Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/19/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  - Bathroom remodel project started 2/2023, supposed to last 6-8 weeks.
  - Single grout color requested for shower wall, however contractor applied multiple colored grout to shower wall.
  - Following up with contractor every 2 months, being told they are still investigating potential solutions.
  - In April 2024, 14 months after start of the project and 12 months after final invoice was paid, contractor conveys it will cost the client $500 to attempt to resolve the issue.
  - Contractor no longer responds to calls or text messages.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/01/2024

  Alex
  We are sorry to see your review of your experience.  While it is certainly true that we have
  worked with you for many months following the completion of your project there
  are a few important details that have been omitted.  When HWG came to your home for warranty work
  we found that the floor tile was showing signs of cracking. HWG without
  question agreed to un-install all fixtures and trim and replaced the entire
  floor at no cost to you.  While you did have additional underlayment added at this time, which we agreed to provide at builder cost despite having never previously purchased this product, you didn't in the end pay for it. We later agreed to offer this to you as a credit to allow a third party to color your grout. This warranty work was completed quickly,
  and all fixtures were reinstall in as new condition. In a remodel situation HWG
  often does not have full control over the existing sub structure, but we did
  warranty the work.
  You have also included several phots that are not
  representative of the condition we left your home, so we have included a few as
  we left the project. 
  You also said that HWG told you to pay another contractor to
  re color your grout.  While this is true,
  because we don’t offer this service, you omitted the part where HWG provided
  you the $500 to have this done.  We will
  include a photo of your invoice evidencing the credit we provided. 
  The color variation that you see in the shower area occurs
  from two things. The first and most visually obvious is in the corners. This is
  visible from two different materials coming together.  HWG always uses a color and brand matched
  silicon or sanded silicon caulking for joints in wet locations.  The second is caused by moister drying out of
  a cementitious material “grout”. 
  Examples of this can be found in almost all grout or cement mixed in
  different batches or that dry at different rates for any reason.  I have included a link to the Tile council of
  North America that discusses this problem.
  *********************************************************

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/01/2024

  Complaint: 21597765
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  1. HWG never offered to pay the $500, they merely informed us that was the cost of attempting to address the issue. Additionally, I placed several calls and voice mails to the project manager to discus the cost and plan to fix however my calls and voicemails were never returned.

  2. Regarding the shower fixture, I invite the contractor to come and see for themselves, if they would return my calls. It was installed loose and we brough this to the project managers attention however was never resolved. 

  3. Regarding the grout color, as an end customer that spent a significant amount of money on a bathroom remodel, we requested and expected a single grout color. We are being given many explanations of why it is different, but again, as a customer we are not interested in the cause, just the solution, which we have not been provided.  
  
  
  
  Regards,
  
  
  
  Alex Jacobson

  Business Response

  Date: 05/02/2024

  photos of text conversation 

  Business Response

  Date: 05/02/2024

  We will refer you to the credit applied to your invoice as uploaded.
  HWG has come to your home many times over the last several months to offer corrections to work you have asked for. In every instance we found work to be unsatisfactory, we have corrected the issues with no pushback.  This includes complete replacement of the floor, providing all new tile and gout, complete replacement of the trim that was uninstalled to replace the floor, reinstall of all plumbing fixtures on the ground and repainting as needed.  We also talked to you as recently as march 5th about your faucets. In or around early February you contracted HWG for replacement of the mixing valve in your shower.  Per our records on approximately Feb 27th we came to you home and replace the complete valve and cartridge in the wall for you. On March 5th ( see attached photo of text conversation) it was confirmed to HWG that the faucet was “working great”.  A loose accusation on the wall can almost always be easily corrected. If in fact this had been loose on the many visits to your home we could have tightened the set screw, or retaining nut while we were there. Our records indicate that you have contacted us many times for various items all of which we have come out to look at, we don’t see any prior mention of the accusation. It is disappointing as this has become a public forum discussion; this is now a problem.
  We have also returned to your home several times to discuss the issue of grout. We are sorry that the final product did not meet your expectations. It is sometime the case that the reality of working with standard materials, and the vision we have are not exactly the same. We try at every step of the process to help set expectations about variability in materials, dye lots, levelness of existing surfaces, and the realities of real life install but this can be hard to overcome.  When we look at your installation in person, we can see a shade difference between the back wall and the left wall. The amount of variability is also dependent on how recently the shower was used.  While we agree this is not the definition of perfection this is not a faulty installation. Two different color grouts were not applied to your wall, and the variability seems to be well within reason. However, inconsideration of always trying to make reality match our customers vision we sought out a third party company who does color corrections.  They quoted $480 to make a color adjustment. We have also uploaded photos of our text conversation around this very item where our best suggestion for a resolution was provided.  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/10/2024

