BBB Business Review

What is a BBB Business Review?

Consumer Complaints

BBB Accredited Business since 08/01/2011

Craftsmen Contractors

Phone: (859) 246-0108Fax: (888) 799-9936

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

Customer Complaints Summary

3 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 1 closed in last 12 months
Complaint TypeTotal Closed Complaints
Advertising / Sales Issues1
Guarantee / Warranty Issues1
Problems with Product / Service1
Billing / Collection Issues0
Delivery Issues0
Total Closed Complaints3

Complaint Breakdown by Resolution

Complaint Resolution Log (3)
06/09/2015Problems with Product / Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Complaint
I would like to report a problem that is ongoing and in which I, the home owner and contract signer am being subject to sloppy business practices, ignored when trying to resolve the problem, discriminated against as an elderly single female.
Attached is the list of projects I requested to be done. Mr *** ******* and Mr ******* ******* came over on March 31,2015 and discussed the project and I gave them a list of what I wanted to be done and to which was added the installation of a pre-cut kitchen counter.
On Thursday morning April 9th Mr *** ******* showed up at 9am with one crew member then another crew came, and presented me with the contract to be signed. I had not seen a copy of the contract prior to the commencement of work. I was never allowed to read or review the contract in its entirety. How can you read or understand a contract when you are being charged $120 to read and sign a contract? A reputable business should not present a contract while the workmen a standing there idly. That is an abusive business practices.
I wrote a check for $400 as a deposit.
Mr ******* kept assuring me he knew how to hang picture molding and his crew could do. They did not know and had never done such work and I was charged for them to learn how to install the molding. It has not been done to my satisfactions with gaps over 1/16 of an inch.
Over and over the workmen, who had no supervision, would make mistakes and poor judgement decisions and I have been left with an unfinished job. The used unsanitary old sink and plumbing fixtures rather than install new ones. As someone in Public Health I am appalled.
RE: Painting. See attached letter. I could complain endlessly.
As a part of this letter is a time line which presents a list of my interactions with the Craftsman business.
Any way you review the final price they charged for the job it was written with the intention of fleecing the client. They were physically in my house for 32.75 hours. They spent about 12 hours painting. The bill as it stands is double billing.
I remain very concerned that they have not gotten back to me and that they in my mind abused an elderly woman who need work to be done.

Desired Settlement
The customer is asking the company to address the issues.

Final Consumer Response

04/21/2016Guarantee / Warranty Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Complaint
We have a roof, completed 11/14, that has had two major leaks since. The contractor is refusing to take full responsibility for the issues and damage.
Our building suffered a partial collapse of a corner eave and parapet wall in June 2014. This collapse necessitated that the existing roof be replaced. The tasks with which we signed a contract with CRAFTSMEN in September 2014 to complete included: rebuilding of the damaged parapet wall, removal and replacement of all eaves on the building, to be built back in the same design style as the original, removal of Spanish tile from the eaves and replaced with newer, lightweight shingles, removal and replacement of the existing roof, including the original decking, installation of EPDM on the new roof to protect against water and weathering, replacement of the roof drainage system to ensure proper flow of rain and snowmelt from the roof.
Since the completion of the project in mid-November 2014, we have had multiple incidents of water infiltration. The first major water infiltration occurred on February 21, 2015 which CRAFTSMEN blamed on an ice dam. Though Mr. ****** did come out to "stop the bleeding," that is as far as his efforts went. This leak caused extensive damage to the upstairs left unit, which was repaired at the cost of the owner.
The second major water infiltration occurred on June 19, 2015. This time, Mr. ****** was unavailable and sent Mr. ***** over to inspect the damage. Upon his arrival, Mr. ***** did not find anything wrong. Hours later, a rain storm came through ultimately causing a flood in the upstairs left unit. The owner insisted that Mr. ***** return to stop the leaking. He came and cleared out some late spring debris, stopping the major leaking. He returned on Monday with the subcontractor only to tell the owner that someone should be on the roof weekly to clear out debris, a requirement that is unacceptable by industry standards.
This leak caused even more damage to the upstairs left unit as well as damage to the downstairs unit. The leak occurred in the exact same place as the "ice dam" leak, consequently damaging the newly replaced plaster. The bedroom in the upstairs unit remains uninhabitable at this time (two months later). Mr. ***** & Mr. ****** made it clear that they were not responsible for the interior damage, nor is there anything wrong with the roof (though Mr. ****** has yet to return to look). There is also new evidence of water damage visible in both right units.
We have had a private third-party contractor inspect the work performed by CRAFTSMEN. This inspection by a third-party expert cited more than a dozen mistakes made by CRAFTSMEN, ranging from minor suggestions to significant redesigns to the drainage system, which the third-party expert stated was woefully inadequate to handle the removal of water from the roof.
Additionally, we have learned that CRAFTSMEN failed to apply for any building and/or construction permits for the project, nor did they complete any architectural drawings for the project. We have also requested an itemized receipt for services totaling more than $83,000 paid to CRAFTSMEN and have never received any documentation resembling a detailed receipt.
The project is under warranty until November 2016. The warranty stipulates that CRAFTSMEN reserves the right to first repairs, and that any work performed by a third-party contractor nullifies the warranty. CRAFTSMEN has been negligent in addressing the multiple seepages of water from an $83,000 project which is less than a year old, and the solutions they have suggested have roundly been rejected by industry professionals whom we have consulted for outside opinions.
We have tried to reason with Mr. ******, but have not yet been presented with a reasonable solution.
We are greatly concerned that in addition to the extensive price tag that it will take to repair the faulty drainage system we may have incurred incalculable water damage to the superstructure of the building which will necessitate extensive repairs that could exceed the original cost of the project performed by CRAFTSMEN.

