BBB Accredited Business since

Constructech Venture Group

Phone: (425) 445-2697  

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


This company offers interior and exterior remodeling services, including decks, fences, painting, dry rot and tile work.

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Constructech Venture Group 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 Constructech Venture Group 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

Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

2 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 0 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 Constructech Venture Group
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

BBB file opened: October 09, 2009 Business started: 06/01/2008 Business started locally: 06/01/2008
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:

Washington Department of Revenue
6500 Linderson Way SW Fl 1, Tumwater WA 98501
Phone Number: (800) 451-7985

Washington Department of Labor & Industries
7273 Linderson Way SW, Tumwater WA 98501
Phone Number: (800) 647-0982

Type of Entity


Business Management
Mr. Wayne Ferguson, Partner Mrs. Angela Ferguson, Partner
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Wayne Ferguson, Partner
Business Category

Deck Builder Construction & Remodeling Services Fence Contractors Tile - Non-Ceramic - Contractors & Dealers Painting Contractors Patio & Deck Builders

Hours of Operation
24 hours a day, 7 days a week

Additional Locations


BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.

Customer Review Experience Value
Positive Review 5 points per review
Neutral Review 3 points per review
Negative Review 1 point per review

BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.

BBB Letter Grade Scale

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)

1/28/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Constructech is wanting me to pay the sales taxes on the amount that I had already paid them, even though the amount includes sales taxes. This is the issue we are trying to resolve. I have paid all dues to Constructech (nearly 2 weeks ago). Constructech is not depositing my final check, and is holding on to my lien-disclosure agreement (required by WA state department of labor and industry) - this is supposed to be returned after all the payments are made. Constructech signed a contract with me to re-model my deck and agreed upon a price of $34,187.18 including sales taxes, on January 7, 2014. I had paid $15,000 as advance payment for the project. There was an issue getting the building permit from the King County and as a result, we had to revise the project scope. Constructech presented me with a revised quote for the project - $44895, on March 13, including sales taxes that we signed as an addendum to the contract. The work was supposed to be complete in 43 days, starting March 13. Towards the end of May, the project was not even close to being complete. Repeated asks of a revised completion date was never responded by Constructech. Between January 7 and May 30, Constructech had already collected $35,000 from me. On June 1 Constructed presented me with a revised "Cost Projection to Finish Contract" - a detailed estimate of what it will take to complete the project - $21,020, including taxes. This estimate did not indicate that sales taxes have not been paid on the $35,000 I had already paid. I attempted to have Constructech convert this estimate into a formal contract addendum, but they did not oblige. Given the history of the project before this, I was nervous to give a large sum of money to Constructech. Hence I proposed that I will manage the budget against this amount, will buy materials and give them a small amount of money for incidentals, and at the end of the project, whatever is remaining in the budget is theirs. Although they did not sign an agreement to this, they continued to work on the project, while I paid for the materials that Constructech bought for the deck. Under this plan, I had paid an additional $5,500 to Constructech, in June. I had also bought $17,097 of materials to complete the project. Essentially we are exceeding the $21,020 budget from the revised estimate from Constructech as well. The project delayed even further and Constructech was not responsive to any queries of a revised completion date at all. It was getting more and more difficult to work with them. Constructech could not find a carpenter and an electrician to work on the project - I had to refer people that I know to Constructech and guarantee payment to them in order to make progress on the deck. Finally, on August 8, they completed the project and presented me with an invoice that consists of: 1. Sales taxes on the total cash I paid to Constructech thus far ($40,500) = $3,847.50 2. Outstanding Service Fee = $4,468.36, including taxes. I had explained to Constructech that the outstanding Service fee is just that - the remaining money due to them. And made 2 payments $2600 and $2000 = $4,600. I had also forgiven Constructech from making $300 payment each to the carpenter and the electrician and I paid them myself. Constructech got $600 extra. If you just take the original addendum as the basis - and ignore all the money that I had spent on material, and all the stress that I had to endure working with Constructech, the total I paid to Constructech ($35,000 + $5,500 + $4,600 + $600 = $45,700) - which exceeds the contract price $44,895. If you consider the revised, June 1 estimate from Constructech (for $21,020): - The balance due per the old contract on June 1 = $9,895. - The revised estimate supersedes this = $21,020. - We spent against this budget to build the deck, there is no money remaining. - Constructech is presenting an invoice of $4,468, and I had paid $4,600 + $600 = $5,200 - more than what is remaining per the contract. Constructech is not hearing it, despite many tries from me. My attorney also had spoken to Constructech and they either don't understand or simply want to extract more money from me. ***** ********, from Constructech has been the one I am working with. He had even sent me emails stating that per the WA state Department of Revenue codes, I owe him sales tax. There was no changes to the project scope and there are no change orders. I wanted only one change - to install additional decking in the SPA area and I was willing to pay for this. Throughout the project, Mr. ******** had been very arrogant, never listened to us and is always evading any kind of responsibility for the project. He continued to demand money through the project - even before the first nail was hit on the deck, soon after accepting the first payment.