  Complaint: 21597765
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  While it is correct that HWG did provide a suggestion at reslution for $480, it was never conveyed that HWG would cover this cost. As such we made several attepmts to contact our project manager to discuss the subject, however our voicemails and texts were never returned, hence leaving us under the impression that HWG was no longer engaged in our project and we were now resonsible for paying to resolve the unacceptable state of the shower grout. We have since engaged with a company that specilizes in resolving grout issues, and they have provided the attached estimate (Option2) Grout Colorant Seal $1,200.00. If HWG will cover this cost in order to resolve the issue we've been trying to address for over a year after the work has been complete and our last invoice was paid then we are will to consider this matter closed. 
  
  
  
  Regards,
  
  
  
  Alex Jacobson

  Business Response

  Date: 05/14/2024

  See attached daily logs for this project stating work completed on the corresponding logged dates. Communication was always made with Kelley Jacobson not Alex Jacobson.  Contact information shared with HWG was Kelley's cell phone and email only.  Recent text messages between Kelley and project manager have been attached, please review communication.  The last invoice sent was October 25, 2023, three months late fees credited.  Payment for $495 to customer was made March 28, 2023.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/20/2024

  Last invoice was sent on 10/25/23 for a total of $450.  Customer did not pay invoice incurring $267.41 in late fees.  HWG credited $222.41 in late fees on this invoice. HWG paid the remaining invoice on 3/28/24.  Text communication with Kelly about this action is attached, total of $495.  From the last invoice which was the completion of the project to March 2024, HWG visited job site multiple times for warranty claim issues which can be viewed on the daily log attachment.  Also attached is viewing documentation when the invoice was viewed by the customer.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/22/2024

  In HWG's message they refer to a last invoice was sent on 10/25/23 for a total of $450. Our final invoice for the project had been paid in April 2023.The invoice they are referring to was for warranty work to fix flooring that was not installed correctly. It is incomprehensible why they would send us an invoice 6 months after we paid our final invoice for warranty work that was not done correctly the first time. They are now claiming that, because we did not pay the warranty invoice, that those funds should cover the cost of fixing the issue the BBB complaint is regarding. All we want is for HWG to make right on the poor work that was performed as we are not pleased with the end result of a $55k job and they stopped responding to texts and phone calls. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:11/07/2022

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  UnresolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  On 4/21 we contracted with HWG to finish our 450sf basement into a family room/bathroom. Much of their work was well below industry standards and violated construction guidelines. We asked HWG to fix their work, but they refused. On 12/2/21, HWG terminated our contract and demanded a final payment of $5,200, threatening to file a lien on our home if we didn’t pay immediately/in full. On 1/2/22 we replied with some clarification questions because we believed that they had overcharged us. HWG never responded to our email.
  
  We secured other contractors’ bids to finish the job. In the bidding and demolition process, they noted many other defects with HWG’s work:
  
  Both the tub and toilet egress pipes sloped in the wrong direction, which would cause sewage overflow in our basement.
  HWG failed to fill in the foundation hole under the tub with concrete.
  HWG didn’t set the tub in concrete (or anything).HWG poorly designed the tub deck; water could not drain off of it.
  The bathtub rim bent down when pushed; ¼” gaps existed between the tub rim and deck; it wasn't level.
  HWG installed the tub’s rough-in plumbing to the wrong depth and unparallel to the wall.
  HWG incorrectly installed the shower diverter valve, rendering it nonfunctional.
  HWG used paper shims throughout, eventually f*****ing mold growth.
  
  First, we request that HWG reimburse us for labor and materials needed to fix their insufficient work. Although they tout a 10-year warranty, they quit when we asked them to fix their problems and then were non-responsive after that. We had to hire others to fix their work. Many more problems with HWG’s work then were learned that necessitated repair. Subtotal: $11,550.00
  Second, HWG required that we purchase all fixtures through them for cost + 30% handling fee in case we wanted to return them for any reason. We request that HWG comply with their own policy and reimburse us for multiple fixtures that we cannot use and want to return. Subtotal: $6,906.57
  Total: $18,456.57

  Business Response

  Date: 12/02/2022

  This case is in litigation trying to be resolved and are currently awaiting response from clients lawyer.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 12/11/2022

  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  We did retain the legal services of ***** ****** ******* * ***** earlier this year in an effort to resolve our initial conflict with HWG after they had refused to respond to multiple questions that we had regarding several overcharges we had paid that remain unreimbursed. As a middle-class family working paycheck-to-paycheck, we no longer can afford to continue to pay out-of-pocket for an attorney. Hence, no other litigation between our family and HWG is actively occurring at this time. And, as an important sidenote, the concerns that we raise here in this request for resolution are distinct from our prior requests for resolution with HWG, as they only were discovered much more recently. 

