Business ProfileforCMS Roofing and Restoration

CMS provided 3 different quotes on the same roofing job, all based on information I provided to them.Told us a "contract" was just a "consent form" to talk to our insurance company. Admitted to "putting us on the back burner'' and delaying the job.Threatened us with civil action. Filed a Mechanics lien on our property, that was for the full amount of the estimate, although they did not touch our roof or provide any labor or materials.

To whom it may concern, Regarding the **********, we initially met the ********** from a prior project ******** *********** company. CMS Roofing and Restoration offered him our services which included an inspection on the roof. The inspection had been accepted by the **********. CMS Roofing and Restoration had shown up to do the initial inspection which includes setting a ladder up to get on the roof to inspect for hail and wind damage that may be present. Prior to filing the claim as well as the adjustment appointment ******** knowingly signed an advocating agreement stating that CMS Roofing and Restoration could advocate for ******** and negotiate with ***** **** regarding the roofing funds. The contract states in the event the claim is approved and funded via insurance proceeds that those approved and negotiated funds would be used with CMS Roofing and Restoration. Unless, the client chooses to excise the right to cancel which was included and disclosed in the clients attached documents. This is also standard practice for each and everyone of our clients here at CMS. After thoroughly reviewing our data and communications with said client it is without a doubt that ******** did not exercise this right that was provided and the 72 hour grace period “was' ' and “is' ' now expired. CMS Roofing and Restoration was in attendance to advocate the damages during the adjustment with ***** ****. After the visit from the insurance adjuster, CMS Roofing and Restoration was successfully able to negotiate and advocate for full replacement of the roof located at ***** ******** ***** ************, ** *****. Funding for the project would then be provided and released by ***** ****. ******** was then a recipient of said funds from ***** ****. Once those funds were received ******** took the first step on voiding the terms and conditions on the contract (Supporting documentation can be provided upon request). ******** neglected all correspondence with CMS Roofing and Restoration even after several documented responses from CMS Roofing and Restoration. ******** was in full acknowledgement of the terms and conditions pertaining to the agreement including but not limited to a non written estimate as negotiations would come post insurance claim approval. Ohio administrative code permits the option for “1. Written estimate”. “2. Oral estimate.” “3. No estimate.”. ******** agreed to no initial estimate. Hence ******** was in acknowledgment that the insurance negotiation would be the project price. ******** has also violated the terms and conditions on the agreement by utilizing another contractor to perform the negotiated scope of work by ***** **** and CMS Roofing and Restoration. In conclusion CMS Roofing and Restoration undoubtedly held up the written agreement as well as the agreement on the code of ethics. However ******** has gone completely default on the agreement based on recorded violations pertaining to agreed contract terms and conditions. Should the better business bureau need any further information or documentation pertaining to this case they may contact CMS Roofing and Restoration by email “*********************” or by phone ************.