BBB Accredited Business since

Brad Smith Roofing Co. Inc.

Phone: (440) 835-3377 Fax: (440) 892-9944 View Additional Phone Numbers 24550 Sperry Rd., Westlake, OH 44145 View Additional Email Addresses http://www.bradsmithroofing.com


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


BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Brad Smith Roofing Co. Inc. 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 Brad Smith Roofing Co. Inc. include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 3 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business


Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

3 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 2 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 0
Billing/Collection Issues 0
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 3
Total Closed Complaints 3

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

0 Customer Reviews on Brad Smith Roofing Co. Inc.
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

BBB file opened: January 01, 1979 Business started: 01/01/1979 in OH Business incorporated 01/30/1991 in OH
Type of Entity

Corporation

Business Management
Mr. James Bradley Smith, Owner/President Ms. Stacey Kitchen, Secretary/Treasurer, Human Resources Mr. Nicholas Drew Smith , Vice President
Contact Information
Customer Contact: Ms. Stacey Kitchen, Secretary/Treasurer, Human Resources
Principal: Mr. James Bradley Smith, Owner/President
Business Category

Roofing Contractors Siding Contractors Skylights Tile - Ceramic - Contractors & Dealers Ventilating Contractors Construction & Remodeling Services Windows - Installation & Service Garbage Disposals - Household Gutter Cleaning Slate Chimney Builders & Repair Gutters & Downspouts Home Improvements Mason Contractors

Alternate Business Names
U Trash It
Industry Tips
Home Improvements

Additional Locations

  • 24550 Sperry Rd.

    Westlake, OH 44145 (440) 835-3377 (330) 645-7663 (330) 351-0391

X

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.
Details

BBB Letter Grade Scale

BBB Rating Value
A+ 5
A 4.66
A- 4.33
B+ 4
B 3.66
B- 3.33
C+ 3
C 2.66
C- 2.33
D+ 2
D 1.66
D- 1.33
F 1
NR -----
Star Rating scale

  Average Score
5 stars 5.00
4.5 stars 4.50-4.99
4 stars 4.00-4.49
3.5 stars 3.50-3.99
3 stars 3.00-3.49
2.5 stars 2.50-2.99
2 stars 2.00-2.49
1.5 stars 1.50-1.99
1 star 0-1.49

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.

Complaint Detail(s)

11/24/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: We hired Brad Smith Roofing to put a new roof on our house. On the first day of the job, I was told that some siding would need to be taken off to properly install the flashings. I was told I would have a quote for the work to me by noon. We did not recieve the quote until the evening of the following business day, after all of the extra work was done. This extra work included the tear off of approx 1,000 sq ft of siding on the house. We did not authorize this tearoff, as we did not receive the price quote. We were then told by the company that the cost of the tear off was $2,000. They left all the siding off the house in un useable condition, and stated that it would cost $2,000 to put the aluminum siding back up, or $3,000 for them to install new vinyl siding. They left the large pile of old siding and gutters in our back yard, and our house did not have any siding on it when they were done with the job. We had several roofing contractors and siding contractors come out to evaluate the situation, all of which said the tear off of all that siding was completely unnecessary. In short, they completed work without our permission and without giving us a quote, and they are now trying to charge us for the cost of the extra work. They forced us into spending thousands of more dollars on a project that we did not authorize or sign a contract for.

Desired Settlement: We would like the cost of the siding tear off taken off our bill, and we would like Brad Smith Roofing to reimburse us for the cost of putting on new vinyl siding.

Business Response:

Business responded to complaint.  See attached.

Business response also copied and pasted below by BBB staff 11/3/15.

Customer Information: 
*** ******* ****

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

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

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

November 2, 2015 

In response to the Customer's Statement of the Problem, we would like to response to each statement within the complaint, and show documents and photos within separate attachments to follow up on our responses to each statement from the Customer. 

Customer: "We hired Brad Smith Roofing to put a new roof on our house." 

Our Response: The Customer signed and initialed a 10 Page Contract packet containing three different areas that disclose additional work may be necessary, two areas specifically describe the possible need for siding removal, waterproofing and siding re-installation at an additional rate of 565.00 per man-hour port to port plus materials +10%, along with the possible reasons for the siding removal, These areas we have highlighted in the separate attachments. The Customer did not sign these documents the first day we met. Our first appointment was on 7/11/15, our second meeting to discuss the proposal was on 7/18/15 and the Customer signed the contract on our third meeting on 8/28/15. The Customer had over a month to review our contracts and most likely received competing estimates from other companies and chose us to do the job, chose the highest offered price estimated number on the 4'1' page of our contract which is the manufacturer backed "Golden Pledge Warranty" from GAF where GAF does a 40 Point On-Site inspection of our companies workmanship and issues a 25 year 100% Non-Prorated Workmanship and 50 Year Material Warranty, and The Customer signed all of our documents and disclosures and did not raise any issues about what was in our disclosures. 