Desired Settlement: I realize that Constructech had underestimated the job and had already worked with them to get the project completed -- and I have borne all the additional costs. I want them to accept the final payment that I had already made and return the lien release to me and sign a release stating they got all their money, their subcontractors are paid and I got all the work done.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2014/10/19) */ CONSTRUCTECH VENTURE GROUP XXX-XXX-XXXX Email – ************ General Contractor License # ************ Shortly after the first of the year ***** received a call from **** *********, requesting a bid for the remodel of a three level deck. **** wanted the spa and the lower deck against the house. ***** designed the lower deck spa and pergola off of the house as a focal point in the yard at ****’s amazement. On January 9, 2014 **** ********* entered into a contract with Constructech Venture Group (CVG); ***** ********; for a three level deck remodel and addition; approx. 1000sf. The contract also included demolishing and removal of a lower. The original contract agreement; see Item I was proposed at $35,987.18, but **** said that he couldn’t afford that much and asked that ***** take off part of the fee. The cost of the building permit assumed to be around $600 increased to approx. $1,800. All contract proposals have an itemized line for WSST; see Items I & II. The contract fee was reduced and the permit fees increased. This was one of the reasons we ran out of money. After ***** submitted drawings, the permit was denied because the existing deck was built illegally and incorrectly over septic tank; see Item III. The final approval almost 7 weeks later required additional meetings with the King County Health and Building Departments, which resulted in an additional permit fees of over $1,400. ***** spent unpaid time to draw two separate designs when the final approval was given; see Item IV. ***** suggested cost effective approaches to reduce the fee, but **** wanted all of the epic features. On March 13, 2014 CVG renegotiated the contract to cover the additional material costs and requirements by King County. ***** originally quoted $48,000 plus tax, but the contract was negotiated at $41,000 plus tax. Based on the additional work required by the Building department, time spent on the project, ***** renegotiated the contract for $41,000 plus tax bringing the total to $44,895.00; see Item V. It should also be noted that even with this agreement; ***** told **** that this would be a very tight budget. Material costs continued to increase for *****. Below is a list of additional work performed outside the original Scope of Work that was identified by ***** and approved or requested by ****. These cost increments for material were approved by **** without hesitation: • Building permit mitigation due to illegal deck construction • Additional architectural drawing due to illegal deck construction • Additional permit fees due to illegal deck construction • Extra caulking provided at contractor’s discretion • Travel time and mileage to get discount on material • Painting mid-level 8’x20’and lower deck 19’x19’ deck joist for moisture protection • Removal of original material used at spa area • Installation of extra **** decking at spa area • Elderly friendly steps with 13 inch stair treads were built for easier climb • Two extra posts installed at stair from mid-level to upper deck • Additional **** patterns @ stairs • New hose bid installation to stop water leak onto house • Chandelier detail in middle of pergola • Extra bracing under the stairway • Extra gas used due to location of project – paid $80/wk for last 8 weeks without compensation • Installation of rodent barrier at lower deck 16’-0 x 16’-0 wrap around • Installation of pea gravel walkway to backyard • Earthquake bracing at upper deck • Entry opening at pergola – design and construction change • Sawmill cost to cut cedar to 4’x8’ from 8’x8’ to save money on pergola build & travel • 10 additional lighted rail post @ $74.84 each; see Item VI By the end of May, CVG put together a final proposal that required an additional $21,020 including sales tax; see Item VII. After reviewing the cost breakdown with ****, **** took over the distribution of funding and management of the project because he no longer trusted *****. The change required extra time to make purchases, because **** or ***** had to approve them first. ***** drove to Tacoma, Kent and Snohomish County, without additional compensation