Desired Settlement
At this point, our ownership group would like for Craftsmen to fund any repairs, inspections, fines, fees, etc. that we may have to incur in order to get the roof fully operable and up to code.

Business Response
Craftsmen has attempted on multiple occasions to propose reasonable and fair solutions to this problem.
Craftsmen can not take responsibly for problems that exist outside of the scope of work we agreed to perform.
Craftsmen has offered to complete additional work to resolve this issue, at no cost, in order to help the customers avoid further damage.
Craftsmen has consistently gone above and beyond and is continuing to offer to do so.
The first occurrence of water infiltration into the building came as a result of massive ice damning. This was a natural event which impacted more buildings in Lexington than any winter storm in decades. We responded promptly and did not charge the customer for labor or materials to rid the building of the ice build up which ceased the leak though the walls.
The last case of leaking in the property was caused by two things, clogged gutters due to a lack of maintenance, and deteriorated mortar joints which allows water to flow into the structure when the gutters are clogged with debris.
Craftsmen has offered to install screens as well as seal the wall behind the gutter. Neither of which were part of our agreement with the customer.
Craftsmen has always and will remain committed to serving our customers to the best of our ability. We can not however, take responsibility for an issue which was not caused by the work we completed.
We have been offering to make these changes since June and have yet to receive authorization to do so.
Regarding permits and drawings, Fayette county does not require or issue permits for roof replacement. Furthermore, no drawings were created as we were returning the property to the same condition as it was originally designed.
Finally, in regards to the findings of the "third party contractor"hired by property owners, the project was inspected and approved by the regional manufacturers inspector upon completion. The roof has thus been certified by the manufacturer to have met or exceeded their standards.
It is our opinion that Craftsmen completed the work requested and specified. We did so correctly. However, we have, and continue to offer to complete additional work beyond the original scope, to ensure that this problem does not continue.

We look forward to receiving communication from the customer.


Consumer Response
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Craftsmen has attempted on multiple occasions to propose reasonable and fair solutions to this problem.

- We refute this claim based on the fact that the 'reasonable and fair solutions' have remained relatively the same or the solutions have been contradictory to prior solutions.

Craftsmen can not take responsibly for problems that exist outside of the scope of work we agreed to perform.

- The work that was performed created the problems, which therefore makes it within the scope of the warranty provided by Craftsmen.

Craftsmen has offered to complete additional work to resolve this issue, at no cost, in order to help the customers avoid further damage.