  We kindly request the BBB's support in resolving our dispute with HWG at this time. Below we offer a more detailed account and timeline of our current complaint for the sake of clarity. 
  

  The Nature of the Dispute 
  In April 2021 we entered into a contract with HWG for them to convert our unfinished 450sf basement into a family room/bathroom. The contract specified that “HWG Services will complete the project in accordance to construction guidelines,” and that “HWG will never complete work that is notably below industry standards.” Unfortunately, a significant amount of their work on the bathroom portion of this project was well below industry standards and in violation of construction guidelines. When we asked them to remedy their work that was notably below industry standards, they simply quit the project. We then were forced to pay another company a substantial amount of money first just to fix damages to our home caused by HWG.  
  Initially, HWG roughly estimated the entire project to take two to three months at most. After their multiple delays, their ordering/installation of incorrect parts, billing overcharges, and their extremely poor craftsmanship with the bathroom that were below industry standards, we broached our concerns again with Project Manager Kevin B******** on 10/28/2021. In inspecting the job at the time, Mr. B******** agreed with us, expressing his disapproval with what work had been completed by his staff and noting that much of it was of poor quality and below industry standards. He asked how we wanted HWG to address our concerns; we responded that we wanted HWG to fix the various problems that they had created [NOTE: An audio recording of this conversation is available for review.]
  
  Mr. B******** summoned HWG Owner Adam J******; the two met at our home on 11/11/2021. In this meeting, we once again asked them to fix the problems that their staff had created in our bathroom. Mr. J****** responded that he did not have any other staff employed with HWG who could adequately fix their prior mistakes. He said that he would consider his options, work on a solution to our problem, and formally notify us of his decision by email soon. [NOTE: An audio recording of this conversation is available for review.]
  
  On 12/2/2021 we received HWG’s formal reply by email (also available for review). In their reply, they (a) formally terminated our contract as per its terms; and (b) requested a final payment of $5,200 for construction rendered on the bathroom, threatening to place a lien on our home if we did not pay immediately and in full.
  
  In reviewing their reply, we instantly recognized that they had failed to account for several refunds that we still were owed on (a) products that already had been returned by HWG, (b) several services that we paid for but never were rendered by HWG, and (c) multiple overcharges that HWG billed us, either intentionally deceitful billing practices or simply made in error, that we already had paid. On 1/2/2022 we formally responded to HWG by email (also available for review). In our response, we yet again reiterated many of the concerns with their work that we previously had broached with them in person but remained unaddressed. We also offered in good faith to work with them to resolve the billing dispute. In kind, we asked them to respond to multiple questions that we had about the above-mentioned monetary inconsistencies that remained unaddressed, all to their benefit. Per our own calculations at that point, we believed that they ultimately owed us back far more money than they were demanding from us.
  
  HWG never responded to our email.
  
  With this matter still unresolved and our basement still unfinished, we met with other contractors to assess HWG’s incomplete job on the bathroom as well as to secure bids with the intent for it to be finished adequately. Multiple different contractors pointed out several other novel defects with HWG’s work that they cited as being below industry standards and in violation of various construction guidelines, including:
  
  The rim of the bathtub that HWG installed would bend down when pushed, and in some spots, a ¼” gap existed between the bottom of the tub rim and its deck, indicating that it was not installed to be level. Per its installation manual, the tub must be installed with “the rim level against the frame.” With this large of a gap, it was sure to leak soon; it was just a matter of time. 
  Relatedly, HWG improperly designed the tub deck. We’d asked for an undermount construction because we also wanted an overhead rain shower. HWG instead recommended an overmount construction, assuring us that this was preferred even with an overhead shower. Unfortunately, HWG’s tub deck was engineered so that any volume of water that sprayed outside of the tub and onto it then had nowhere to drain. Instead, it either would collect on the deck surface and/or would pool on the bathroom floor.