for time or gas. In the end the material costs to complete the project under ****’s management came to $17,097, while ***** felt punished, ***** finished the project as promised. He worked from June 1 to August 20 to completion of the project without compensation and with limited help, because **** was controlling what could be spent. In our final invoice we only requested payment for the sales tax on the revenue received as required by RCW 82.08.050-Buyer to pay, seller to collect tax ; see Item VIII. and reimbursement for additional services for the hired labor cost, see Item IX. In the email from **** dated 8/10/14 he says he would pay for the Additional Services totaling $4,468.36 but wouldn’t pay the sales tax on the $40,500 paid to CVG that is clearly shown on a separate line on our contract; see Item XI. All payments received up to this point were even dollar amount and didn’t include tax. **** said taxes were included in his payments. The payments received were installments paid exactly how the contract was laid out and tax was a separate line item to be paid at the completion of the project. Payments for $15,000, $13,000 and $7,000 were received as shown on our contract. An additional $5,500 for **** and labor rounded off the contract cost for $40,500 Item XIII. At the Department of Revenue to verify the law, CVG contracts and emails were reviewed. The DOR staff informed ***** that he was within the law to request payment for revenue received. **** has gone to an attorney without results and now has initiated this complaint with the BBB. As a small contractor, ***** had to coordinate his high construction standards with a limited budget. This resulted in more time shopping for lower cost on material, and using labor with limited skill sets. The bids for subcontractors to install the railing and the electrician were high. ***** talked to owner and **** said he was familiar with an electrician and a handy man that came in with bids that fit the deck budget. When days, weeks and month of your effort is discounted with an angry or unhappy customer it may look like arrogance. When in reality ***** was just defending the planning, coordination and scheduling constraints of the work. Addressing things misconstrued in ****’s complaint: • All contracts show the tax owed by the client as a separate line item and it was communicated on several occasions that tax would be collected at the end of construction. • The “Cost Projection to Finish Contract” document laid out additional cost including tax totaling $21,020. It should be noted that sales tax was an issue with the first renegotiated contract; see Item XII. • **** stated in an email dated 8/10/14; see Item XI, page 2; that he was going to pay $4,468.36 to cover the additional service fees. He also stated he wasn’t going to pay the taxes. All the legal counsel we have talked with agree that **** is responsible for the sales tax. • **** states that he paid Constructech $5,200, but, our records show we received $2,600 on August 10 and another check totaling $2,000 dated September 10, with a note that said final payment that we haven’t cashed. The $600 he notes in his complaint was part of the additional services $4,468.38 to cover the costs. **** can’t show us the checks that equal the $5,200 he said he paid CVG. • During the last three months of the project, ***** worked without compensation. Since **** was managing the project, ***** status changed. **** believed that the $600 “gift” covered *****’s time and effort, but it doesn’t even come close. At this time we are just asking to cover the cost of the additional services and the sales tax. • In this complaint, **** requested the Lien Disclosure document with the premise that all payments have been made. We asked **** for time to research the sales tax issue. We told **** that once the sales tax issue was resolved and all debts paid we will sign off on the document; **** has not paid the sales tax of $3,847.50 noted in our final invoice. CVG acknowledges that this project had time and cost overruns, but 90% of the money received went to material and labor costs. CVG was committed to complete the project to produce a quality product. The deck design, special features, workman and craftsmanship have been met to the owner’s approval and appreciation. We feel that the additional $3,715.86 including the check we haven’t cashed is the correct compensation for the work completed. Based on the information we provided and the professional advice we’ve received, we need your assistance to