & Construction (DAVIS) asserts again and again that the roofing leaking was caused by ice damming. But DAVIS cannot provide its own evidence. DAVIS refuses to come to look at the leaking fields, how can DAVIS be so sure about the leaking causes? 1. The inspection report says: "The wall to roof flashing are not laying flat...". It is so obvious that it was the people, the DAVIS employees, not ice damming, did lay the flashing. 2. I have submitted two other roofing contractors' reports about roof leaking in this complaint. They all indicated that DAVIS did flashing incorrectly. To correct this, ******** Roofing ***** ******** XXX-XXX-XXXX) suggested: "Remove siding and shingle. Install new flashing and modified roof rolled up behind siding. " *** ****** Construction suggested: "Remove siding & install roofing behind siding-reinstall siding." 3. In our court, there are many houses like ours, no one else claimed roof leaking due to the ice damming. It is impossible that just our house had that. 4. I called the DAVIS as early as 2013 about roof problems more than 10 times, but DAVIS never sent technician to look at the problems. DAVIS just ignored me again and again. Until June of this year, one technician came and did some caulking just in one of 4 leaking sports. The inspector and two roofing contractors looked at all the leaking sports; they all didn't see any of the ice damming evidences. 5. DAVIS tried to get more profit by reducing even necessary roof repair jobs. The two roofing contractors all suggested that the flashing in valleys should be rolled up behind siding. But DAVIS didn't do so. As the result, the flashing discontinues at the bottom of the valleys, causing roof leaking underneath the valleys. 6. DAVIS admitted that they just did repair job for the shingle part of my roof. Why? My insurance paid the repair cost for the whole roof ($19,781.80), including gutters. DAVIS never answered my accusation about that and keeps the un-used insurance money. The total of this money is $1,418.00. DAVIS should return this money to me so I can hire other contractor to do the repairs. 7. In last response to my complaint, DAVIS started using abusing words against its client, such as "slander"," ill will". This shows that DAVIS really does not have a good will to resolve this issue. It is totally away from the company's advert ice on the web site: "Satisfactory Guaranteed". NOTE FROM THE BBB: Please provide a copy of the inspection report for our review. That copy may be attached to your next response or faxed to XXX-XXX-XXXX ***** ****** Assistant Manager - Home Services BBB-Chicago & Northern Illinois Business Response /* (4000, 27, 2014/10/22) */ To answer the latest allegations by mr ****. Firstly, Davis roofing did not lay the roof to wall flashing , it was installed during the initial construction of the house. Secondly whatever mr **** received from the insurance company and for what is immaterial; Davis roofing and construction provided an estimate for roofing work to be done at mr. ***** house which was accepted by him. At no time did we contract with mr **** to do any gutter work nor did we indicate that we would do so. Insurance companies quite frequently do not pay enough to cover all of the work necessary to restore a hail damaged house, and this was the case in this instance. As for removing siding at metal valleys, again Davis roofing was not contracted to do so or our price would have reflected that. Davis roofing and construction again would like to inform mr **** that we will stand behind our warranty on the work for which we were contracted to perform but cannot be held responsible for work which we were not contracted to perform and also for acts of god such as ice damming and other situations clearly listed on the rear of the contract which mr **** signed before having us do the shingle replacement on his home in westmont. Thank you again for the correspondence. Consumer Response /* (4200, 29, 2014/10/28) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Firstly, the flashing work was specified in the work contract as: " Install ice and water shield in valleys, around chimneys, soil stacks, and along necessary walls adjacent to flashings" (see complaint attachment 08/26/20014). It was Davis Roofing & Contraction (DAVIS) who lastly touched the flashing. Before that the flashing never made roofing leaking for more than 12 years. Secondly, DAVIS made other big lie, saying that the insurance money was not enough to cover other jobs besides replacing shingles. The DAVIS's estimated cost made by DAVIS Employee, ***** was $17,000, which was less than insurance money of $19,781.80. Also DAVIS issued an INSURANCE COMLETE CERTIFICATE (see complaint attachment 