Complaint Category: Inappropriate behavior by customer service personnel
Complaint: *** ******* apparently feels it is appropriate to lie to customers, get water inside their homes, no allow them time to see what the damage is and then try to intimidate them into paying prior to allow them to inspect the work and potential damage. He has now threatened to place a lien against my house since he didn't get his check immediately even thoug damage had not yet been assessed. 1st) He never at any time told me that payment immediately upon completion was a requirement. 2nd) I never agreed to pay him immediately upon completion. Having said that I probably woulf have agreed to those terms until it bacame obvious that his workmen had potentially dmaage the ceiling system and insulation in the roof.
Initial Business Response
It is always our policy to please every customer. ** ******** did not want our help. We tried to speak with him, and he refused our help. We are sorry ** ******** feels as he does. I'm sorry this is late getting to you. I was in the hospital and **** -my husband was overwhelmed with my situation. Sincerely,
Final Consumer Response
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
It is quite obvious that *** ******* has a very selective memory and has used just enough of the truth in his response to sound legitimate. That fact that he talked to my wife over the course of two years is accurate. The fact that I called him to see about getting the roof cleaned is accurate. The fact that I told him I did not want a pressure washer used on my roof is accurate. The fact that His worker got water inside my house is accurate. Very little else in *** *******'s statement is accurate.
*** ******* specifically told me he did not use a pressure washer, but did have a "special machine" made exclusively for cleaning roofs. As I have previously stated, that "special machine" turn out to be a pressure washer. You can call a horse a duck, but that doesn't make it one. A horse is still a horse and a pressure washer is still a pressure washer even if *** ******* chooses to call it something different.
I have had three separate evaluations done on the roof since *** *******'s employee was here and finished his work. Each of them independently came to the conclusion that the work done by *** *******'s employee took years off the life of the roof and in several places all the granular material was removed from the composition shingles, exposing nothing but the tar underneath. At least one of these folks that provided an evaluation of the situation is recognized by the courts as an expert witness. Two of these folks were not even told that a pressure washer had been used on the roof until they had done their evaluation and tried to understand what could have done so much damage to the roof.
It is now apparent that we will need to replace the roof very soon. If we are lucky we will probably not need to do that until next spring when the weather improves. I have had two separate bids to get the roof replaced. The lowest bid so far is more than 7500 + tax. If one assumed the best case scenario for *** *******, where his roof cleaning took only two years off the life of the roof, the resulting dollar amount of damage would be in excess of $500. If on the other hand the damage done by his use of the pressure washer took five years off the life of the roof, the resulting loss to the life of the roof would be more than $1,250. Either one of these damage loss dollar figures is more than the $450 he thinks he deserves.
As for *** *******'s ability to demonstrate respect, I'm not at all sure he is able to show respect to anyone.
Now on to another matter. I have contacted the department of Labor and Industries and have been informed, by them, that *** ******* business is not licensed to clean roofs or use a pressure washer, which then means he is not bonded for that activity either even though he is taking these roof cleaning jobs and representing himself as being licensed and bonded for cleaning roofs. I believe that is called fraud or at least that is what the department of Labor and Industries calls it. According to the Department of Labor and Industries *** ******* is licensed and bonded for window cleaning only. The Department of Labor and Industries was also very interested to know that *** *******'s employee was not tied off while working on the roof, which is required by Washington State Law, and yes we have eye witnesses to support that also.
As opposed to *** *******'s statement which primarily couched with phrases such as "in my opinion" or referring to his pressure washer as a "special machine", up to this point I have cited only facts. Now I will express an opinion. I believe that the only reason *** ******* has had as few complaints as he has is due primarily to the fact that very few if any of his clients have had an expert go onto the roof after the work was done and have any possible damage done evaluated. Quite frankly we probably wouldn't have taken that step either if it wasn't for the fact that his employee had gotten water into the house.
My advice to *** ******* is to cut his losses before the damage to his reputation suffers any more than it already has. There certainly are other measures I can pursue if it becomes necessary. As stated in my previous response, I would much rather just agree that we both made a mistake and move on with our lives. I agree that he made a bad choice is deciding to do work for someone that actually expects work to be done correctly and stand up under scrutiny by experts. I agree that I made a poor choice in allowing someone to do work on my house without doing my normal due diligence.
Final Business Response
Over a 2 year period I spoke with *** ******** twice. they had moss and stain on their roof and if left on it could damage it. They had a real mess. Approximately 2 years, ** ** ****** called and wanted his roof cleaned. but not with a pressure washer. I explained to him we could leave roof looking great but not without using a machine. I explained, that in my opinion he had 3 choices. 1. he could have someone scrape and brush roof but that would get part of the moss off-but not the moss growing under the shingles. the roof would still look stained .Some businesses charge 300-400$ for this and in my opinion the value for money spent to do it is not there. 2. He could have someone use a high volume air blower but it would not get all the moss off or the stain. the roof would look just as bad in less than 2 years , in my opinion. 3. we could clean it with our lower velocity pressure washer and it would look beautiful. We have cleaned approx 15-20,000 roofs with this in 30 years. we have had great results and happy customers and no damage. In fact, we have cleaned roofs for the same customers every 5-6 years for 30 years! Happy customers. The word pressure washer is a very broad term and misleading. . some are so strong =3500 psi -they could do a roof in 2-3 hours.that is too strong in my opinion. our machine is less than half that psi and takes us approximately 8 hours to clean a roof. then we also clean the inside and outside of gutters and wash all the outside windows. Then we clean up all debris and haul it away. After talking to *** ** ****** he said to come clean his roof. Explained that he would give *****-our employee who has been with us for 20 years-a check after job was completed. he agreed.
** ******** has a large vent across the top of his roof. We are always careful to not spray water at wrong angle but when ***** was cleaning roof some water splashed upward and got in the vent. An honest mistake but none the less we were responsible. ***** called me immediately. I called ** ******** immediately and explained that we would let it dry out for a couple of days. He said ***** could finish the job of cleaning the roof. there were no other water issues and the roof looked beautiful. (Note: over the years some homes have leaky vents or skylights-it usually drips through a light fixture with no long term effect.) this job took ***** over a day to complete. we charged $750.00. explained that we guarantee no moss return for first 2 years but many homes don't have moss return for 4 years which has been proven out over our 31 years. When I called him about the check he said he would not pay till he opened up his roof and checked for damage. He said he could not trust us to do it because we lied about using a pressure washer. Oh, Really? After I explained two times in our original conversation that we use a low pressure machine? So he refused our help..
When I spoke to him again he told me he had torn it open himself and damaged the wood in the process.. We would have paid my carpenter to open it up free of charge to him and let him see the results. We would have made sure it was satisfactory to him.- dry and no damage He choose not to let us do that. We offered. We would have gotten paid and everyone would have been happy. I am very disappointed in ** ********. . He can send us a check for $450.00.. we will send him a receipt marked Paid in full when the check clears and move on. This will pay ** ******** 300 dollars for the damage he created .
Complaint Resolution: BBB determined that despite the company's reasonable effort to address complaint issues, the consumer remained dissatisfied.