explain to ****; without upsetting him; that he is obligated to pay for the additional services; see Item XI and the Washington State Sales tax. We believe that we should be able to collect the sales tax. ***SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REDACTED BY BBB*** Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2014/10/22) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Response to ConstrucTech Venture Group's response - 10/21/2014 Summary ConstrucTech's interpretation that I am not paying sales taxes is just wrong. The project is governed by the contract that we signed and no matter which way we look at it, the total payments made to ConstrucTech exceed the total (including taxes) based on the contract. Table of payments made to ConstrucTech - I have copies of checks deposited by *****. Payment Date Check # Amount January 8, 2014 **** $15,000.00 March 14, 2014 **** $13,000.00 April 30, 2014 **** $7,000.00 June 8, 2014 **** $4,000.00 June 25, 2014 **** $1,500.00 August 10, 2014 **** $2,600.00 September 10, 2014 - ***** has not cashed this yet **** $2,000.00 Total $45,100.00 If you just take the original March 13, 2014 contract addendum (Exhibit 1) - the last one that is signed - as the basis - and ignore all the money that I had spent on material (per *****'s revised estimate), and all the stress that I had to endure working with ConstrucTech, the total I paid to ConstrucTech ($15,000 + $13,000 + $7,000 + $4,000 + $1,500 + $2,600 + $2,000) = $45,100) - this exceeds the contract price $44,895, including taxes. If you consider the revised, June 1, 2014 estimate (Exhibit 2 - COST PROJECTION TO FINISH CONTRACT from ConstrucTech for $21,020.00) as the basis: - The balance due per the old contract on June 1 = $9,895 ($44,895 - $35,000 that was paid before June 1). - The revised estimate from the proposal supersedes this. The new balance is $21,020 - including taxes. - I spent against this $21,020 budget per *****'s guidance, to get the deck completed, there is no money remaining. I spent on materials (taxes paid to the merchants), paid ***** $5,500.00 between June 1 and August 9, per his labor cost estimate in the proposal - $5,005.00. - ConstrucTech is presenting an invoice of $4,468 (the "Outstanding Service Fee", including taxes). I had paid $4,600 = ($2,600 on Aug. 10 and $2,000 on Sep. 10 that ***** has not deposited yet). - The total price for the project per the contract is ($35,000 per the original March 13, addendum + $21,020 per the revised estimate = $56,020.00. - The total amount paid to ***** is: o $35,000 before June 1 ($15,000 + $13,000 + $7,000) o $5,500 payments to ***** per the labor estimate on the proposal ($4,000 + $1,500) o $17,097 paid for materials based on the revised estimate from ***** o The "Outstanding Service Fee" in the final invoice that was paid ($2,600 on Aug. 10 and $2,000 on Sep. 10 that ***** has not deposited yet) o The total = $62,197.00. This exceeds the total price per contract. - The June 1, 2014 revised estimate from ***** (Exhibit 2) did not state that sales taxes were not paid on the $35,000 payments already received by ConstrucTech. Either way, the total paid to ConstrucTech exceeds the contract amount, including taxes. It is ConstrucTech's responsibility to set aside money for sales taxes and pay them. There is no reason to pay additional money for taxes. I cannot set a precedent by paying additional money for taxes - is ConstrucTech going to come back to me for payment to others? What is the purpose of the contract then? *****'s final invoice (Exhibit 4) stated the "Outstanding Service Fees" as $4,468.36 - and this was paid ($2,600 on Aug. 10 and $2,000 on Sep. 10 that ***** has not deposited yet). Outstanding Service fee means fee outstanding against the contract. In addition, I have excused ***** from paying $600 to the subcontractors that he was supposed to pay - ***** could not hire anyone else, and I had to bring the subcontractors that I had known to help him, guaranteeing their payment - and I paid them. This $600 is extra for *****. Quoting from the last paragraph from *****'s response - "We feel that the additional $3715.86 including the check we haven't cashed is the correct compensation for the work completed" - ***** is simply asking for more money beyond what is there in the contract. This is just not professional way of conducting a business. While I agree that *****'s individual craftsmanship was not an issue, his ability to act as a general contractor - hiring other workers, managing the project budget, acting