  HWG apparently did not set the bathtub in concrete. Per its installation manual, “The bath must be supported along its entire bottom,” recommending “approximately 1½”  to 2” of mortar as bedding material (do not use sand or foam).” Numerous contractors noted that the tub sounded hollow when its floor was tapped. HWG previously had assured us that they had set it in concrete. However, upon further inspection later on, we learned that this simply was not the case; this is described in greater detail below.
  HWG installed the tub’s rough-in plumbing incorrectly. They set the rough-in plumbing valves to the wrong depth and unparallel to the wall. As a further example, the tub spout purchased through HWG did not reach into the tub. Importantly, all of these new bidding contractors stated that for them to agree to work on this project, we’d need to purchase all new plumbing and fixtures as they would not warranty HWG’s prior work. Further, they considered many of HWG’s installed parts to be damaged upon inspection.
  
  With still no response from HWG to our 1/2/2022 email, we retained the legal services of ***** ****** ******* * ***** based in **** ******* as we noted above. They acknowledged having prior legal involvement with HWG on behalf of another disgruntled HWG client with complaints quite similar to ours. Our attorney sent HWG a demand letter on our behalf on 5/10/2022 (also available for review) that reiterated many of our previously-stated concerns along with the newly-discovered defects in their work up to that point. He also demanded that HWG agree to cover the cost of another contractor to repair the damage that HWG had caused to our home.
  
  Mr. J****** responded to our attorney’s letter on 5/24/2022 (also available for review). While he refused to compensate us to pay another contractor to repair the damage that HWG caused to our home, he did offer to officially drop HWG’s 12/2/2021 demand of $5,200. Our attorney informed us that although he absolutely believed that we had a strong case against HWG already, taking them to court to recoup our losses likely would cost just as much in legal fees. He added that, based on his firm’s prior legal involvement with HWG, doing so likely would result in our “just throwing good money after bad.” 
  
  We ultimately hired a licensed plumbing company, *** ****** ******** based in ********, to finish the bathroom with what little money we had left in our savings. After all, we needed it to be safe and functional, which HWG had failed to ensure. Again, no plumber with whom we spoke was willing to warranty their work with now-used parts. We had no choice but to buy all new parts (including a new bathtub) since HWG had used the parts and damaged several of them in the process. 
  
  The demolition/new remodel exposed several other defects in HWG’s work that also were well below industry standards and in violation of the code: 
  The 72” x 32” 90-gallon bathtub that we purchased through HWG wasn’t actually set in concrete (or anything at all, for that matter). HWG had placed a few mortar cow pies underneath the tub; however, the tub didn’t touch them due to HWG’s deck build/frame being too high. Per our conversation with a representative from the tub’s manufacturer (transcript of this conversation available for review), this eventually would’ve caused the bathtub to crack due to its lack of required support underneath. Regardless, per the tub’s manufacturer, HWG’s decision to install the tub as such voided its warranty (documentation available upon request). 
  HWG used paper shims in the construction of the tub deck, providing ample food for mold that would’ve emerged quickly given how HWG constructed the deck. 
  Prior to installing the tub, HWG failed to fill in the foundation hole underneath (which they had created when they initially plumbed for the tub) with concrete. It is against code to not seal this, as it leads to significant radon exposure.
  HWG incorrectly installed the shower diverter valve, which was intended to direct water to emerge from either the hand wand or the shower head. Regardless, HWG’s improper installation rendered it nonfunctional.  
  After demolition, our plumber installed our new bathtub and then tested the waste/bath drain before setting it in concrete so as to ensure that everything worked and drained properly. Unfortunately, they then learned that the tub could not drain properly. After checking its venting, they discovered that the plumbing that HWG installed underneath the house foundation was sloped in the wrong direction to the check valve. Because of this, the tub could not fully drain. This problem also would leave stagnant water in the pipes, f*****ing a prime breeding ground for odorous bacteria. 
  The plumbing valve from the toilet also was discovered to have this similar backward sloping problem. Per our plumber, if left unresolved, solids flushed down the toilet would clog it every time and eventually cause a sewer overflow in our basement. Thus, we had no choice but to break concrete once again, remove all of HWG’s previously-installed plumbing, and have it all redone to code with the proper ventilation and the correct sloping, this time headed toward the check valve and then toward the city sewer line. Because of this necessary process, we were required to remove all of the floor tile that HWG had installed. Although that too had been a poor quality install, something that we also had addressed with HWG previously, we intended to keep it up until that point. 
  
