BBB Logo

Better Business Bureau ®
Start With Trust®
Hawaii

BBB Accredited Business since

SCV Pools, Spas & Masonry

Phone: (808) 326-2005 Fax: (808) 329-0924 74-5605 Alapa St Ste 103, Kailua Kona, HI 96740 http://www.scvpools.com

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

Description

This company offers construction of swimming pools, spas, ponds, waterfeatures, masonry, concrete, walls, tile and granite work.

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that SCV Pools, Spas & Masonry 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 16 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for SCV Pools, Spas & Masonry include:

  • Length of time business has been operating.
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size.
  • Response to 2 complaint(s) filed against business.
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business.
  • BBB has sufficient background information on this business.


Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

2 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 1 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 2
Total Closed Complaints 2

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

0 Customer Reviews on SCV Pools, Spas & Masonry
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

top
BBB file opened: October 31, 2008 Business started: 12/28/2006 Business started locally: 12/28/2006 Business incorporated: 12/28/2006 in CA
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:

State of Hawaii Department of Taxation
PO Box 1425, Honolulu HI 96806
http://pahoehoe.ehawaii.gov/tls/app
Phone Number: (808) 587-4242
The number is W56319913-01.

DCCA Consumer Resource Center
235 S. Beretania Street, 8th & 9th Floors, Honolulu HI 96813
Phone Number: (808) 587-4272
The number is C27992.

DCCA Consumer Resource Center
235 S. Beretania Street, 8th & 9th Floors, Honolulu HI 96813
Phone Number: (808) 587-4272
The number is C27993.

Type of Entity

Corporation

Business Management
Ms. Robin Hosmer, Secretary Dephanie, Controller Mr. Steve Erenberg, President
Contact Information
Principal: Ms. Robin Hosmer, Secretary
Business Category

Swimming Pool Contractors, Dealers, Design Tile - Ceramic - Contractors & Dealers Brick - Concrete, Pumice Masonry Panels - Prefabricated

Alternate Business Names
S.C.V. Pools, Spas & Masonry, Inc.

Additional Locations

  • 74-5605 Alapa St Ste 103

    Kailua Kona, HI 96740 (808) 326-2005

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

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.

Professional AffiliationsX
X

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
  • Delivery
  • Guarantee or Warranty

We do not handle workplace disputes, discrimination claims or claims about the quality of health or legal services.

X

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.

X

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.

X

What government actions does BBB report on?

BBB reports on known significant government actions involving business' marketplace conduct.

X

Thank you for your feedback!

Help us improve by taking our survey.

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.

Find a LocationX

  Change Location
Show Only Accredited Locations


Complaint Detail(s)

4/21/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: Refused to floow inderstry standers for pool. Wouldn't seal tile. Wouldn't use new material and material was old and clumps for plaster.

Desired Settlement: Pay $1000.00 to settlement

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/04/08) */ We find this interesting as this is being filed by a person who claims to be a general contractor but is not licensed in the State of Hawaii and has been illegally performing contracting work. He also is not the customer but someone working for the client. The client has been served by us for breach of contract. The court date is 4-29-14. This complaint is not from the client. We performed our work competently and on schedule. Sealing of the grout for the tile is not industry standard and all grouting material used was new and in good condition. We have the receipts to proof it was new. We have been building and remodeling pools for well over 45 years and are well experienced in industry standards and we adhere to them. We are a licensed contractor in the State of Hawaii. We ask this claim not to reach the public as a court date is pending and again these accusations are from an unlicensed contractor and not the client. In addition, they are false accusations.

12/18/2012 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: Didn't provide: work to be completed by subcontractors and a timeline Use of unlicensed contractors Unprofessional conduct Not finishing project SCV Pools did not provide a written time line of the project despite numerous verbal and written requests. Unlicensed subcontractors were used. Unprofessional conduct was displayed throughout the project, such as: name calling and speaking poorly of us to other workers and subcontractors, threatening behavior (to shut down the project if we did not do as he said, to sue us if we did not do as he said, other threatening of us to do as he says, putting us in charge of overseeing subcontractors, finding subcontractors, paying subcontractors directly), not respecting personal and professional time (calling late at night and during critical work hours as opposed to communicating over preferred method of email. Overall length of project was well beyond industry standard (well over 11 months) despite many avoidable delays (prioritizing other projects, and ****** not making himself available during critical stages). Poor oversight of work leading to: visible eye sores (marred stone walls, poor grouting technique, substrate material for concrete decking was wrong material resulting in cracked joints, boot imprints in our concrete decking, and plaster over-spray). Not returning work site/yard to industry standards following pool construction (ditches left uncovered in our yard, base course scattered over our lawn preventing mowing of grass, and deep tractor trenches which would normally be graded and smoothed over.