in a professional manner to provide accurate estimates and completion dates, follow the scope of the work agreed upon, track changes - was not even barely adequate to be in business. The only reason why I had to take over managing the project is because there was no progress on the work, even after paying $35,000 towards the project (as of June 1), ***** will not provide a revised completion date, and ***** was just asking for money all the time. ***** claims his status changed as of June 1 - this is not true. Even though I paid for the materials and paid $5,500.00 to ***** (per the labor cost estimate that ***** provided), all decisions about the project - hiring of other workers, selecting the materials to buy, where to buy the materials from, etc. - were made by *****. *****'s claim that he did a lot of additional work is just false. No professional contractor can keep working for 8 months (the project ran from January and was completed in late August) without any change tracking. ***** is the professional here and if he thought the work items were additional beyond the scope of agreed upon work, he should have told me and made change orders. Change orders are required by the contract between us. In the only instance where I had initiated a change and specifically asked for the additional price for the change, ***** did not want to give me a price, nor wanted to produce a change order (Exhibit 6). On another instance ***** demanded extra money for final cleanup, even though the original project agreement and punch list included final cleanup. I have email records to prove this. Quoting from *****'s response - "Extra gas used due to location of project - paid $80/wk for last 8 weeks without compensation" - ***** knew exactly where the project is going to be before signing the contract and he wants to get paid to just show up for work at the work site? Coming to work is just part of the job and cannot be an additional expense. This is just one example of how ***** doesn't follow the contract and misrepresents. I have gone above and beyond to accommodate ***** to work with him by following the contract, despite the very stressful conditions that ***** created on the project. In good faith, I realize that he had underestimated the project and have accommodated that. ***** should be grateful that I had not held him to the original contract addendum (March 13, 2014) of $44,895, when he presented the revised estimate on June 1. We are done with the project, I have paid him more than what the contract says, and he should just move on. ***** cannot intentionally underbid the project and increase the prices along the way - this is not professional. My attorney had communicated to ***** these facts and ***** is not listening. I sent the final payment to ***** on Sep. 10, with a detailed explanation per advice from my attorney in good faith to settle this. I am willing to consider the following and resolve this in good faith: - ***** had managed the project before June 1 and it is his responsibility to set aside money for the taxes. - I managed the project after June 1, and I paid $5,500 to ***** per his labor estimate. I am willing to pay the taxes on the labor cost that I paid to ***** per his revised estimate on June 1 ($5,500). The tax is 9.5% of $5,500 = $522.50, even though I had already paid $600 extra to *****. My attorney had communicated to ***** that we will consider this, but ***** is not listening. Additional Details The cost of the project do not even account for all the pain I had to endure working with ConstrucTech: - Amount of my time spent following up on things as basic as the revised completion date - Dealing with ***** who was constantly demanding additional money, without making progress on the work. We have notes on these. - ***** promised that he had all the workers, and the project will be done in 43 days (it is in the contract). The project took almost 3 times as long. And our entire summer has been spoiled, because ***** could not complete the project in time and not even provide a revised completion date. This is just not professional. - Money that I spent on storage of the SPA which was waiting for the deck to be completed - this is over $1,200. - I had to put my personal reputation on the line by referring to ***** the subcontractors that I had known - because ***** couldn't hire people to work - and on numerous occasions, ***** had wasted their time by not being ready with the work area. ***SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REDACTED BY BBB***