Customer: "On the first day of the job, I was told that some siding would need to be taken off to properly install the flashings." 

Our Response: The Customer is correct, we called him because he was not On-Site, the Customer was at work. We had a conversation about the siding issues and that there was not one, but two layers of siding on the wall and the aluminum siding was installed over the original wood lap siding and when the second layer of shingles were installed, that contractor did not install a second layer of wall flashings because it would have been impossible to install a layer of wall flashing underneath the nailed in 1-Channel of the aluminum siding, so they just butted the shingles to the aluminum siding and relied on the original layer of wall flashings to prevent leaking. When you have this condition when tearing off Two layers of shingles and go down to the wood substrate, now the old original wall flashings do not extend far enough out from the sub wall behind the original wood lap siding and past the aluminum siding in order to be able to re-use the original wall flashings to meet Ohio Residential Building Code Requirements. Even if the old original wall flashings did extend out past the aluminum siding far enough to re-use with the new 

p.2

shingles, they are the original wall fleshings the home was built at least 40-50 years prior or more and they were in very Poor Condition and we as a company and GAF as a manufacturer would not want to accept and warrant that condition as apart of our new roof system and The Customer agreed with our company on that phone conversation. 

Customer: "I was told that I would have a quote for the work to me by noon." 

Our Response: The Customer was told in that phone conversation that the removal of both layers of siding and the subsequent Ice and Water Shield Membrane waterproofing work falls into our "Time and Material" rates listed on our contract and we did not know what that would be until that part of the additional work was completed. The Customer %vas told that our recommendation would be that instead of installing the Existing Aluminum siding back up after we waterproof both dormers, installing new vinyl siding would be a better long term benefit for him because it would create less maintenance for him in the future with not having to paint the old aluminum siding and since we have to remove and re-install the siding anyways, it wouldn't he that much more of a cost to install vinyl siding. We offered to price out both the New Vinyl Siding installation and price out re-installing the old aluminum back onto the house in order to give him options on what he wanted to do. it would have been impossible to give him a price on the additional work by noon of the first day of work because we only removed the two layers of siding on the back of the house the first day and waterproofed, then the second day of work we removed the front dormer two layers of siding and waterproofed. 

Customer: "We did not receive the quote until the evening of the following business dim alter all of the extra work was done." 

Our Response: The Customer is correct that he did not receive a quote" until the evening of the following business day. The Customer was told in the initial conversation that the removal was to be "Time and Material" and that we would not have a price for that until it was completed and that he would have a "quote" for the aluminum re-installation to compare to installing new Vinyl siding thereafter. Ile agreed that the condition existed and he wanted to do this detail of the job correctly in order to maintain a warranty from us and the manufacturer. The two layers of aluminum and wood lap removal on both dormers was very time consuming, which is why it wasn't complete 100% in the first day. We issued an additional work order to the Customer after the second day and the "Time and Material" work finally was completed as far as the removal and waterproofing, along with a "quote" with options to install new Vinyl or go back with the existing aluminum, as we told him originally in that phone conversation the first day. The Customer came home the first night after the first day of work and had to see that we removed the siding and waterproofed only half of the house. We started the job on 10-7-15 and didn't finish until 10-9-15. 

Customer: "The extra work included the tear off of approx. 1,000 square feet of siding on the house," 

Our Response: The Customer is correct, it did include approx. 1,000 square feet of aluminum siding tear off on the house, however, it also included approx. 1,000 square feet of old original wood lap siding (total of 2,000 square feet of siding removal) and rotted out old original rake edge and gutter edge fascia boards on both dormers and replacing them with new wood gutter edge and rake edge 2x fascia trim. See photos attached. We as a company have a policy that we don't cover up rotted wood. The Customer was told this and signed our documents disclosing this. We then installed an Ice and Water Shield Membrane waterproofing over all exposed wood sub walls on both dormers, as the Customer was told would happen on the first day conversation. 

Customer: "We did not authorize this tear off, as we did not receive the price quote." 

p.3

Our Response: Again, the Customer was told the tear off was "Time and Material" according to our contract that he signed. The Customer was told that the "Price Quote" would be for the two separate options of either re-installing the aluminum siding or installing new vinyl. This is why the old original aluminum siding is shrink wrapped up arid labeled on each panel of how is goes back on so in the event the Customer chose to put the old aluminum back on, it could be done. We cannot give a price for the "Time and Material" until it is complete. The Customer agreed on the phone to remove and waterproof because he was not onsite and was at work. We did not complete the tear off of all the siding and waterproofing the first day. The Customer knew this. 

