Work described in accepted quote has not been completed. Vendor continues to state they need more money to complete the work described.
We accepted a competitive bid from Wright to grade and sod our west side yard and a portion of the front yard. The bid was in line with other bids received and we selected Wright due to work they had performed a year prior. After accepting the proposal and submitting a deposit, the work was not completed in the estimated time frame and we had to make repeated phone calls to understand when work would be completed. Most calls were not returned.
When the work was conducted the west side yard was not completed. In a follow up conversation with the vendor, they did not acknowledge that they knew the work was incomplete until I addressed the issue. The indication was then that they had calculated the job incorrectly and would send a new quote. The quote was to be for the sod needed to complete the side yard which was estimated to be 4 - 5 rolls. The estimate received was a 50% increase in price from the original quote and not only included sod but included labor, also.
Through various emails and phone conversations with many staff at Wright, in general they state that more money is needed for them to complete the work detailed in the quote due to their math errors. However, they did not follow the standards of their contract to indicate this error until they left the job site and seemed to hope we would accept the work as is.
When looking at the layout of the work area, it seems the west side yard should have been the first area they began working on but instead started at the edge of the stepping stones that run along the west side of the house. The quote specifically calls out moving these stones, grading and replacing the stones as part of the overall project. They contend that they will not complete the work until we pay them more money and Wright has requested final payment for the original proposal even though the work is not complete per their quote description.
Wright has also indicated "we would have been much higher than the other bids that you received, which is common for our company" as an explanation for needing more money to complete the work.
The contract states that "additional materials and/or labor charges may apply according to unforeseen site conditions" however there continued description for not finishing the work is that their math to calculate the cost of work was not correct nor did they contact us about unforeseen conditions as the work was being conducted. Math calculation errors do not seem to constitute an "unforeseen site condition".
Complete the work as described in the accepted contract at the accepted price. Wright did no work to the west side yard as part of their time on site and laid sod starting at the edge of the first stepping stone. It seems they knew of the error prior to work starting but did not follow appropriate protocols to address this or give us the opportunity to respond to the situation so that we were not pulled into a contract that was, at the time the work started, known to be underbid.
Below is the letter we sent to our client. I have removed our estimators name from the text.
We have been updated on the communications you've had with our company regarding work done at your home. We understand that your expectation of the work to be done does not match the result and you would like to have your expectations met.
The proposal from our estimator was for 1600 sq ft of sod. We installed 1600 sq ft of sod. The crews used an additional 200 sq ft to complete the outlined scope of work. At this point the crew had completed what the estimator had outlined for them to do. This is where your expectations were not met. Our estimator did not fully understand the scope of the work you wished to be done, however we have fully executed the scope of work outlined on the proposal you signed. We would like to give you an estimate of the cost to finish the sodding and are prepared to offer you a 20% discount for this work. We will also forgive the additional 200 sq ft from the original proposal.
Our company readily admits that our estimator did not understand the area the client was expecting to have sodded. We are willing to forgive the overage from the first estimate and offer a substantial discount to complete the work to her expectation. We do not feel that we should perform this work at no charge however.
Our client has refused to allow us to present her with a proposal for the completion work so we have no idea what the cost/scope of that work would entail. We are anxious to reach a mutually satisfactory solution to this complaint.
Our client references an increase in price from her original quote. This is incorrect, we estimate all of our sodding at the same rates regardless of the area being covered. Our estimator (who is new to the company)did not calculate labor correctly on the first estimate for removal of the damaged lawn. I will up load both estimates that are being referenced. With the discount of 20% and forgiving the overage of $60 on her first invoice we feel is a fair solution, but are willing to work to settle.
I misspoke, we have provided a proposal for the additional work. I can provide copies if needed. The total after the 20% discount would be $481.60 plus applicable tax.
Final Consumer Response
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
In response to Wright's response, the following items are incorrect:
1.As stated by Wright: "At this point the crew had completed what the estimator had outlined for them to do", "Our estimator did not fully understand the scope of the work you wished to be done, however we have fully executed the scope of work outlined on the proposal you signed" and "The proposal from our estimator was for 1600 sq ft of sod. We installed 1600 sq ft of sod".
Consumer Comment: The attached proposal details the work to be completed and details: 1) removal of stepping stones on the West side of the house before re-grading, 2) removal of existing (damaged) lawn as needed to create a clean edge for new sod, 3) rough grading to smooth ruts and other uneven surface, 4) installation of new sod, 5) re-lay stepping stones on the West side of the house.
Wright staff did not do the grading or sod work in the location of the stepping stones (graphic of lot attached showing where sod was/was not laid). While the crew may have been told by the estimator to not complete work in the area of the stepping stones, the area was to be graded and sodded per the proposal description and was not done resulting in the work not being fully executed.
As the consumer, we received no contact or acknowledgement of the area not being addressed until specifically asking the estimator why the work described in the accepted proposal was not completed. Per the description in the response from Wright, it seems the estimator knew of the issue but chose to not address it in advance of the work starting and instead directed the crew to not complete work in the area. Not notifying us of the known issue and starting the work regardless is unacceptable. Wright should have proactively contacted us, explained the issue and asked us if we wanted to proceed given they would be asking for a cost increase of approximately 50% over the accepted invoice.
Further, it seems unreasonable that the customer was responsible for knowing that the square footage of sod estimated in the quote was not enough to cover the area that we requested to be addressed and that was described in the quote. We should not have to pay for the calculation errors of the employee the company assigned to do the estimate.