09/04/2014), where DAVIS stated: "All the work has been completed for the above claim and at this time we are requesting that any final payment to be sent to the insured party". The above insurance claim covered many non-shingle jobs, for examples: 10. Valley metal; 11. flashing - pipe jack; 15. *** ******* flashing; 17. *** ****** / downspout (see complaint attachment 09/04/2014). When I signed the contract, both **** and *** (***** employees) promised to do every job that the insurance paid. Otherwise, the payment to ***** could not be exactly the same as the insurance money of $19,781.80. Again, as I stated before, DAVIS is a roofing & construction company. DAVIS is not a shingle company. The ultimate objective of roof repair contract is to give the client a good roof, not just good shingles. In a summary, it is very clear right now that after DAVIS got all my insurance money, which covered the repair of a whole roof, DAVIS just did shingle part of the roof, ignoring or damaging the connections to the other parts of the roof, resulting in roof leaking in 3 valleys and around chimney. This is a breach of both work contract and commitment to insurance. DAVIS should pay the consequences of the breach. So far, ***** just repeated its lies and assumptions without any real evidence. I hope BBB Officials can give this case a conclusion of arbitration. If ***** is continuously doing like that, I have to file a law suit. Business Response /* (4000, 34, 2014/11/11) */ ***** roofing and construction would like to respond one last time to mr. ***** situation. 1. ***** roofing and construction was hired to replace hail damaged shingles, which it did. 2. After not hearing any complaints through the course of the rainiest year in Chicago history, we experienced the worst winter in Chicago history and got a call from mr **** that he had leaks in his house. These leaks were determined to have occurred at the metal dead valleys which tie in to the siding, which were not to be replaced. 3. The leaks were caused by ice damming and not by any installation problem with the shingle roof, as per mr ***** own inspectors. Ice damming is caused by poor insulation and inadequate soffit ventilation resulting in premature melting and the resulting re freezing at the bottom edges of the roof. ***** roofing and construction did not perform any insulation or soffit ventilation work at mr ***** residence. 4. ***** roofing and construction was not hired to perform any gutter work at mr ***** house, and did not do any gutter work there. 5. Ice damming is an act of god. Under the contract that mr **** signed both front and back, acknowledging that he understood the terms and limitations of ***** roofing and constructions liabilities, ice damming and the resulting leakage is expressly listed as one of the conditions for which ***** is not liable under any circumstance. 6. Mr **** had mike out to do an estimate before insurance was involved and he was provided a quote of around 17,500.00. Mr **** declined to accept the contract. Mr **** was then able to get his insurance company to pay for a new roof and some other work. He then contacted the office which sent *** out to his house who gave his own estimate which mr **** accepted. The office staff at ***** roofing was unaware of the previous estimate, as mike had met mr **** through an estimate at his neighbors house and had not contacted the office directly. ***** roofing and construction is not liable for a contract not accepted by a homeowner, only for ones agreed upon by both parties. The contract *** provided was higher, but that was his estimate and it was accepted by mr ****. The cost of the roof provided by *** is in no way out of line or high- in fact the estimate by mike would have been too low for a house the size and difficulty of mr *****. This speculation, however, is irrelevant as mr **** did not accept the proposal submitted by mike, but waited until insurance paid and accepted the contract drawn up by ***. At no time were any agreements made to replace gutters or do any other work at the house or it would have been included in the written contract. 7. In closing, we would again recommend that mr **** have a qualified expert investigate the cause of his ice damming before it happens again and would remind him to read the contract that both parties agreed to with a special focus on the exclusions section on the rear of the contract which he indicated through his signature that he understood. If, after consulting an attorney with all of the evidence, mr **** feels that he wants to sue, our attorneys have informed us that we are not at any risk of losing the case due and would welcome the opportunity to clear our reputation in this matter.