Customer: "We were then told by the company that the cost of the tear off was $2,000." 

Our Response: As stated above, we mailed the Customer the final "Time and Material" Charges, see Additional Work Order dated 10-8-15, which included new 2x fascia rake and gutter edge trim to replace what was rotted, see photos attached, and included roughly 40 feet of lx decking that was rotted and missing at the bottom of the two valleys where the back of the house main and the rear porch connect. In this Additional Work Order, we quoted the two options of re-installing the old aluminum siding or installing new vinyl as we talked about in the first day conversation about what would go back up. 

Customer: "They left all the siding off the house in an unusable condition, and stated that it would cost $2,000 to put the aluminum siding back up, or $3,000 for them to install new vinyl siding." 

Our Response First, the aluminum siding is not in an "unusable condition", it is wrapped and saved ready to be re-installed if that is what the Customer wants to do. Again, our quote separates the re-install of the old versus install of new, as we told the Customer we would do in the first day conversation that he agreed he wanted. The numbers being used by the Customer are inaccurate. Sec Additional Work Order sent to the Customer. $2,050.00 to re-install the old aluminum versus $2,900 to install new vinyl. t'i'c have been waiting for the Customer to respond to us on what he would like us to do since we completed the job on 10-9-15. Ile told us that he wanted to do some "research" over the weekend following the last day of work and would get back to us, he stated in an email correspondence to our company the night of 10-8-15. The Customer has not responded to several attempts to contact following the installation of the roof regarding what the Customer has decided on about the siding re-installation. The Customer B1313 complaint was filed on 10-27-15, exactly 18 days after final day of work. 

Customer: "They left a large pile of siding and gutters in our back yard, and our house did not have siding on it when they were done with the job." 

Our Response: Yes, of course the house did not have siding on it when we were done. In the phone conversation that the Customer and our company had. we agreed that the siding needed to be removed in order to process and flash the roof correctly. As the Customer has stated in this complaint and in emails he acknowledges having this conversation and that he knew the siding was going to be removed and the wall waterproofed. Sec email from customer dated 10-8-15. The job was completed as far as it could be without further approval front the customer on what he wanted to install on his home as far as the siding, as we agreed upon. We left his walls of the dormers 100% waterproofed with l hell Tack Ice and Water Shield that is good to be exposed to the weather for 6 months to ensure there is no possibility of leaking. 

Customer: "We had several roofing contractors and siding contractors come out to evaluate the situation, all of which said that the tear off of all that siding was completely unnecessary" 

Our Response: The Customer is not staling who these "Contractors" are or their credentials. These "Contractors" were not on site during the roof tear off and have not seen the photos taken during the tear off process. These "Contractors" are not liable for this project in any way or for any future warranties 

p.4

issued. These "Contractors" are not under contract with the Customer. These "Contractors" allegedly offered "free opinions" on the situation based on what is now a 100% watcrprookd sub wall area of two second story dormers. These "Contractors" most likely don't know that there was two layers of siding on this these dormers which could not be seen until the time of the roof removal because of the sequence of how the siding and two layers of roofing where built. These "Contractors" don't know that there was rotted wood underneath the aluminum siding system at the top that needed to he replaced. Brad Smith Roofing would be willing to pay a third party Engineering firm at the choosing of the Customer to investigate the issues we discovered during the tear off process and render an educated and credible account of how any contractor should have properly installed this roof system. Brad Smith Roofing is willing to have GAF, the manufacturer of the shingles installed and the company that is issuing a 100% Workmanship and Material warranty on the roof installed on the Customer's home, render a educated and credible account of how the roof flashings are to be installed. See attached diagram from GAF on proper roof wall flashings. 

Customer: "In short, they completed work without our permission and without giving us a quote. and they are now trying to charge us for the cost of the extra work." 

Our Response: Sec our companies' responses to the previous statements. The Customer knew the siding was coming off and being waterproofed and knew it was on a "Time and Material" basis and once complete, we would notify the Customer of the charges and two separate options of re-installing aluminum or installing new vinyl or hire a different contractor to re-install either. The Customer acknowledges that he knew this was the case and states in the attached October 8th email lie sent to our company that he was "surprised at the price" not surprised at what needed to be done. He states that he thought it sounded like "not a big deal" when the phone conversation the First day was over. Again, it is impossible to give a price on -Time and !Material" work until it is finished, which is stated in our contract that the Customer signed. 

