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:04/01/2025

  Type:Product 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.

  I am filing a formal complaint against Florida High and Dry Roofing regarding the unacceptable quality of their roofing services on my property. In January 2025, I had my roof replaced by this company, paying a total of $18,027.71. From the moment the work was completed, the roof appeared unfinished and poorly constructed. When I contacted the company about my concerns, I was told to wait a couple of months for the roof to settle ******, three months later, I have had an official inspection conducted by a reputable professional, and the results confirm my initial concerns. The inspection report clearly outlines numerous deficiencies and failures, indicating that the work performed does not meet industry standards. The roof did not pass any of the criteria required for a proper installation, making it evident that Florida High and Dry Roofing delivered subpar, unqualified workmanship.Given the severity of these issues, I am formally demanding a full refund of $18,027.71. I am not interested in allowing Florida High and Dry Roofing a second chance to correct their work, as the level of incompetence displayed in the initial installation is unacceptable. I do not wish to engage in any back-and-forth negotiationsI simply need my full refund so I can hire a reputable roofing company to correct their mistakes.If the company wishes to retrieve the materials they installed, they are welcome to do so at their own expense. However, I expect my refund to be issued immediately. If this matter is not resolved promptly, I will have no choice but to escalate this complaint further, including pursuing legal action if necessary.I request a response within 2 business days acknowledging this complaint and confirming the steps the company will take to process my refund.

  Business Response

  Date: 04/04/2025

  We are Responding  to this official complaint,  

  When the roof was installed, it occurred during the cooler months, which caused the shingles to be stiffer and more rigid. We advised allowing approximately 30 days for the shingles to warm up and relax. Prior to the official complaint, no contact was made with our office. We understand that you had your own home inspector evaluate the property. However, it is important to note that this roof has passed two separate city inspections without any comments from city officials. The dry-in inspection was approved on January 9, 2025, and the final inspection was approved on January 15, 2025.

  We adhered to the manufacturer's installation instructions and the Notice of Acceptance for the products submitted to the city. The crew assigned to this project has been with our company for several years and has consistently installed these products without issue.

  
  During our meeting with the homeowner and her daughter on April 4, 2025, scheduled for 9 AM, both were 20 minutes late. We were then able to inspect the roof ourselves. Our inspection revealed several trusses that were uneven in height compared to adjacent trusses, resulting in an uneven roof appearance. We also noted what appears to be thermal bridging beneath the roofing materials. We have since improved the propertys ventilation, as the previous system was inadequate. Unfortunately, the thermal bridging has caused some of the peel-and-stick underlayment to lift the shingles in certain areas.
  
  This morning, we offered to have our crew return next week to address these cosmetic issues; however, we were informed by the homeowner and her daughter that they do not wish for us to proceed with any repairs. The homeowners daughter requested that we retrieve the installed roofing materials, which we cannot do by law as they have been paid for in full and are the property of the owner.
  
  As we are not being given the opportunity to resolve these cosmetic concerns, we will not be issuing any refunds at this time. Should the homeowner decide to allow us to address these matters, we would be more than willing to do so to ensure peace of mind and fair treatment for the homeowner and original purchaser. the the time our our inspection this morning the homeowner and her daughter informed us that there are zero leaks or failures in the roofing system we installed.  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/06/2025

  To Whom It May Concern,
  
  I am writing in response to your reply to my BBB complaint.
  
  First, Id like to correct the claim that I arrived 20 minutes late to our April 4th meeting. I arrived four minutes after the scheduled time. It was then  stated that the homeowner had to be present, despite me being her daughter and fully authorized to represent her interestswhich, frankly, felt unnecessary, but I wont dwell on that. I even apologized for the slight delay, and you both said it was okay, so I dont understand why it was brought up in your response as if it were an issue. We moved on from it during the meeting, so it feels irrelevant now.
  
  
  We did initially express concerns when we noticed the shingles hadnt settled. We followed your advice and waited the 30 days. However, after three months, with no improvement and growing concerns, we pursued a professional, independent inspectionand that report confirmed serious issues.
  
  
  As I told ********, I did not reach out to your office before filing the BBB complaint because my trust in your company had significantly declined. I fully expected an attempt to justify subpar workand that is exactly what occurred during our meeting. Yes, the roof passed city inspection, but after speaking directly with the city inspector, I was informed that their review is focused on mechanical code compliance, not craftsmanship or cosmetic qualitywhich directly impacts the longevity of the roof.
  
  
  You acknowledged several issues, including lifted shingles, and now request a second chance. But if the roof had been done properly, a second chance wouldnt be necessary. Additionally, the explanation given for the shingle that came offsuggesting it was from the gutters, despite clear evidence of adhesiveis inconsistent and dismissive.
  