- We have sustained more damage to the property since the project was complete than ever before (building was built in the early 1900s), the exact opposite of what is expected out of an $85,000 project.

Craftsmen has consistently gone above and beyond and is continuing to offer to do so.

- Initially, Craftsmen presented themselves in this manner, but when their "above and beyond" efforts were truly needed, they have not been there (i.e. repairing the roof).

- Come spring time we finally spent some time outside and started to notice a handful of items displaying poor workmanship. We brought these issues to Craftsmen's attention and followed up as we had not heard back from them as we were told we would. The issues were not able to be resolved given the leak that happened the next week. It seems as though the fixes and repairs have been never ending, and while we appreciate some of them being addressed, all of them need to be addressed.

The first occurrence of water infiltration into the building came as a result of massive ice damning. This was a natural event which impacted more buildings in Lexington than any winter storm in decades. We responded promptly and did not charge the customer for labor or materials to rid the building of the ice build up which ceased the leak though the walls.

- We were very appreciative that they came out to clear the ice that day. But that was the extent of their actions. We had an almost two hour meeting about the ice dam in which we were repeatedly told it was due to poor insulation and the unprecedented weather and that, unless very similar conditions were to happen again, there would not be a problem with the roof.

The last case of leaking in the property was caused by two things, clogged gutters due to a lack of maintenance, and deteriorated mortar joints which allows water to flow into the structure when the gutters are clogged with debris.

- Lack of maintenance is absolutely incorrect. According to the standards in which Craftsmen should have built the roof system (GenFlex's standards), "roof inspections should take place twice a year (in the spring and fall)." We have been on the roof to perform maintenance multiple times since the completion (last winter) including a few weeks prior to this major leak.

- We agree that the mortar joints may need to be fixed, but question why this was not brought to our attention during the project, especially when the leader heads were placed right over that "deteriorated" mortar, blocking any sight of a potential issue. Unlike this seemingly easy fix, Craftsmen was sure to bring potential issues to our attention, so we are certain that they were not shy about offering solutions to maintain the integrity of our building.

- Though Craftsmen is confident in their reasoning for the current leak, to our knowledge none of them have been on the roof since the leak, except for Jacob who came over and cleared out elbow deep debris that he did not see upon first look (proving the point that even if we had looked at the roof the day before, we may not have known there was debris backed up). Phillip, our main point of contact, has yet to come over and inspect for himself. We don't feel confident taking the word of someone who has not even inspected the property.

Craftsmen has offered to install screens as well as seal the wall behind the gutter. Neither of which were part of our agreement with the customer.

- Craftsmen told us previously that we should not install these screens. We were told if we installed them and they became blocked, the roof could potentially hold too much water and collapse. We refuse to accept a solution that was previously recognized as a potential issue.

Craftsmen has always and will remain committed to serving our customers to the best of our ability. We can not however, take responsibility for an issue which was not caused by the work we completed.
We have been offering to make these changes since June and have yet to receive authorization to do so.

- Once again, this issue was in fact caused by the work that was completed by Craftsmen.

Regarding permits and drawings, Fayette county does not require or issue permits for roof replacement. Furthermore, no drawings were created as we were returning the property to the same condition as it was originally designed.

- Fayette County indeed does not require permits for roof replacement, but they do require permits if there is any structural work being done. Our contract stated that "all necessary permits" would be acquired and we confirmed a second time that those permits would be in place before construction began. See below:

(Ryan Kelly) We would like a photocopy of all permits that you will need from the city, county and or federal as you begin construction on the building. We cannot afford this project being suspended and/or postponed as a result of a lack of permit being filed with the city, or an OSHA violation.

(Jacob Hardy) No problem. I will have all permits to you by the start of work.

- Craftsmen states that "no drawings were created as we were returning the property to the same condition as it was originally designed." Wrong. The new "design" that was apparently made up, is very different from the original design. This is a major concern. We are confident that this "design" is the root of all of our issues and would be happy to discuss it further. We are also happy to produce photos if this is necessary, but a quick GoogleMaps street view search will show you what the design used to look like.