11/17/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Much of the work that was agreed upon was either done poorly, and dangerously (cabinet he hung fell off of the wall), or not at all. The owner's behavior was erratic, verbally combative, and he claimed not to know how to do agreed upon work. When work could not be done, and we felt unsafe, he would not submit a detailed summary of his work, in order to resolve the financial aspect of the job.

Desired Settlement: We would like an accurate and detailed summary of the work that was done properly, and clear indication of his fees, and his worker's fee. We would like to be financially refunded for unfinished or shoddily done work. We would like to be refunded for the cost of changing our locks, due to feeling unsafe.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2013/11/07) */ view attached documents online We have several documents I have sent to ******** ******** email address. CONSTRUCTECH VENTURE GROUP XXX-XXX-XXXX Email - ************ Attn: ******** ******* BBB Services Consultant Re: BBB Complaint Case#********(Ref#XX-XXXXXXXX-XXXXXXXX-X-XXX) ***** ******'s complaint Constructech Venture Group has over 5 years of customer satisfaction for work we have completed. Past projects ranges from a $937.00 (6) chute mailbox cover stand constructed as per post master general and local building code requirements to $30,000.00 bath and room remodels. This company has built and installed decks, fence, window and doors. We have also completed interior commercial remodel, residential restoration, room remodels and additions. We have even built a residential handicap bathroom as per local building code and A.D.A. requirements, (American Disability Act). As a general contractor, we hire subcontractors for specialty work or to reduce the time to complete a project. We have included pictures of our work to illustrate our high level of knowledge and competency. To address the work identified in the complaint, the upper cabinet that has been identified as poorly installed. This cabinet was only placed temporarily, so that the location placement could be verified with the owner. The location of the upper cabinet wasn't in a location where someone could be hurt. (See attached drawings) Much of the work installed was only partially completed since the owner initiated the stop work order, as noted in the attached emailed dated 10/19/13. If everything had gone as planned by the contractor, the upper cabinet location would have been verified with the owner and the cabinet securely placed. Generally, ***** walks through with owner when he's finished. It's at that point of construction you kick the tire and check the motor. Attached you will find pictures of upper cabinets we have installed, demonstrating our knowledge and competency in cabinet hanging. On 9/23/13, ***** was commissioned to build a fence along the west part *****'s property, but three days later the project went awry. Before we started working we were told that the neighbors were in agreement to the placement of a new fence on the corrected property line which lands along the neighbor's swimming pool ledge. On 9/26/13 the police were called by the neighbors over the clearing and stake work we completed as directed by *****. Our company name was mentioned, but ***** told us not to worry about our reputation because she took responsibility for the work performed under her direction. That same evening ***** called between 7:30 - 9:00pm and conversation lasted approximately 52 minutes. The next day she stopped work on the fence because her attorney told her to postpone the work for 7 - 10 days, while they ironed out the issues. After a 10 day ***** and ***** verbally agreed to have the contractor perform some handyman tasks around the owner's home. ***** made it clear early on what experience he had. The first thing ***** requested was to hang some cabinets in the laundry room. Work was to begin on Thursday, 10/10/13, but received a text requesting work to start sometime after noon, due the *****'s ongoing medical issues, which we were willing to oblige. ***** went to the site and discussed with ***** the cabinet project. On Friday, ***** and ****** came to the site to work. A toe space base was configured, built and then the lower cabinets installed. The plywood countertop base was cut on site to fit the angles of the base cabinets and taken to the shop for some intricate cuts. Upon inspection, ***** the homeowner; former landscape architect and general contractor; as we recall, was very pleased with the quality, time and progress of the work. ***** told ***** to keep up with the hours and expenses. Overall approximately 6 hours was spent that day. Work resumed on the following Monday, and the plywood board for the counter top was