  
  To clarify, we did not deny your offer for repairs. What we said was that we needed time to review the inspection report, educate ourselves, and see your warranty and contract in writing before making any decisions. That is not a refusaljust responsible due diligence.
  
  
  Yes, we stated there were no leaks, and the inspector confirmed that. But again, a leak-free roof doesnt mean a well-installed or lasting roof. You also said youd only fix whats visible, but refused to address other areas by blaming the trussesyet the previous 16-year-old roof never had that uneven look, so the explanation doesnt hold up. Showing us unrelated roofs with similar issues was also unhelpfulwe are discussing our roof, the one we paid nearly $20,000 for.
  
  
  The bottom line is: whether mechanical or cosmetic, the overall workmanship is unacceptable. At this point, we are awaiting the warranty and the signed contract to be sent to the email address I provided at the meeting. As I stated to you both verbally and now in writing, we will follow up with our decision regarding whether we will allow a second chance to correct all of the errors. To be absolutely clearthis is not a denial, but we are taking the time to fully consider all factors and determine what is in our best interest moving forward.
  
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/07/2025

   
  Complaint: 23145584
  
  Date Sent: 4/6/2025 6:06:38 PM
  To Whom It May Concern,
  
  I am writing in response to your reply to my BBB complaint.
  
  First, Id like to correct the claim that I arrived 20 minutes late to our April 4th meeting. I arrived four minutes after the scheduled time. It was then  stated that the homeowner had to be present, despite me being her daughter and fully authorized to represent her interestswhich, frankly, felt unnecessary, but I wont dwell on that. I even apologized for the slight delay, and you both said it was okay, so I dont understand why it was brought up in your response as if it were an issue. We moved on from it during the meeting, so it feels irrelevant now.
  
  
  We did initially express concerns when we noticed the shingles hadnt settled. We followed your advice and waited the 30 days. However, after three months, with no improvement and growing concerns, we pursued a professional, independent inspectionand that report confirmed serious issues.
  
  
  As I told ********, I did not reach out to your office before filing the BBB complaint because my trust in your company had significantly declined. I fully expected an attempt to justify subpar workand that is exactly what occurred during our meeting. Yes, the roof passed city inspection, but after speaking directly with the city inspector, I was informed that their review is focused on mechanical code compliance, not craftsmanship or cosmetic qualitywhich directly impacts the longevity of the roof.
  
  
  You acknowledged several issues, including lifted shingles, and now request a second chance. But if the roof had been done properly, a second chance wouldnt be necessary. Additionally, the explanation given for the shingle that came offsuggesting it was from the gutters, despite clear evidence of adhesiveis inconsistent and dismissive.
  
  
  To clarify, we did not deny your offer for repairs. What we said was that we needed time to review the inspection report, educate ourselves, and see your warranty and contract in writing before making any decisions. That is not a refusaljust responsible due diligence.
  
  
  Yes, we stated there were no leaks, and the inspector confirmed that. But again, a leak-free roof doesnt mean a well-installed or lasting roof. You also said youd only fix whats visible, but refused to address other areas by blaming the trussesyet the previous 16-year-old roof never had that uneven look, so the explanation doesnt hold up. Showing us unrelated roofs with similar issues was also unhelpfulwe are discussing our roof, the one we paid nearly $20,000 for.
  
  
  The bottom line is: whether mechanical or cosmetic, the overall workmanship is unacceptable. At this point, we are awaiting the warranty and the signed contract to be sent to the email address I provided at the meeting. As I stated to you both verbally and now in writing, we will follow up with our decision regarding whether we will allow a second chance to correct all of the errors. To be absolutely clearthis is not a denial, but we are taking the time to fully consider all factors and determine what is in our best interest moving forward.
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ********** *****

  Business Response

  Date: 04/16/2025

  Upon inspecting the property, we observed several uneven trusses that are visible through the roofing materials. Attached are photos from ****** showing similar issues with the old roof prior to our replacement. Additionally, we noted instances of thermal bridging unrelated to the uneven trusses, which we discussed in person. We attempted to schedule a repair for the following week, but the homeowner and her daughter indicated that we were not welcome to address the issue.
  
  Initially, we advised the homeowner to allow time for the roof to settle, considering it was installed during colder months. During this time, shingles need to warm up to relax and lay completely flat. Due to the installation conditions, some edges of the shingles were cold and ridged.
  
  We were not contacted directly to assess the concerns raised by the homeowner's daughter before this formal complaint was made. According to the signed workmanship warranty agreement, we should have been informed in writing immediately after the 30-day ***** which we previously advised. Waiting over three months does not comply with the warranty agreement signed by the homeowner. However, we remain willing to address some of the thermal bridging concerns.
  