  Importantly, *** ****** ******** will provide ample confirmatory documentation of our claims upon request. 
  Our Request for Resolution
  First, we request that HWG reimburse us for what we paid for the labor and materials needed to fix HWG’s botched plumbing, tub deck, and build of tub/shower walls. Multiple times over, HWG touted to us that they gave a 10-year warranty on all of their work. They quit the project midstream when we asked them to fix what was out of code and/or not up to industry standards. They then were non-responsive to our clarifying questions about their demand for further payment until we hired legal counsel. All of this left us with no choice but to hire other companies to fix their work. Upon doing so, many more significant problems with HWG’s work were uncovered that mandated correction immediately.    
  Subtotal: $11,550.00  [NOTE: This does not at all cover the entire amount paid to our current contractor for the full remodel.]
  
  Second, HWG also touted a strict, written policy that we were required to purchase all fixtures, products, etc. for the job through them. They then charged an additional 30% handling fee on top of the cost for each item in the event that we chose to return something for any reason. We request that HWG simply comply with their own handling policy and reimburse us for multiple bathroom fixtures that we cannot use. Each of these fixtures are available for HWG to arrange for pickup.    
  Subtotal: $6,906.57 
  Total: $18,456.57
  

  Regards,

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

  Business Response

  Date: 01/24/2023

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

  The declaration in the first paragraph of the response states this is a different issue that is being raised and is not in relation to the previous litigation that was brought to HWG Services by ***** ****** ******* *** ***** on behalf of ******** ***** *** ****** *****.  This issue was requesting HWG to pay $16,198.18 for hiring a second contractor and stated the second contractor bid was $23,816.50 which included labor and supplies, see attachment.  After reading the resolution it seems it includes some of the same issues raised, but it is stated the litigation has been dropped and will be addressed by BBB complaints as well as a separate complaint targeted at HWG Services plumbing subcontractor.  HWG will present the previous response submitted to customers lawyer to address some of the previous complaints, see attachment.
  
  The statement of incorrect plumbing that was discovered after the second plumber did their demolition is inconsistent.  This was a permitted job and The City of ******** inspected and passed underground plumbing.  This is when the issues stated about underground plumbing and incorrect drainage would have been raised.  This was not the case; the inspector passed the installation of all underground plumbing.
  
  HWG tried to resolve the homeowners’ concerns at the time of the project.  A resolution was never going to be accepted therefore HWG agreed to dismiss the outstanding invoices of $10,615.41 and uninvoiced amount of $4,102.77 and terminate the project.
  
  A breakdown of invoice billing is also attached in response to the claim of being overbilled.
  
  In response to unapproved selections please see attachment.
  
  The signed estimate and contract is attached in response to HWG policies on warranty, homeowner supplied materials, and termination. 
  
  HWG understood the customer was unhappy with the product and tried to resolve the issue multiple instances by uninstalling and reinstalling items, allowing non payment of invoices because of the dissatisfaction, and then again by lawyer communication initiated by the customer.  We would like to have a final resolution on this issue.

  5 Attachments
   

  Customer Answer

  Date: 02/13/2023

  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Ms. *****, thank you once again for continuing to help all of us work toward appropriate resolution on this matter. Regretfully, we cannot accept HWG’s response at this time. A large number of concerns pertaining to different phases of this project have been broached by both parties thus far. Certainly all of it is related and serve as chapters of the entire story. However, in an effort to keep this dialogue from being further clouded with even more extraneous details at this time, I first want to reiterate our standing request for resolution and respond to HWG’s corresponding rebuttals for those that they provided. I then will address some of their other responses that are less directly related to our specific and still standing request for resolution.

  
  Our Standing Request for Resolution
  
  First, we request that HWG reimburse us for what we paid for the labor and materials needed to fix HWG’s botched plumbing, tub deck, and build of tub/shower walls. Multiple times over, HWG touted to us that they gave a 10-year warranty on all of their work. They quit the project midstream when we asked them to fix what was out of code and/or not up to industry standards. They then were non-responsive to our clarifying questions about their demand for further payment until we hired legal counsel. All of this left us with no choice but to hire other companies to fix their work. Upon doing so, many more significant problems with HWG’s work were uncovered that mandated correction immediately.    
  Subtotal: $11,550.00  [NOTE: This does not at all cover the entire amount paid to our new contractor for the full remodel.]
  