Customer: "They forced us into spending thousands more dollars on a project that we did not authorize or sign a contract for." 

Our  Response: Our Company was contracted to perform the roof system according to State Requirements and it is inspected by the City of Independence and GAF the manufacturer. We have given the Customer two options to handle the siding re-install, or make other arrangements to re-install siding. The Contract that the Customer signed states to replace the shingle tin wall flashing. The Contract that the Customer signed also states in multiple places that if the wall flashing cannot be removed or replaced without removing siding, that this work will be done on a "Time and Material" basis. The Customer acknowledges in writing via email that he knew the work needed to be done, but was "shocked" at the final account of the "Time and Material" charges. '[his complaint is not workmanship related in any way. The Customer is not complaining about the overall quality of the work, just that the Customer's opinion, now after the fact, is that it did not need to be done. The Customer knew that it needed to be done via phone conversation the first day and authorized it to he done by signing our original contracts. 

Brad Smith Roofing's position is that the customer has a complaint about the dollar amount or the work that was required, not that the work was required. The Customer had ample time to research companies to hire to replace the roof and review the roof contract language from each company before choosing his contractor. Now after the fact, the Customer has these alleged "opinions" from other unknown "Contractors", uneducated of the actual job details our company discovered, and with no known credibility, in order to leverage a reduction on out of pocket cost of the overall project being performed to proper Code Standards. The Customer did not hire these "Contractors" to do the job and they have no liability for their unwritten statements. 

p.5

Brad Smith Roofing is more than willing to get educated, credible engineering firms to make written statements about the proper way to flash a wall and what was required to be done on this Customer's home in order to meet Ohio Residential Building Code and Manufacturers' Specifications that would be warranted. The Customer was given this full description in an email back to him on October 9th, at 12:1 lam. See attached email. The Customer has waited until 18 days to file a complaint. We have emailed the client approximately 4 times since our October 9th email with no response to the siding being re-install or new being installed. 

Desired Settlement: Brad Smith Roofing receive the balance the Customer has been billed, which is the balance of the original contract amount plus $2,190.00 of siding removal, waterproofing and rot replacement that was necessary to perform the roof system to the law. Brad Smith Roofing does not require the Customer to approve our company to re-install any siding, however, we cannot guarantee the siding installation if our company does not perform the work. We only guarantee the work that we do as apart of the roof system. Note: The Customer has not, as of today's date 11-2-15, paid the balance of the original contract of $4,990.00 which was due upon completion and has nothing to do with the Additional Work. The $2,190.00 is the Additional Work performed so far. The Customer does not have a filed complaint about the Original Contract work completed. 

Attached are all of the Emails, Photos, Codes, GAF Diagram and Signed Contract between the Customer and our company. 

 

Consumer Response: Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

It is stated in the contract that " Brad Smith Roofing will provide temporary covering of roof and wall areas open until signed approvals and required deposits are received." This was not the case, the work of the siding tear off of the siding was completed BEFORE a contract for the additional work was signed. I am not disputing the quality or work of the roof, and we will pay the remaining balance once the siding situation is completed. It was my mistake in the original complaint filed that the price quotes were not exactly as Brad Smith Co had quoted us, but the amounts that they stated are correct ( $2050.00 to re install the old aluminum, and $2,900 to install new vinyl siding). While I do understand the need for proper flashing installation, it is not clear the need for ALL of the siding to be removed, and not just the bottom portion where the flashings are to be installed. We did wait 18 days to file a complaint because I needed to get quotes to have the siding installed and getting the house covered was my first priority.


The resolution that I am seeking is for Brad Smith Roofing Co to drop the additional work order balance of $2,190, as again I did not sign a contract to authorized this extra work. 


Regards,

*** *******

Business Response:

It is impossible to remove only the bottom of the siding in order to properly flash the walls.  In this case, the customer has aluminum siding panels that are seamless on the the sides of the dormer.  As far as the head walls, aluminum siding has to be taken off from the top down, it is unlike vinyl siding in the way it locks together.  You cannot separate a panel in the middle or bottom of a wall without cutting the aluminum and ruining the panel.  Also, there were aluminum corner posts on each corner of the dormer walls that each panel was nailed into and it is impossible to get the corner posts off without taking off every panel from the top of the walls down to the bottom in that order.  Also, the wood was rotted behind the aluminum at the top of the wall, shown in the photos.  So the customer had issues with the siding at both the top and the bottom of the walls.  The customer is asking for a shortcut that is impossible from an engineering standpoint just to cut cost.  