  During our conversation, the homeowner and her daughter mentioned that a "home inspector" evaluated the property. It appears that this inspector did not understand or identify what thermal bridging is or how it affects the roof, leading us to question his qualifications, as he is not a licensed roofing contractor or engineer. The roof was installed per Florida building code and the manufacturer's installation instructions, and it passed two separate inspections: one for underlayment and flashing, and a final inspection by a building official.
  
  Regarding the "shingle that came off the roof," it was a piece left over from the installation that was missed during cleanup. We could not locate any missing shingles on the roof, nor did the inspector find or document any. We have photos from our most recent visit confirming that there are no missing shingles.
  
  In our last meeting, we directly attempted to schedule cosmetic repairs but were informed that the homeowner had no interest in allowing us to proceed. The warranty documentation was sent via email to the contracting party at the address she signed digitally, and we resent the contract on April 4th, 2025. We have been informed in writing that the daughter has been acting on behalf of the homeowner and has permission to send all correspondence. However, for legal reasons, we cannot allow her to make decisions on her mother's behalf without valid legal documentation, such as a Power of Attorney. If we proceed with changes or repairs based on the daughters direction, we may face legal repercussions.
  
  While on our way to meet the customer, we noticed several roofs in the neighborhood exhibiting "thermal bridging," which is a common occurrence in newly installed roofs, affecting both reroofs and new builds. We showed the photos of other affected roofs to help them understand this issue.
  
  We offered to repair some visible cosmetic concerns that can be seen from the road, although not all cosmetic issues can be addressed due to aged decking and uneven trusses. We observed that in some higher areas, the material was flat against the trusses, indicating no give. Please review the attached photos of the old roof showing high spots due to uneven trusses.
  
  This ongoing back and forth is unproductive for all parties involved. We will allow a response period of three business days to schedule the cosmetic repairs. Two weeks have already passed, and we do not wish to continue incurring losses from these discussions. According to the warranty paperwork provided with the signed contract, failure to mitigate and inform us in a timely manner could invalidate the warranty. Nevertheless, our offer to address some cosmetic concerns remains. If no attempt to schedule these repairs is made by April 21, 2025, we will cease further communications.
  Kind Regards, 
  Florida High & Dry Roofing 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/16/2025

  We strongly reject the misleading statements made in your recent message and are providing this to clarify the facts and document your continued failure to resolve this matter in good faith.
  
  First and foremost, we never denied your offer to make cosmetic repairs. What we clearly stated during our in-person meeting was that we needed time to consider our options especially after being met with nothing but excuses and shifting blame. That meeting raised serious trust concerns, and wanting time to think is not the same as refusing service.
  
  Your claim that this situation has been prolonged on our part is absolutely false. The delay has been caused by your ongoing refusal to provide the signed contract and full written warranty key documents that weve been asking for repeatedly. You stated they were sent, yet we have confirmed several times that we have not received them and have provided the preferred and correct email address: ******************** on three separate occasions verbally, in writing, and in person. The fact that you still havent corrected this shows a serious lack of effort and cooperation on your part.
  
  In our in person meeting you claim that you are willing to address what is visible to the eye but that statement in itself is alarming. That vague language suggests you are only willing to fix what can be seen from the street, while ignoring issues that may impact long-term performance or structural integrity. This is unacceptable, especially for a homeowner who was promised professional workmanship and peace of mind.
  
  Lets also address your attempt to deflect responsibility by referencing pre-existing truss issues. While the image you attached does show some minor unevenness, it is nowhere near the extent of what is now visible on the new roof. If these conditions were known or visible during your pre-inspection or during installation, it was your responsibility to address or disclose them not use them now as a justification for poor results.
  
  Additionally, your repeated refusal to communicate with my authorized representative my daughter continues to be both obstructive and unfounded. Under Florida agency law, I have the legal right to designate someone to act on my behalf. She has been the main point of contact throughout this process, with my full permission, which you acknowledged in person and now in writing. Your claim that she cannot make decisions without a Power of Attorney is legally incorrect. It is simply being used as another excuse to avoid accountability.

  
  You also criticized the inspector we consulted, claiming he was not qualified because he is not a licensed roofer or engineer. However, your teams work passed only basic city inspections, which do not address cosmetic quality or deeper workmanship issues. His concerns were legitimate, and dismissing them so easily reflects poorly on your companys professionalism.
  
  Finally, lets be clear: you have not made a good faith effort to resolve this. Two weeks have passed, not because of hesitation on our part, but because you continue to withhold key documents and push the burden back on us. Until we receive the signed contract and full written warranty at the correct email address provided ******************** we cannot move forward with any decisions.
  
  This is your opportunity to correct course and show that your company stands behind its work.