Desired Settlement: We are seeking a financial refund which correlates with what it would cost to remedy the concrete decking, the improper grouting, the marred stone walls, and to grade the yard (again, which is usual and customary in the industry, and something he several times told us he would do)

Business Response: Business' Initial Response /* (1000, 9, 2012/11/19) */ We are always more than willing to work with our clients to assure that they are completely satisfied with their project. We have been in business for over 40 years and would not have been so if we were unwilling to resolve issues. This client has brought forth these items of concern 2 ½ months after the completion of the project. In addition, they relayed none of these items to us when we followed up with them a month after completion. A timeline was not requested until midway through the project. At that time we provided a date for completion with the understanding that this project is located in an area where the rainfall is one of the highest in the world, thus rain delays were highly likely and the completion date would be revised accordingly. During the time of this project, it rained over 84% of the time thus causing the work to have to stop and then be rescheduled. This made it impossible to complete the project in a normal time frame. It was unfortunate that this project had to stop and go because of the weather but this was out of our control and we are baffled by the fact that the client is not taking this into consideration when there were conversations and emails about this. We are very concerned that the client feels that "Unprofessional conduct" was displayed. We are a licensed contractor and know that we would be in violation of our license if we walked off a project and left the project uncompleted and at no time have we ever wished to enter into a lawsuit. It is unfortunate the client states the use of unlicensed subs. Our records indicate that subs were licensed. Is the client confusing the subs with material suppliers? We are also concerned they feel they were left in charge of overseeing subs, finding subs and paying subs. To our knowledge, they found one company of their choice to do clean up of the yard and paid them a partial payment at that time. We reimbursed them and made the remainder of this payment. We also have emails asking them not to discuss the project with the workers or subs and to please contact the owner of our company so that he could relay direction. They would request changes and would ask the workers to do this directly. We consistently asked them to stop this and communicate their requests to the owner of the company as many of the changes were not in our contract and were resulting in cost overages which we never asked them to pay for. These changes also contributed to the amount of time it took to complete the project. The phone calls that took place at night are because the client's husband works at a hospital and works odd hours and we can show messages asking us to call him at night or on the weekends. We were simply trying to accommodate the clients schedule and available times for one on one discussions. We are in communication with this client regarding the items they are saying are in defect or need repair. We have told them quite clearly that all they needed to do was contact us directly and we are more than willing to repair anything that we are responsible for to their complete satisfaction. We have asked them for further clarification on the items they are concerned with and exactly what they want done. This area is still under communication to find out exactly what it is they are in need of. We will work with them diligently to come to a resolution. Consumer's Final Response /* (3000, 20, 2012/12/18) */ From: ************ Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:15 PM To: ************** Subject: Re: BBB Complaint Case#********(Ref#XX-XXXXXXXX-********-XX-XXXX) Aloha Ms. ****** We are attaching our reply as a word document. I am not sure if it is not coming through as a file you can open or not. If it is not found on this email, please let us know. Mahalo for your assistance, ******* and ************ We are pleased to hear the contractor is now willing to work with us to resolve our complaints. It is true we are following up on these issues through formal channels 2 ½ months after the completion of the project. However, the majority of them were brought up at the time of final payment and/or during the course of the project. At that time, the contractor said he was not willing to work with us further to resolve these complaints. Unfortunately, there are also new problems of which we have only recently become aware. Timeline – Prior to starting this project, we were not aware of regulations that mandate contractors provide clients with a written timeline for project completion in the contract (not simply per client request). During contract negotiations in September 2011, we were verbally told that construction would take 4 months. However, we asked for a written timeline on several occasions and were repeatedly told that is would be “impossible” to provide such information given the unpredictable nature of construction (e.g., weather, permitting, etc). It was not until June 2012 that we learned he was violating industry regulations by not providing us with a timeline at the outset of a project. At that time, we gave the contractor a deadline for project completion by July 2012 or threatened to seek assistance from RICO. Only then did we finally receive a written statement from the contractor agreeing to this timeline. The project was “completed” in August 2012, more than 11 months after we signed the original contract. Project Delays - Inclement weather is certainly a legitimate reason for construction delays, especially when working in Hilo over the winter. However, we do not know where the contractor came up with the statistic “it rained over 84% of the time.” We do not agree that weather was the primary cause of delays (though it was certainly part of the problem). We were impressed with how much the workers were able to accomplish in spite of the rain, when they were actually onsite to work. Our records show only 2 days of work were cancelled as a direct result of inclement weather over the entire course of the project. Our primary complaint regarding project delays are related to the long periods of time when nobody would even show up to our site regardless of weather conditions, some of which spanned more than a months time. We have emails to the contractor documenting our distress regarding the lack of attention to our project, especially during periods of good weather. Project Oversight - Another significant complaint we have was the lack of presence and oversight by the contractor that resulted in a difficult working relationship, miscommunications, and poor workmanship. To illustrate, between February 2nd 2012 and June 16th 2012, the contractor was only onsite once. Additionally, despite our protests, he was not onsite for major stages of construction, including the placement of approx. 