The original contract specifies time and material additional costs, if needed. The original contract when signed is authorizing us to do the work performed if necessary, again we stand by the fact that the time and material work was needed, and the customer agreed. Again, we would never cover up a situation and not inform the customer. We notified the customer of the situation, he understood and had a chance to see the work being done after he would have arrived home to see just the part of the work done at the end of the 1st day.

Again it is the cost in dispute and we feel the time and material additional costs are fair and honest, as described in our original contract. This is why we explain in detail of the “Unknown Conditions” that may arise when explaining our contract with a potential customer.

We do not believe it is fair to refund the entire $2,190.00 and again the customer has still not paid the $4,990.00 balance due for the roof work regardless of this time and material balance due. This amount is due upon completion.

In an effort to show good faith to the customer that we want to work with him to get this resolved, and since the cost is the real dispute, at this point we are wiling to offer to the customer a fair and good faith discount. We will discount the total man hours by 3 hours of the 20 man hours performed, which equals a discount of $195.00 or 15% discount on labor for the extra man hours only.

$4,990.00 roof balance

$2,190.00 time and material balance

($195.00) 15% discount on labor for the extra man hours only

$6,985.00 Total Due

If Mr. ******* chooses not to accept this offer to resolve this dispute over final cost of the time and material additional work, Brad Smith Roofing Co., Inc. reserves the right to withdraw this offer of the $195.00 discount at any time.

7/21/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Complaint Details Unavailable
9/2/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: Roof replacement commenced on 8/13/14. Job not completed on 8/13. Did not have enough cap shingles to complete dormer. Extra materials left in drive. including pallets and board remained across roof. All debris had not been picked up. Noticed next day. Crew worked late into the evening so was dark when they left so I couldn't blame them. Gutter guards also left on ground and not reinstalled. Told by crew someone would be back next day to complete. No one showed, no one called and no one followed up. Customer called company on 8/18 and inquired about status of project and remaining items. Did not appear that there was knowledge of incomplete items. Given 8/20 for completion. Customer had to call again on 8/21 as supplies and pallets remained in drive and gutter guards not reintalled. Inquired if supplies were supposed to be attic stock or for credit due to over purchase. Told no. Finally picked up but gutter guards still not reinstalled. Call back from company on 8/22 indicating that gutter guards were to be installed on 8/23. No one showed, no one called and no one has followed up as of 8/27/14. Additionally, damage to gutter above garage which must have occurred when crew completed caps and removed board from garage roof. Would like this to be repaired.

Desired Settlement: I would like work to be completed on this project and gutter repaired (or replaced) if repair to original condition is not possible. I would like this to be done as soon as possible and request communication from the company with a firm committment on their part to get this resolved. I have sent an email communication to the president of the company and have requested a meeting with him to further discuss my concerns. I would like this request honored. A copy of the email will be forwarded.

Business Response: Brad Smith received this customer's complaint via email this morning and Brad has responded with the crews at the jobsite to make sure the work is complete. We will be setting up a time to review this project with this customer and Brad Smith. Per the customer's request, I will be calling to set this up after 6pm tonight.

See attached email responses to the customer.

****** *******, Office Manager
Brad Smith Roofing Co., Inc.

Consumer Response:

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. 

I have requested from Mr. Smith that the roof project on my house be inspected to ensure that all work has been completed.  He has agreed to do this during the week beginning August 31st.  Mr. Smith did clarify for me that a GAF inspection does not come with the warrenty I purchased.  I did suggest that this information be presented clearly to others as it was my understanding that this inspection was standard with the installation of a GAF roofing system. 

I met with Mr. Smith on Friday, August 29th to share with him my story and concerns regarding my experience with his company.  It is my hope that the information shared will be of help to his company going forward. 

Once Mr. Smith communicates that the project has been inspected and all work completed this matter will be considered resolved.

Regards,

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


Customer Review(s)

The customer review(s) below are un-filtered. These positive and negative reviews are not used in the calculation of the BBB Rating. If you wish to file a complaint and request a resolution to your issue please click here. This customer review section is not BBBs complaint resolution system. Customer Reviews are the subjective opinion of the individual who posted the review and not of Better Business Bureau. A customer review is not posted on a business if a BBB complaint on the same issue(s) is also filed. BBB cannot guarantee the accuracy of any customer review and is not responsible for the content of any customer review. Public comments are not customer reviews.

Customer Reviews Summary

0 Customer Reviews on Brad Smith Roofing Co. Inc.
Positive Experience (0 reviews)
Neutral Experience (0 reviews)
Negative Experience (0 reviews)