- We would also like clarification on where the drawings are that are required by GenFlex in order to submit a project on their website.

Finally, in regards to the findings of the "third party contractor"hired by property owners, the project was inspected and approved by the regional manufacturers inspector upon completion. The roof has thus been certified by the manufacturer to have met or exceeded their standards.

- We would like to see proof of this, please, as well as detailed information as to what exactly was inspected and approved.

It is our opinion that Craftsmen completed the work requested and specified. We did so correctly. However, we have, and continue to offer to complete additional work beyond the original scope, to ensure that this problem does not continue.

- Initially we were told on 9/11/14:
(Ryan Kelly) We would like to ensure that we receive the manufacturer's warranty on the EPDM whether it is the 15, 20 or 30 year product which is utilized. (Jacob Hardy) There will be at least a 15 yr manufacturers warrantee on the material, I am waiting on a callback from our manufacturers rep to see what our options are for extending the warranty. We are certified Master installers from GAF and are able to offer their full range of extended warranties and I will send a followup email detailing those options.
On 9/24/14 the warranty status was changed to:
Regarding the Genflex manufacturers warranty. We are limited in the warranty options due to the type of construction. Since you have a wood deck, as opposed to metal or concrete, they will provide a ten year manufacturer warranty. I have made arrangements for it to be inspected by the manufacturer after the project is complete in order for this to be issued.

***The warranty we received is a 10 year, limited warranty.

Additionally, we are still sustaining damage with each heavy rain and are confident that there is water getting in to other parts of the building that we cannot see from the interior.

We hope this can be resolved in a timely manner.

Final Business Response
Craftsmen has attempted on multiple occasions to propose reasonable and fair solutions to this problem.
- We refute this claim based on the fact that the 'reasonable and fair solutions' have remained relatively the same or the solutions have been contradictory to prior solutions.
--We have attempted to find several ways to help you with the maintenance issues on the building. Obviously our advice has changed at times due to changes in circumstance with the building.

Craftsmen can not take responsibly for problems that exist outside of the scope of work we agreed to perform.
- The work that was performed created the problems, which therefore makes it within the scope of the warranty provided by Craftsmen.
--The problems were created first by a severe weather event that affected many buildings in Central Kentucky. There have been further problems caused by failure of the property owners to regularly clean their gutters. The problems that are happening have been a result of severe weather and gutter blockage caused by leaves. The initial leak happened when gutters were filled with ice. The second when gutters where filled with debris.

Craftsmen has offered to complete additional work to resolve this issue, at no cost, in order to help the customers avoid further damage.
- We have sustained more damage to the property since the project was complete than ever before (building was built in the early 1900s), the exact opposite of what is expected out of an $85,000 project.
--The project we performed does not factor into the maintenance issues that are currently causing problems in the building.

Craftsmen has consistently gone above and beyond and is continuing to offer to do so.
- Initially, Craftsmen presented themselves in this manner, but when their "above and beyond" efforts were truly needed, they have not been there (i.e. repairing the roof).
--We came out several times on weekends and after hours at which time we performed for free the maintanence that was needed on the gutters, cleaning them out. At that point we advised that these gutters, similar to those on a single family home, needed to be regularly cleaned in order to function properly. Again, we are offering to complete additional work at no cost to help remedy the situation.
- Come spring time we finally spent some time outside and started to notice a handful of items displaying poor workmanship. We brought these issues to Craftsmen's attention and followed up as we had not heard back from them as we were told we would. The issues were not able to be resolved given the leak that happened the next week. It seems as though the fixes and repairs have been never ending, and while we appreciate some of them being addressed, all of them need to be addressed.
--There was no issue with workmanship. There were a few minor aesthetic changes requested. Craftsmen had a date scheduled to make these changes and we were asked not to come onto the premises and complete those changes prior to the scheduled date

The first occurrence of water infiltration into the building came as a result of massive ice damning. This was a natural event which impacted more buildings in Lexington than any winter storm in decades. We responded promptly and did not charge the customer for labor or materials to rid the building of the ice build up which ceased the leak though the walls.
- We were very appreciative that they came out to clear the ice that day. But that was the extent of their actions. We had an almost two hour meeting about the ice dam in which we were repeatedly told it was due to poor insulation and the unprecedented weather and that, unless very similar conditions were to happen again, there would not be a problem with the roof.
--We were happy to be of assistance during the ice damming. The severe weather last winter caused many issues around Central Kentucky that are not typical of this region.