  Second, HWG also touted a strict, written policy that we were required to purchase all fixtures, products, etc. for the job through them. They then charged an additional 20 to 30% handling fee on top of the cost for each item in the event that we chose to return something for any reason. We request that HWG simply comply with their own handling policy and reimburse us for multiple bathroom fixtures that we cannot use. Each of these fixtures are available for HWG to arrange for pickup.    
  Subtotal: $6,906.57 
  
  Total: $18,456.57
  
  In response to HWG’s rebuttal to the first portion of our request above, we recognize and maintain our claim that HWG is refusing to honor their own-stated warranty. Their argument here is that our claim is “inconsistent” with the fact that this portion of the project passed inspection with the City of ********. Here is the quote from HWG co-owner ****** ******* from their BBB response dated 1/23/2023:
  
  The statement of incorrect plumbing that was discovered after the second plumber did their demolition is inconsistent.  This was a permitted job and The City of ******** inspected and passed underground plumbing.  This is when the issues stated about underground plumbing and incorrect drainage would have been raised.  This was not the case; the inspector passed the installation of all underground plumbing.
  
  Ms. J******’s statement above appears to imply one of two messages, either (1) that the City of ********’s building inspector actually inspected HWG’s work and made the correct decision to approve it; or (2) that the City of ********’s building inspector actually inspected HWG’s work and made the incorrect decision to approve it, indicating the possibility of negligence on the inspector’s part.
  
  Interestingly, both options here are debunked according to HWG’s own paperwork. Please see the PDF attachment titled, “HWG Running Schedule thru 9-20-21 (3875 Minturn),” which we pulled from their BuilderTrend website portal shortly before they cut off our access to it. In that document you’ll see two lines that I’ve highlighted that, again according to HWG’s own records, demonstrate that they poured the concrete floor five days before the City of ********’s rough inspection occurred. Thus, in neither hypothetical option in the paragraph above could the City of ******** inspector actually inspect the underground plumbing.
  
  To explore this concern further, I personally met with ******** *******, the Chief Building Official for the City of ********. After briefing her on my active complaint against HWG, Ms. ******* acknowledged that although it’s not ideal, sometimes inspections do happen to occur at a point when further work already has been completed that then keeps them from being able to inspect matters as originally intended. Oftentimes the inspector then chooses to pass the inspection because the alternative always is costly and time intensive. HWG is aware that this can be a fairly common outcome, which perhaps is why they chose to pour the cement floor before they scheduled the rough inspection, either purposefully or negligently keeping the building inspector from being able to actually inspect their work.
  
  Ms. ******* then kindly directed me to the Code of Ordinances for the City of ********, specifically ***** ********* – Nonliability of city. This standard legalese apparently is entirely commonplace from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, so I have to believe that HWG is acutely aware of its application given their specific line of work. Nevertheless, for everyone’s ease of reference, I’ve copied and pasted it verbatim immediately below: 
  
  ********* - Nonliability of city.
  A.  Any duly authorized representative of the City charged with enforcement of this Title, acting in good faith and without malice in the discharge of the duties required by this code or by any other pertinent law or ordinance, shall not be rendered personally liable for damages that may accrue to persons or property as a result of an act or by reason of an act or omission in the discharge of such duties.
  B.  This Title shall not be construed to relieve from or lessen the responsibility or liability of any party owning, operating, controlling or installing any materials or equipment related to any permit issued by the City for damages to anyone injured or any property destroyed by reason of the performance of any inspection authorized therein or the issuance of any certificate of inspections as herein provided. Nor shall the duly authorized representative or the City be held as assuming any such liability by reason of the duties assumed or inspections authorized by this code or any permits or certificates issued under this code. (Ord. No. 6370 , § 1, 12-15-2020)
  
  This portion of the Code of Ordinances for the City of ******** primarily clarifies two positions. In (A), the City of ******** and its building inspectors neither are responsible nor liable for any damages whatsoever in situations such as ours. And then in (B), any/all liability and responsibility for the work conducted and potential damages ensued remains squarely with those who conducted the work; the City of ******** holds no such liability or responsibility in matters such as ours. 
  
  Given the above evidence, neither Mr. nor Ms. J****** can claim with any certainty that the plumbing in question was laid correctly or incorrectly. But with the burden of proof on me as the complainant, I first refer you back to the photos of these pipes that I submitted with my last BBB response dated 12/11/2022; those photos were taken by Mr. **** *****, a licensed plumber for *** ****** ******** in ********. I also refer you to another PDF attachment included with this submission titled, “**** ***** 1st Action Letter 11-2022.” In that letter, Mr. ***** documented not only what he encountered with HWG’s underground plumbing, but also regarding the numerous other concerns that I raised in my last BBB response dated 12/11/2022. Mr. ***** has offered to speak with your office to further corroborate this information if you would like.
  