  We are still open to resolving this respectfully, but your continued deflection and mischaracterization of our position are unacceptable and will not be tolerated.
  
  

  
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/21/2025

   
  Complaint: 23145584
  
  I am rejecting this response because:Date Sent: 4/16/2025 8:15:53 PM
  

  We strongly reject the misleading statements made in your recent message and are providing this to clarify the facts and document your continued failure to resolve this matter in good faith.
  
  First and foremost, we never denied your offer to make cosmetic repairs. What we clearly stated during our in-person meeting was that we needed time to consider our options especially after being met with nothing but excuses and shifting blame. That meeting raised serious trust concerns, and wanting time to think is not the same as refusing service.
  
  Your claim that this situation has been prolonged on our part is absolutely false. The delay has been caused by your ongoing refusal to provide the signed contract and full written warranty key documents that weve been asking for repeatedly. You stated they were sent, yet we have confirmed several times that we have not received them and have provided the preferred and correct email address: ******************** on three separate occasions verbally, in writing, and in person. The fact that you still havent corrected this shows a serious lack of effort and cooperation on your part.
  
  In our in person meeting you claim that you are willing to address what is visible to the eye but that statement in itself is alarming. That vague language suggests you are only willing to fix what can be seen from the street, while ignoring issues that may impact long-term performance or structural integrity. This is unacceptable, especially for a homeowner who was promised professional workmanship and peace of mind.
  
  Lets also address your attempt to deflect responsibility by referencing pre-existing truss issues. While the image you attached does show some minor unevenness, it is nowhere near the extent of what is now visible on the new roof. If these conditions were known or visible during your pre-inspection or during installation, it was your responsibility to address or disclose them not use them now as a justification for poor results.
  
  Additionally, your repeated refusal to communicate with my authorized representative my daughter continues to be both obstructive and unfounded. Under Florida agency law, I have the legal right to designate someone to act on my behalf. She has been the main point of contact throughout this process, with my full permission, which you acknowledged in person and now in writing. Your claim that she cannot make decisions without a Power of Attorney is legally incorrect. It is simply being used as another excuse to avoid accountability.

  
  You also criticized the inspector we consulted, claiming he was not qualified because he is not a licensed roofer or engineer. However, your teams work passed only basic city inspections, which do not address cosmetic quality or deeper workmanship issues. His concerns were legitimate, and dismissing them so easily reflects poorly on your companys professionalism.
  
  Finally, lets be clear: you have not made a good faith effort to resolve this. Two weeks have passed, not because of hesitation on our part, but because you continue to withhold key documents and push the burden back on us. Until we receive the signed contract and full written warranty at the correct email address provided ******************** we cannot move forward with any decisions.
  
  This is your opportunity to correct course and show that your company stands behind its work.

  We are still open to resolving this respectfully, but your continued deflection and mischaracterization of our position are unacceptable and will not be tolerated.

  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ********** *****

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/21/2025

  In response to Florida High & Dry Roofings most recent offer to perform cosmetic repairs, we are open to resolving this matter, but only under clear and fair terms. The original phrasing of what is visible to the eye is far too vague and does not provide any assurance that the full scope of workmanship concerns will be properly addressed.
  
  
  To move forward in good faith, the following must be agreed upon in writing:
  
  Defined Scope of *********************** must specify all areas that will be corrected including but not limited to: visibly rippled shingles, loose or improperly seated tabs, and any areas lifting due to thermal bridging or installation flaws. We are not agreeing to an undefined patch job. The work must be done professionally and to full manufacturer standards.
  Acknowledgment of ************************************ must acknowledge that while there may have been minor uneven trusses previously, the current level of roof distortion is visibly worse post-installation. Therefore, the excuse of preexisting structure is not valid to dismiss responsibility. Proper adjustments and workmanship corrections must be made regardless of the prior condition especially since it was not disclosed to the homeowner before installation.
  Completion Timeline and Oversight:
  We require a defined date of service and estimate for completion, and we request a written summary or photos of the corrected areas once completed.
  
  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/24/2025

  we will not continue to go in circles, discussing the same things over and over again.

  We have offered to schedule the cosmetic repairs MANY times with no progressive steps to further resolve this complaint. 

  We also will reiterate that we will not partake in communication with the daughter of the owner since no power of attorney has been provided (simply stating that the daughter has been granted permission to act on the owners behalf is not legally binding) thus far all communications have been made by the daughter as we have been informed)

  we sent the contact and warranty paperwork on April 4th 2025 as requested to the property owners email on file that the contract was signed on.

  the dishonest nature of the last BBB response stating that said documents had not been sent are simply not true. our estimating software indicates the documents were viewed on 

  April 20th 2025 at 5:01pm, 5:26pm and 5:38pm as you can see from the photo provide