The last case of leaking in the property was caused by two things, clogged gutters due to a lack of maintenance, and deteriorated mortar joints which allows water to flow into the structure when the gutters are clogged with debris.
- Lack of maintenance is absolutely incorrect. According to the standards in which Craftsmen should have built the roof system (GenFlex's standards), "roof inspections should take place twice a year (in the spring and fall)." We have been on the roof to perform maintenance multiple times since the completion (last winter) including a few weeks prior to this major leak.
--Inspecting the roof and keeping your gutters free of debris are two separate things. Gutters need to be cleaned as often as they are filled by leaves or other debris. Some buildings with less surrounding tree cover require infrequent maintenance.
- We agree that the mortar joints may need to be fixed, but question why this was not brought to our attention during the project, especially when the leader heads were placed right over that "deteriorated" mortar, blocking any sight of a potential issue. Unlike this seemingly easy fix, Craftsmen was sure to bring potential issues to our attention, so we are certain that they were not shy about offering solutions to maintain the integrity of our building.
--As you have stated previously, this is an old building and there are many areas of the building that could use additional work. It's hard to say for certain what the condition of the mortar joints was prior to the maintenance issues that caused water to back up into the building. The water backup and separate ice damming issues may have loosened the mortar. In our efforts to take care of our clients, we offered to repair the mortar joints at no additional cost.
- Though Craftsmen is confident in their reasoning for the current leak, to our knowledge none of them have been on the roof since the leak, except for Jacob who came over and cleared out elbow deep debris that he did not see upon first look (proving the point that even if we had looked at the roof the day before, we may not have known there was debris backed up). Phillip, our main point of contact, has yet to come over and inspect for himself. We don't feel confident taking the word of someone who has not even inspected the property.
--This is Jacob. I did not see the debris at first because I was called out for a "roof leak." My first thoughts were to objectively look at the roof and see if there were any workmanship issues. I could not find any issues with the roof. I then climbed into the attic space and still couldn't find any area on the roof that a leak was coming from. Once the rain started again I was able to see that the gutters were completely clogged and were backing up into the building through mortar joints that were not part of the work completed by craftsmen.

Craftsmen has offered to install screens as well as seal the wall behind the gutter. Neither of which were part of our agreement with the customer.
- Craftsmen told us previously that we should not install these screens. We were told if we installed them and they became blocked, the roof could potentially hold too much water and collapse. We refuse to accept a solution that was previously recognized as a potential issue.
--Unfortunately a regular maintenance schedule is going to be required in order to keep the gutters free of debris with or without the screens. Craftsmen has repeatedly said that our only concern with installing screens was the structural integrity of the building. We are not saying that screens should not be installed, rather to be conscientious that they not clog and keep large amounts of water on the roof.

Craftsmen has always and will remain committed to serving our customers to the best of our ability. We can not however, take responsibility for an issue which was not caused by the work we completed.
We have been offering to make these changes since June and have yet to receive authorization to do so.
- Once again, this issue was in fact caused by the work that was completed by Craftsmen.
--The debris in the gutters, which blocked the downspout and caused water to back up into the building was not caused by Craftsmen

--The design is the same, which is why no permits were required. We cannot change anything on the exterior of a historic property without approval from LFUCG. A ten year warrantee was offered and provided. Proof of inspection was issued in the form of a Genflex warrantee. We offered and provided a 10 year manufacturer warrantee.