2. As stated by Wright: "Our company readily admits that our estimator did not understand the area the client was expecting to have sodded'
Consumer Comment: As referenced in the previous response, the description contained in the accepted proposal along with a graphic of the lot layout makes it clear the estimator understood the scope of the work to be executed but instead directed the crew to not execute work in the area of the stepping stones.
Further, given the area of the stepping stones is the furthest point from the front property line, it makes sense that the crew would have started in this area and worked their way toward the sidewalk so as to not disturb the grading and sod laid.
In phone conversations and emails with the estimator, she acknowledged she knew this area was to be part of the accepted work proposal. In an email on 7/30/13 she stated "the prep work for the side yard was not completed on the day they laid the sod" and "the crew made the decision to not prep that area based on the time they were allowed on site".
3. As stated by Wright: "Our client has refused to allow us to present her with a proposal for the completion work so we have no idea what the cost/scope of that work would entail. We are anxious to reach a mutually satisfactory solution to this complaint"
Consumer Comment: Untrue. Wright provided a quote to finish the work but the point of contention is that we already accepted a proposal for work to be conducted and the work detailed in that accepted quote has not been completed.
As indicated in Wright's response to this issue, the work crew was given the direction to not complete work in an area detailed on the accepted proposal.
As it relates to reaching a mutually satisfactory solution, Wright has been unwilling to complete the work as described in the proposal. We are unwilling to accept an increase in costs that is equal to approximately 50% of the total job cost when the area under discussion was detailed as being addressed in the proposal we accepted. As the consumer, we find it unacceptable to accept financial responsibility for the errors of Wright's estimator.
4. As stated by Wright: "Our client references an increase in price from her original quote. This is incorrect, we estimate all of our sodding at the same rates regardless of the area being covered. Our estimator (who is new to the company)did not calculate labor correctly on the first estimate for removal of the damaged lawn"
Consumer Comment: In an email from the estimator on 07/09/2013 she stated "I'm sure you will notice the total price of the project is higher per square foot of sod than the first proposal that I gave you" along with an email on 7/30/2013 that indicates only 4 rolls of sod were needed to complete the work they did not do when originally on site.
The price quoted for those four rolls of sod was $602.00 which is excessive for four rolls of sod. Additionally, the revised estimate included work that was already part of the previously accepted proposal.
Wright acknowledges that the estimator is new to the company. It was their decision to send a new staff member to the job site to complete the quote without oversight/supervision.
When the original bid was provided, the property had recently had a sewer line replacement done so the area of damage was very clear from the perspective of what needed to be graded/leveled and sodded compared to the rest of the property. As part of the quote, we asked for the sod to be extended down the west side of the home for a consistent look. The accepted proposal clearly indicates the estimator understood the scope of work to include that area as it is the only portion of the property in the work area that has stepping stones.
We believe Wright is making it is the consumer's responsibility to pay for the inexperience and mistakes of a new employee and find this unacceptable. Further, it seems unreasonable that the customer was responsible for knowing that the square footage of sod estimated in the quote was not enough to cover the area that we requested to be addressed.
We are not comfortable submitting a payment for the work completed given the work detailed in the accepted proposal has not been completed. We received three bids on the project and all were within a few dollars of one another. As part of the estimator trying to justify the request for additional dollars to finish the work already quoted and accepted, she indicated in a 7/30/13 email that the approximate 50% increase in price over should be understood because "we would have been much higher than the other bids that you received, which is common for our company" which is another example of the company making it seem it is the consumer's responsibility to now the business and its practices.
We too would like to reach an agreement on when the remaining work will be completed as detailed in the accepted proposal and that the agreed to time for the work to be conducted is reasonable from a weather and temperature perspective but do not believe it is our responsibility to incur extra expense over the accepted bid because:
* The work and quote calculation errors are completely those of Wright Outdoor Solutions
* Wright Outdoor Solutions made no attempt to contact us about these known issues in advance of the work beginning yet state that the estimator directed the crew to not complete the work in the area of the stepping stones.
* There were no unforeseen site conditions that impacted work being completed. The site was fully available to Wright to access when they came to the property as part of submitting a bid. The areas to be addressed were not only explained to them but readily visible. There is nothing about the site itself that changed between when the quote was generated to the time the work was done. The issue is mathematical errors of the estimator.
The consumer should not be made financially responsible for errors and choices made by the estimator and work crew.
We have attempted to work with Wright representatives on this since July and continue to receive additional explanations of their errors and in some cases, receive no response at all but do not accept that it is our financial responsibility to pay for the errors committed by Wright employees and expect the described work to be completed for the cost quoted and accepted.
Final Business Response
Our company does not accept nor agree with all of the client's comments however we are anxious to come to a solution.
Wright Outdoor Solutions would like to extend two offers to the consumer.
1. We are offering to forgive the remaining balance due to Wright Outdoor Solutions so the consumer may seek out another provider to complete the desired work.
2. After the consumer pays the remaining balance on their account, we are offering to complete the below scope of work at no cost. Work would need to be completed in 2014. This is the description from our estimate #XXXXX that was given to the consumer.
This estimate includes additional sod needed to cover the area from the South West corner of the house to the gate of the fence. The concrete stepping stones will be removed and reset and sod will be laid.
Work to include:
Removal of existing (damaged) lawn by raking the dead weeds out to create a clean edge for new sod.
Rough grading to smooth ruts and other uneven surface.
Installation of new sod.
Setting stepping stones to appropriate grade in new sod.
The client will be responsible for watering the sod two to three times a day as needed to keep
the new sod moist at all times for 2-6 weeks until the sod is established. Wright Outdoor Solutions does not guarantee sod.