installed. At this point the owner and the contractor decided to keep the existing upper cabinets and only install one of the upper cabinets that matched the lower set. The contractor decided to use the wood from the extra cabinets and refaced the existing upper cabinets. Approximately 5.5 hours was spent working this day and again the homeowner said to ***** and his worker, how she was pleased with their work. The contractor returned to the site on Wednesday to complete the refacing work on the upper cabinets. The upper cabinets didn't have doors, so the contractor worked with the owner to determine how he was going to build and install the type of doors she wanted. ***** had experience installing cabinets, but not cabinet making. The owner also discussed how ***** might install the Formica, even though this was new territory for him. In response to lack of specific knowledge of Formica installation, ***** the sent him a text at 11:21pm with a how to link on Formica installation from *****. She also sent him a link to door hinge options that might work. See attached text messages. There was also a discussion to stop work on the cabinets and to fix an opening on the north section of her fence to keep the trespassers out. ***** also stated that some of her neighbors were not happy about the chickens in her back yard and the opening where they could get out. ***** spent over 30 minutes going over the emergency fence repair project with *****. ***** felt obligated to help ***** out and agreed to complete this work that Friday. ***** made every attempt to work with the homeowner. Each new request was started before the first one was completed. On this day 4 hours was spent on work. On Friday the contractor arrived on the site, chicken wire was used to fix the fence, which required an additional worker to be brought to the site. The contractor also verified the door openings and left the site. Wood for the cabinet doors was purchased and cut to fit the 3 openings. 5.5 hours were charged for ***** and 3 hours for the Labor Works laborer. On 10/19/13 ***** and ****** arrived on site with the door panels and hinges. ***** attempted to fit the doors and the hinges, but realized that his choice of hinges was making the job more difficult to install the doors. Admittedly his frustration level increased along with the audible of his voice. At this point ****** the wife of the homeowner, came in to see what was going on. ***** explained that he was having difficulty installing the hinges and that he needed to leave to see if he could come up with a better option. He also asked to speak to *****, but ***** said she was asleep. ***** told ***** not to bother ***** and that he would leave and come back when he had a better option. ******** responded by asking ***** why this was such a problem, when she thought he knew what he was doing. ***** responded that he was hired to install the cabinets, not build them. He admits his voice was loud, but it should be noted that ***** has a hearing problem and sometimes his voice is louder than he realizes. ***** continued to push the issue, requesting ***** to stay and install the Formica, because didn't he know how to do that at least. ***** responded that this was the first time he would have installed Formica. ***** was aware of this as noted by her text message dated 10/16/13, but must not have been communicated to ****** As we are heading towards the door, ***** stated that she didn't want ***** to be mad at her. ***** continued his attempt to leave and stated that he wasn't mad at her, just frustrated with the door installation. ***** started to demand that ***** stay and work. He said he would call ***** later. She insisted that he stay and he reminded her that it was Saturday and time to take it easy. ***** said she was hurt by *****'s response and he made 3-4 more attempts to let her know he wasn't mad at her, just frustrated with the project. ****** continued out the door thinking ***** was behind me. He wasn't and after a few minutes, she went in to the house to get him, but he was already at the door. At this point we left the site. 3 hours was spent on the site, but no hours were charged for this day. ***** made every attempt to work with the homeowner: He found it difficult leaving the job at 5:00pm, when he was asked not to come until 12:30pm. It was hard to get a good days work in, but only charged for hours worked, until ***** insisted that ***** take a copy of the house key on 10/16/13. It was difficult working with 4'-0" long very loud parakeet with a 3" long beak. ***** said it would attack and has pierced a person's face. I asked ***** nicely on several occasions to put the bird in the cage and not bring it around the work area. It was difficult working in the house, after work hours when