--We have been attempting to contact building owners for months in order to evaluate the building. Furthermore, we have not been advised of any continued leaking. Craftsmen has made multiple requests to be notified immediately if there was any further leaking. We have not received notification of this outside of this complaint. Once again, additional damage can be resolved by regularly cleaning your gutters

12/22/2014Advertising / Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Complaint
Misrepresented who would install new roof, misrepresented item of purchase, didn't fix leak, didn't install properly
On July 11,2014 I was approached by **********, from craftsmen restoration, he was canvassing the neighborhood about new roof and free estimates. (They were replacing a neighbors roof and had the Amish working for them) I accepting because we had a leak and a warped roof. I contacted our insurance, **********, to get an adjustor to come inspect along with ****. It was determined that the backside of the roof needed replacement from hail and wind damage. On July 30, my husband **** and I sat down with **** to pick out our new shingles, We had stated that we wanted the Amish to assemble our new roof and **** had told us that the Amish workers would place our new shingles. We also were looking for energy star rated shingles, after looking at the samples and were told about the difference in price from a 3-tab to a dimensional shingle (GAF Timberline hd) We had decided on the upgrade to a dimensional shingle because we were told it was an energy star rated shingle and had a lifetime warranty, we had also asked for **** to double check with the manufacturer that it was before the install. We never heard back about the energy star rating but was still told it was rated. We were told the install would happened from 4-6 weeks. Within 2 or 3 weeks I received a call to install the roof the following day but still no confirmation on the energy star rating. We still had not finished the financing paperwork but had the check from ********** (Claim #17491w842 check amount $1374.49)come install day. (Complaint 1)On install day on August 13, the Amish workers that we had requested were not there, it was a group of 4 or 5 other workers not the Amish that we were told that would do the install. (Complaint 2) We still hadn't received confirmation that the shingle we picked were energy star rated and looking at the packaging, could not see any identifying marks stating so. The workers finished the job, we liked the new look but we're disappointed that the Amish didn't do it and that the job seemed rushed were we didn't get the answers we wanted about the shingles. (Complaint 3) A week later it had started to rain and the roof still leaked. **** had come back out a day or so later to finally drop off a financing application, I hadvtold him that the roof was still leaking. He went back up and looked at the seals around the vent pipes that stick up out of the roof. I was told it looked good and it shouldn't be leaking. Off and on it continues to leak. During the install their was a warped board that got replaced, (Complaint 4)but I have noticed that their is another board that is warped just not to the degree of the one that was replaced, this was not replaced during the install. (Complaint 5) It is now October 28, I was looking at the new roof and the roof cap vent is pulling up and is possible to get caught by wind and get pulled off and the drip edge that was to be seamless had to get replaced, is not properly attached and is also possible for the wind to catch and pull off. Although the insurance check is the only amount that has been paid, we were to have a rebate from having to realign our ******* satellite and I also feel they came up with a final balance incorrectly, to this day the financing still has not been settled, partially my fault for not having good enough credit, but it still isn't finished.

Desired Settlement
My husband and I have discussed this matter among ourselves and we would like a refund for the amount from ********** ($1374.49) plus the amount of the realignment for our ******* satellite ($49) also not to be placed on any collection or credit report for late payments but to be put toward the placement of a new roof. We would truly like for a new application of shingles that are energy star rated as we intended them to be and fully attach the drip edge so it is seamless as we were told that they would be and plywood boards be properly replaced and all of the vent pipes properly sealed so we will no longer have a concern over a leaky roof. We would not like this work done by the same contractor as they had given us false information on the workers to do the install and over the type of shingles we had picked and that our roof would stop leaking and accept the fact that the roof is still leaking. We were rushed into this job with very little details and answers on the specifics of the job and did not receive the products we wanted or how we wished the install to happen, this is the reasoning for this complaint. We are not satisfied with the finished product! We don't make much and we want what we pay for to be worth what we pay for and this is not it!

