Business ProfileforArctic Home Living

I engaged Richards **************** and my financial institution in a Loan agreement and promissory note, which included a Contractors Agreement with specific conditions. These included proving inventory, permits, and providing a detailed project breakdown. Upon funds disbursement, Richards **************** was authorized to start installation. If conditions were met, we owed the financial institution as per the contract.However, four months later, the contractor claimed non-payment, shifting blame. Investigation revealed Richards **************** breached the agreement by starting without proper documentation, nullifying the bank contract. They now threaten a lien, hindering financial assistance. Lack of a project cost breakdown and unauthorized loan extension attempts complicate matters.With the breach of contract, the project became unauthorized as soon as they began the work. Moreover, the contractor illegally attempted to reapply for a loan extension seven days after the installation, a move denied by the bank due to the contractor breaking the agreement. Furthermore, five months post-installation, the contractor tried to reapply resulting in another rejection from the bank, again without my knowledge or consent. In a December meeting, the contractor blamed me for a possible credit drop, no proof, stating sometimes people ruin their credit. Contrary to claims, my credit improved since the initial loan. Despite efforts, the contractor pressured a new contract, dismissing legal counsel's importance.During the meeting, the contractor falsely claimed authorization for a loan extension without consulting us. Bank clarification revealed no such authorization, emphasizing, due to unauthorized work, extension was no longer viable.In conclusion, Richards ****************'s actions led to a challenging situation, facing a property lien. Our entry into the agreement expected transparency, but the contractor's unauthorized actions created an unwarranted predicament.