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:04/18/2025

  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.

  Had a leak in my roof. Had a salesman come out. I told him where I found water in the soffit above. He advised me it was likely coming from a different area. So I trusted his judgment being the professional. ****, is his name, didnt step foot on my roof or attic or anywhere else. Diagnosed it from the lawn. I paid $4k for a partial new roof. The leak came back in the exact same spot. Well see if they honor their warranty. *** update. No response to call about warranty.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/09/2025

  Regarding *** ******* complaint against Landmark Roofing, we completed his roofing job in mid to late August 2024. On August 30th, I spoke with *** *****, who expressed concern that our crew didn't find any evidence of water damage during the initial repair. He wanted to understand the warranty coverage if the leak continued. I assured him that if the leak persisted due to our repair work, we would return to resolve it. However, if the leak was due to a separate issue unrelated to our roofing work, it wouldn't be covered under our warranty. He seemed satisfied with this explanation and complimented the work done by **** and the crew.
  
  In December 2024, *** ***** left a one-star review on ******. Since December 13th, our office has made several attempts to contact *** ***** to arrange for our owner, ***** ********, to visit the property, assess the situation, and take any necessary action. Unfortunately, each time we called, the call was either disconnected or went to voicemail.
  
  We didn't hear back from the Smiths until April 4, 2025, when *** ***** called to report that the leak was ongoing. He mentioned that he was having his windows replaced and could see some water damage. He believes the leak is originating from the second story, which he had initially indicated to *** as his primary concern. However, he said *** felt the issue was on the first story, and he deferred to ***** opinion. He also mentioned that the roofing crew didn't find any signs of a leak. Understandably, he is frustrated after spending nearly $4,000 and wants to know if the warranty will cover the current leak.
  
  Despite our continued efforts, we have been unable to schedule a visit with the Smiths for our owner to assess the property. We would greatly appreciate the opportunity to visit the property and take any corrective action if it's needed on the work we performed. We are committed to ensuring our customers are satisfied and addressing any concerns they may have.
  
  Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
  

  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/02/2024

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore 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.

  The estimate we were given included foam insulation board. On the date of install they applied only the Mulehide rubber roofing and NO foam insulation board. When we questioned the installers who barely spoke English they said no foam insulation board only adhesive. Called the "Production Manager" ***, he said they could not install the foam board on our roof. They already had our old roof tore off so we had no choice other than to let them proceed with JUST the Mulehide rubber roof.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/21/2024

  We have since reached out to this homeowner and resolved their complaint. Their original estimate was quoted accurately but included a material in the header that we did not use. To resolve the issue we, Landmark Roofing agreed upon with the homeowner to compensate them with a check totaling the cost of materials in question that we did not use on their project. The homeowner and his wife are now very happy with their project and resolution.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/22/2024

   Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

  
  

  Thank you.

   

  ***** and *******************

• Initial Complaint

  Date:08/19/2022

  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.

  Landmark Roofing installed a new roof on June 2, 2022. As a result of completing a two-day project in one day, over $4,000 in damage resulted to my property. Some of this damage has been rectified by me, and some by Landmark. They have offered credits far less in amount than the quotes I have received for the repair work. After promising no damage would be done to my gutter helmets, $600 in damage resulted. Over $1,000 in wood and paint damage, and they want to settle for $500. They broke more than one-third of my low voltage path and flood lights and want to provide a credit of $500 when the estimates for replacements exceed $2,400. They broke a 911 emergency strobe light on my roof, replaced the fixture, but have told me that I have to secure it in the attic. The contractors I have consulted all indicate that they should have removed the new shingles in that area, cut a hole in the plywood, reattached the light using the bracket they broke or a replacement bracket, and then repaired the new damage. It has been eleven weeks since the work began and the damage was done, and I have had to obtain all the quotes and estimates for repair work with no assistance from Landmark. I have had to meet with contractors, provide documentation, exchange numerous emails, texts and phone calls with Landmark, consult with an attorney, and proceed with repairs not knowing whether I will recover any of my expenses, and certainly will not recover my countless hours dealing with issues resulting directly from their negligence. A few weeks ago, I filed a claim with their liability insurance carrier, *********************, and I had to send all documentation and photos to them. They claim they aren't painters, so I have to hire the work done. They aren't responsible for damage done to my lighting system and I "didn't maintain it properly." They have not been responsive except when it comes to demanding payment for a job not yet completed. I am now filing a complaint.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/19/2022