  HWG’s response here would appear to be either deliberately misleading to the BBB or concerningly unaware of some basic tenets of their profession. Either option is problematic for them; regardless, to hide behind the defense of “passing inspection” simply is not a valid and defensible argument under any circumstances. By ordinance, this expensive mistake is HWG’s responsibility no matter what.
  
  In response to the second portion of our request above, HWG confusingly failed to respond to this whatsoever. Maybe they’re simply in agreement with this? Perhaps, but if not, to further substantiate our claim in that regard I again direct you to Mr. *****’s attached letter that describes how several of HWG’s bathroom fixtures were installed incorrectly and thus were damaged and no longer were able to be used successfully. Again, we were required to pay a 20-30% upcharge fee to HWG for each item. Please see the attachment labeled, “Re- [External]Vanity and Other Fixtures,” which was sent by HWG Manager Mr. John F***** on 6/29/2021 at 8:28am. In there, you’ll see Mr. F***** explain in detail this markup and its purpose. This was the first time that we learned of this added markup, a full two months after we entered into contract with them. Nevertheless, based on Mr. F*****’s own explanation alone, we’re clearly entitled to return these various fixtures to HWG and to be reimbursed by them accordingly.
  

  But as a second significant argument on our behalf here, we’re not just entitled to return these fixtures just because of the markup we paid to them for that exact purpose. Rather, we’re entitled to refund them because they were damaged by HWG upon their installation. This also is covered under their own warranty.
  
  Responding to Other Concerns Raised by HWG
  We feel that it’s important to recognize that in her response to the BBB on 1/23/2023, Ms. J****** added some further commentary and attachments that technically are beyond the scope of our current request for resolution with HWG. However, that and some additional historical context may be important in considering the validity of our current concerns. I did strive to summarize our earlier engagement with HWG more broadly in my prior response to the BBB on 12/11/2022, but perhaps a bit more background detail will be helpful.
  
  In Ms. J******’s most recent response, she briefly added that HWG tried to resolve our concerns at the time of the project, and that, “a resolution was never going to be accepted.” If that comment is in any way in reference to us, then this is patently untrue. As I stated in my previous response dated 12/11/2022, our two final in-person conversations with HWG staff were audio recorded and are available upon your request. In our last discussion with Mr. J****** on 11/11/2021, we asked him to resolve the matter simply by fixing and correcting the work of his staff that had been verbally noted to be below industry standards by HWG’s own Project Manager, Mr. Kevin B********, on 10/28/2021 (once again, that audio recording also is available for your review). Mr. J****** declined, stating in the audio recording that he didn’t have the staff to do that.
  
  So, when Ms. J****** stated that “a resolution was never going to be accepted,” she instead more likely was referring to HWG’s position on the matter. In that last meeting with Mr. J****** that I cited above, it ended after he stated that he’d consider waiving all remaining invoices for their below-industry-standards work and that we two parties simply would go our own separate ways. At the time that absolutely was our preference! We then received an email on 12/2/2021 from HWG Manager John F***** demanding more than $4,000 from us as payment for work completed, work that again was cited by Mr. B******** on 10/28/2021 as being below industry standards, with the added threat that they’d place a lien on our home if we did not comply. Please see that attached email titled, “Resolution on Basement Bathroom.eml.” For some reason they did not provide that to you.
  
  As we then began to dig back over our prior statements and paid invoices following that demand email, we started to uncover many instances where we were overcharged, charged for services that were not rendered, and other surprise billing confusions that warranted important clarification from them if we ever were going to comply with their demand. Please see our attached reply to HWG dated 1/2/2022: “Re: [External]Resolution on Basement Bathroom.eml.” For some reason they did not provide that to you. In that email I specified at the outset that we wanted to work with them to resolve our own questions first, at which point we gladly would pay them if in fact we saw that we still owed them money at that point. Again, we heard no reply from them for months; however, we saw per their records in their ********** portal that they still had our account as open and were compiling interest and late fees on those still unresolved questions that we broached with them. Although we already had assumed that they never had intended to respond to our legitimate queries, at that point we believed, based on the evidence, that they now intended to go after us sometime in the future for a far greater sum of money.
  