1000 sf of concrete decking and the plastering of the pool. Unfortunately, we believe his absence during both of these stages directly resulted in an inferior end product (described below). Given the contractor’s notable absence during the course of the project, we were also forced into uncomfortable and inconvenient situations. For example, it is true we spoke directly to the workers and subcontractors on several occasions. However, this was often at the direct bequest of the contractor, or when such individuals approached us with questions, or when we had questions or concerns. These situations would have been avoidable had the contractor been onsite regularly. Furthermore, on several occasions, the contractor requested we pay subcontractors directly either because he was not onsite to do so or had “forgotten” his checkbook. These requests made us uncomfortable since they were often last-minute, were not part of the agreed-upon contract and, at times, resulted in our paying money before it was due. The one occasion we refused such a request, we were told that it would further “delay the project.” Finally, we were often forced into putting our own labor into tasks that should have been the contractor’s responsibility in order to avoid delays and/or damages. Examples include, but are not limited to, the following: documenting addendums to the original contract, moving gravel so new material could be delivered, digging through backfill to uncover a blocked drainage line, removing tenting, watering concrete and brushing plaster several times/day, and identifying potential subcontractors. Unlicensed Subcontractors - With regard to the use of unlicensed subcontractors, we have come to learn the excavator who completed backfill was not licensed. The contractor had significant difficulty finding an excavator to backfill the pool. After more than two months with no progress, the contractor suggested we try to find someone if we wanted more timely progress. As a courtesy and an attempt to avoid further delay, we introduced the contractor to an excavator we knew of. We were not responsible for negotiating a price, hiring, or paying him. However, we did end up making a partial payment directly to this excavator because the contractor forgot his checkbook on the day payment was due. Of note, “backfill” should not be confused with “clean up of the yard,” which was never fully completed (see below). We trusted our contractor to use only licensed subcontractors in the completion of our pool per industry standards. At present, we are not aware of the credentials of other subcontractors utilized in our project and can only hope the use of an unlicensed excavator was an exception, though we understandably have concerns. Unprofessional Conduct - We are glad (though surprised) to hear the contractor is concerned about unprofessional conduct. We were, in fact, appalled by the way in which the contractor conducted himself and treated us throughout the course of the project. Suffice it to say that during disagreements and negotiations, conversations were often tumultuous and frequently deteriorated into yelling, insults, and threatening behavior. On multiple occasions the contractor threatened us with delaying progress, shutting down the project entirely, and/or lawsuits if we did not agree to his terms. Unfortunately, such intimidation tactics were encountered relatively frequently. Even during more “productive” encounters, it was not uncommon for the contractor to make inappropriate comments or jokes that we found offensive. Similarly, we observed the contractor having interpersonal difficulties with subcontractors that we found uncomfortable and worried such interactions may affect their work on our project. Lastly, the contractor often spoke poorly of other subcontractors and clients to us, and we’ve heard rumors since that he has spoken poorly of us to others. Had we not invested so much money into the project during early stages of construction (that we felt we would not be able to recoup), we would have ended our relationship with him given his conduct alone. Poor Workmanship – Given that our project went 35% over budget and 175% over the described timeline, we feel the least we are due is a quality end product. As such, we are seeking retribution for incomplete work and damages that may still be remedied and we feel were the responsibility of the contractor. The following is a list of items for which we are seeking retribution: 1) Overspray of plaster onto Baja shelf 2) Marring of stone walls and poor grout workmanship 3) Cracked and chipped grout between stone steps and driveway 4) Ili ili stone improperly fixed to water feature wall resulting in visible mesh between stones and stones falling off wall 5) Concrete deck shows significant flaws, including but not limited to, the following: uneven concrete deck to coping heights, minimal texture/stamp imprints in a large portion of the deck, crumbling joint lines, visible trowel lines along the joints, and boot imprints left in the decking from workers 6) Water stains in plaster finish of pool 7) ****** leading into spa is slanted forward (i.e., not level), resulting in a fall hazard 8) Failure to perform 30 days of adequate maintenance as stated in contract 9) Failure to return the work site/yard to acceptable industry standards, including, but not limited to the following: a) open trenches left in yard along with deep tractor tracks left ungraded, b) road of gravel left spanning the width of our lawn The contractor has stated that he is willing to work with us to repair defects in workmanship and we remain hopeful that we will be able to come to a resolution regarding these issues. Unfortunately, nothing can be done now to remedy many of our other complaints described above. It is also our hope that by discussing such grievances openly through formal channels, other potential clients may benefit from learning about our experiences with this contractor.