the family members wanted to go through their evening routine It was difficult moving from one project to another and not completing the initial project. ***** said that there were sick people in the household. ***** really didn't know how to interpret that, however it left him feeling uneasy. ***** promised ***** they would go back to the fence job, so he hung in there. ***** utilizes technology to communicate. The complaint cites substandard work and erratic behavior by the contractor. We received 11 email messages from ***** and ***** from 10/19/13 through 10/25/13, with emotional tirades, threats and accusations. Prior to the incident starting 9/23/13, we received 5 emails and 15 text messages with requests and a variety of information. As noted previously in this document ***** was more than happy with *****'s work and behavior. ***** even notified the Better Business Bureau about how pleased she was with *****'s professionalism. ***** also received 3 phone calls after 6 pm requesting start time changes to accommodate *****'s schedule due to her illness. ***** had been in and out of the house on a regular basis from October 9th to the 19th. If ***** and ***** were afraid of *****, it would have been expressed earlier, based on her level of communication, nor would ***** have insisted on giving a house key to ***** on 10/16/13. Initially, ***** portrayed the incident on 10/19 as a miscommunication problem. She stated that the work performed was appreciated and wanted a quick and mutually agreeable resolution. In response to her email to stop work, a phone call was made by ****** and a voice message was left to say we were open to discuss and finalize the resolution of the problem. That's when the tone of the emails changed. *****'s psychological and physical well-being was the topic of more than half of the 11 email messages received. Constructech Venture Group always responded apologetically and professionally within 24 hours if a response was needed. ***** even brought up race in her communication, which offended us as we are a multiracial family. See attached photos, selected emails and text messages. Finally, we would like to address the hours charged. ***** spent 26 days at *****'s residence. We only invoiced the owner for 33.75 hours at $50/hour, we reduced the hours down the best we could to billable time. Some of the tasks that were performed but not fully charged for consisted of clearing and grubbing, purchasing and delivering materials, setting up the site plant, bringing in tools, coordinating the underground utility locators, tool rental reservations, clerical and office duties, along with calculating and paying taxes on 3rd quarter revenue from your retainer check of $2,800.00, etc. On 10/21 we utilized a staff person from the Labor Works employment agency. We were charged an hourly rate of $17.25, instead of $23.87, which ***** negotiated to a lower rate, since the employee would not operate power tools. ***** made several phone calls and sent text messages to *****, which was time consuming, as previously noted. *****'s time alone is worth more than $50/hour, but even after the false accusations, lengthy and libelous emails we still gave ***** a fair time and material bill. We are truly sorry for the events that took play on Saturday 10/19/13. ***** never, ever yelled at *****. ***** is a professional and always works with his customers to give them what they request, whenever possible. He informed ***** that he was leaving the site and would call ***** later. She demanded that he stay and started questioning his qualifications. Finally after 10-12 minutes of conversation, he left. *****'s experience was made clear to early on. ***** obviously had not talked to *****, or she would not have falsely accused ***** of construction incompetency. They also wanted to be reimbursed for the cost of changing their locks, due to their level of fear of *****. We question their level of fear when ***** had insisted that ***** take a key to her house, just a few days earlier. It should also be noted that within 24 hours we asked if we could return the key and within 36 hours the locks were changed out. Everything that went on at *****'s house was a far cry from the original contractual agreement to build a fence for $5,600+/-. We have attached the invoice we sent to the owner and based on the time during and after the project, we believe we have been more than fair with the costs. Sincerely, ***** and ****** ******** Constructech Venture Group WA Lic# ************ XXX-XXX-XXXX ***SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REDACTED BY BBB***

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 Constructech Venture Group
Positive Experience (0 reviews)
Neutral Experience (0 reviews)
Negative Experience (0 reviews)