  It was at that point that we retained a lawyer who then reached out to HWG on our behalf; HWG did provide you with a copy of that letter. Mr. J******’s response to our lawyer dated 5/27/2022, which HWG also did provide to you, finally responded to a few, but certainly nowhere near all, of our earlier queries. Whereas many points that he made appeared to be dramatically inconsistent with multiple other aspects to their prior story, there were a couple of clarifications that he made that lessened our confusion. Regardless, their overall tone strove to minimize our concerns and deflect/project all of the blame for the impasse onto us. If only HWG themselves truly had been willing to try to resolve this matter; however, that would’ve required them to own up to multiple mistakes that their team made on the project, which, despite ample evidence to that effect, which apparently was not up for negotiation.
  
  Sadly, this appears to be a bit of an increasing pattern for HWG based on their other recent published involvement with the BBB, which was deemed resolved on 9/21/2022, as well as many of their most recent reviews on other websites such as Google, HomeAdvisor, etc. Per multiple other clients’ accounts, many of their other projects of late also seem to be dramatically over budget. They also take far longer than initially proposed. Their billing statements also often are rather inaccurate to put it nicely and highly confusing; they then also either argumentatively refuse to clarify such concerns or simply refuse to explain themselves. Their projects also increasingly fail inspections (when they don’t try to cover them up).
  
  We’ve not submitted any reviews for HWG online, nor have we reported them to ******* County. Yet. We’d like to resolve this matter here with them once and for all and then move on. This three-month project now is approaching two full years. For better or worse we recognize that we’re absolutely not alone in being left to clean up HWG’s messes; that is something that they sorely, sorely need to own, starting now.
  
  Ms. *****, thank you so much once again for your support in this entire process.

  Regards,

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

  Business Response

  Date: 02/23/2023

  HWG refers back to previous response, attachments, and the new documents.  Please let HWG know if they need to submit more supporting documents.

  Thank you

  Customer Answer

  Date: 03/03/2023

  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Dear Ms. ****,
  
  We regret to inform you that we cannot accept HWG’s latest response, which appeared to be rather cryptic and entirely unrelated to the complaint at hand. We already have been made aware that they don’t take us seriously; we’re sorry to see them now choose to attempt to mock the BBB’s resolution process as well. You all clearly don’t deserve to be treated as such; neither do we, of course.
  
  Yet again, we stand firm on our prior request for resolution. Although it’s beyond apparent at this juncture, we nevertheless want to highlight the fact that throughout all of their responses in this process, HWG never countered or refuted (a) our account of all events; (b) our request that they simply honor their own 10-year warranty on their work; and (c) why we’re not being allowed to return fixtures that we purchased through them, especially given that they required us to pay and additional 20 to 30% markup charge on all said fixtures for this documented, explicit purpose. Understandably by now, this is because they have no counters to these claims. We instead have provided ample and undeniable evidence for every one of our claims, much of which came straight from their own documentation as well as from the City of ********’s Code of Ordinances.
  
  Instead, what you have observed from HWG in their series of responses throughout this particular process include, but are not necessarily limited to:
  ·      Their outright unwillingness to respond directly, fully, and coherently to our complaints as well as to the direct evidence that we presented.
  ·      Their attempts to obfuscate information and to deliberately mislead.
  ·      Their regular efforts to redirect your attention onto matters that were beyond the scope of our complaint or unrelated to it altogether.
  ·      Their striving to absolve themselves of professional liability in multiple different ways, even in the face of a direct city ordinance.
  ·      Their constant efforts to displace any and all responsibility and culpability for their below-industry-standard workmanship onto us, the paying consumer.
  ·      Their attempts to paint us as wholly unwilling to work toward compromise and resolution of this matter from the outset.
  
  Sadly, yet completely unsurprisingly to us, so many of HWG’s concerning behaviors that we initially cited then were directly demonstrated by HWG right here throughout this process. You’ve now come to witness firsthand their own unique idiosyncrasies and manner of doing business yourself. In their doing so, HWG unwittingly have made our case for us. This, in addition to their continued absence of rebuttals to what I stated in the second paragraph above, altogether serves as beyond-ample evidence in support of our initial and still-standing request for resolution.
  
  At this time, we kindly ask the BBB for your continued support and mediation as we still seek resolution with HWG on this matter. Thank you yet again.

  
  Regards,
  
  
  
  ******* *****

  Customer Answer

  Date: 03/23/2023

  Better Business Bureau:

  I would like my complaint ID ********, to be handled through an Arbitration hearing with BBB.

  Regards,

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