Business Response
First, let me say how disappointed we are to have a dissatisfied customer. It is very rare for us to fall short of our customers expectations.
After having inspected the roof, there is no unsuitable decking and the ridge vent mentioned in the complaint is properly installed and fastened. The raised appearance is not a result of improper installation. Waviness as mentioned by the customer is simply a result of normal settling and does not necessitate costly deck replacement. We are not in the business of charging our customers for unnecessary work.
While the Furnace vent doesn't appear to be leaking, we have offered to replace it at no cost to the customer although this item was not payed for. We were aware of financial constraints from the beginning and wished to keep costs as low as possible for our customer by avoiding any unnecessary work which would adversely effect their budget.
As to the apparent misunderstanding regarding the crew. We have several crews who all operate according the the same Standard Operating Procedure and uphold the same level of quality installation practices. Our Amish crew did perform an installation on this street, but we did not give a guaranty of any specific crew according the recollection of our representative and the documents signed by the customer. We do not prioritize work for one crew over another simply because of their religious affiliation.
As to the concern about the shingle type. We have never attempted to sell the Energy Star rated shingle simply because we do not believe in the actual energy impact and cost savings. The conversation we recall had to do with color and reflectivity. The type and color chosen by the customer was documented and signed off on our contract.
A major source of disappointment for us was in the lack of communication regarding these issues. We have dozens of documented and time stamped phone calls made to the customer on two separate phone numbers which were never responded to. We made visits to the home and sent letters. We received no communication from this customer after they were denied for financing until we were forced to take legal action to attempt to collect final payment. Our effort to communicate with the customer to verify satisfaction and collect final payment lasted over two months prior to notifying her that we were sadly going to need to take a different approach since she would not return our calls.
This complaint was filed after she was notified of this action.
We have never left a customer unhappy, nor have we ever had a BBB complaint. We are happy to work towards resolution and want nothing more than for our customer to be happy. We are however concerned that this complaint is primarily an attempt to avoid payment.
We are prepared to reimburse the customer for the cost of the satellite realignment as that is our standard practice if such costs are incurred.
We sincerely wish to avoid any further legal action but will be forced to move in that direction if the customer does not uphold their end of the agreement. A Mechanics lien has already been placed on the home but will of course be lifted as soon as this matter is resolved.


Consumer Response
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
No we are not satisfied with this result. We are still highly interested in having Energy Star rated shingles for our roof, for the tax break on our taxes, on top of the reduction of future bills, and aggravated that after promising a large sum of money we didn't get what we expressed that we highly wanted. Although, they have come back by to check up on the issues we were having, they are still saying the waves are structural and that the ridge vent curling is structural. The lower waves were at a spot that had a previous leak that fell into our microwave (which was replaced last year from a short after a leak). The vent pipe that is still currently leaking (worse after the installation of new roof) they have offered to come out and reflash, we are still waiting, but has only been two weeks with bad weather that's unable to go up onto a roof.

Final Business Response
As previously stated, we are very disappointed that our customer is not satisfied. As proven by our track record of serving thousands of customers with no BBB complaints in the past, it is a rare occurrence for us to fall short of our customers expectations.
We believe this complaint to be primarily an effort to avoid payment of the agreed upon amount for roof replacement. The only functional problem with the roof we installed relates to a furnace cap which was not included in our estimate. Seeing as it is now causing a problem we have offered to replace it free of charge. Prior to this complaint being filed there were many attempts to contact the customer (all of which are documented and time stamped) to verify satisfaction and to collect payment as agreed. None of these calls were answered or returned. Subsequent to notification of intent to place a mechanics lien on the property, this complaint was lodged, without so much as a phone call to our office.
The shingles which were installed on the home were documented in writing and signed off on by the customer. According to our written agreement no such promise of energy star shingle was made. In fact, we avoid using these shingles purely because we do not believe that they are effective or a good value to our customers. The discussion which was had related to the impact of light colored shingles, which were agreed to in writing and installed.
Seeing as this roof was installed in accordance to our written agreement and in compliance with all building codes and manufacturer specifications, we have no intention of issuing a refund or forgiving the balance owed to our company for work performed. We are open to discussing a reasonable resolution with this customer, should they choose to communicate with us directly.
This is truly an unfortunate situation which we do not believe to be of our doing.




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

Industry Comparison| Chart

Roofing Contractors, Contractors - General, Construction & Remodeling Services

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

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

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

X

What is a BBB Business Review?

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

X

BBB Reporting Policy

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

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

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