  Landmark has acknowledged that there was damage done to the landscaping lights during the install of the roof, there was paint chipped on freeze boards during install, that there was some debris that dented the gutter helmet, and that there was damage to the strobe light on top of his roof. We have since approached this in a way of resolution offering ****************** a credit for painting, landscape lights, dented helmets, totaling in the amount of $2,000.00. We came to a verbal agreement  for ****************** to pay his remaining balance minus the agreed upon $2,000.00 and ****************** has since decided to pursue an insurance claim with our provider. Further details pertaining to the projects timeline include;
  On June 23 We met with ****************** and acknowledged the above mentioned damages, our crews addressed multiple concerns and were able to fix on the spot. The above items that we were unable to take care of same-day (as a special order was required to address the issue of the strobe light) were agreed for us to return at a later date with the proper materials. It was on this date Mr. ************* had agreed to take the $2,000.00 credit applied to his bill; but would send the remaining owed payment.
  On August 2 the special order strobe light arrived and was ready for installation. The appointment to go to ********************** home was made 1 week in advance. On the day of the appointment, ****************** left once the crew arrived and we were unable to install a bracket in the attic to keep the strobe light vertical on top of the roof.
  We responded to issues in a timely manner, and came out on 2 separate occasions to fix concerns. ****************** had agreed to a credit in the amount of $2,000.00 towards his bill for the concerns we would not be able to address personally. By ****************** breaking his agreement and pursuing our insurance, our adjuster has come to a lesser amount than our original agreement of the $2,000.00 credit.
  
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/29/2022

   I am rejecting this response because:
  
  

  1.- The statement that there was "paint chipped on freeze boards" is far from an accurate description of the damage done by Landmark.  Far more damage was done and is evident in the photos I attached to the original complaint.  Wood was damaged where they pried it off that has resulted in wood repair being necessary in addition to painting.  There was also a board that was removed in its entirety and never replaced.  Please review the photos I submitted for additional information.

   

  2- Landmark initially verbally offered a $2,000 settlement on June 23^rd, but after waiting several days past the communicated confirmation date when ****** stated he would provide approval (June 27^th) from the owner, (*****), ****** finally responded on July 7^th that they would only provide an allowance of $1,600 which is a fraction of the actual costs of repairs.  The $2,000 amount discussion only resurfaced after I filed a claim with Landmarks insurance company to seek recovery of my expenses incurred as a direct result of Landmarks negligence.  The $2,000 amount was originally estimated prior to any contractor quotes being received and represents about half of the amount required to restore the property to its pre-Landmark condition.  (Landmark also removed one of the path lights, and has not returned it despite two requests to do so.  They want me to repurpose the existing lights, but I need the fixture they removed to see if I can use the glass from it to replace glass they broke in another fixture.)  They do not want to pay for any removal and installation costs, but instead told me that I have to do the work of repairing/replacing the lighting systems, finding contractors for the painting, wood and gutter repairs, and now, they failed to properly install the strobe light which currently serves no useful purpose as it is not visible from the street and is leaning on the roof instead of being in an upright position.  When I hired Landmark, I thought I was dealing with a reputable firm and all I was asking for was a new roof, instead I have had three months of headaches searching for contractors to repair damage done by them.  This is not how I had planned to spend my summer.

   

  3- The "some debris that damaged the gutter helmet" is not an accurate description of the damage that resulted in $600 in repairs after I was specifically told by Landmark that the helmets did not require removal and that no damage would be done.  I have emails from Landmark to this effect after I specifically inquired due to a separate potential contractor requiring their removal as part of the proposed project.  I instead went with Landmark after those assurances.  They told me they would be using an extractor or buggies to remove debris; that did not occur.  They told me they would cover the garage doors, air conditioner, hot tub and other areas with plywood; that occurred in only a few areas.  They told me they would sweep the ground for nails after I specifically asked about this due to a previous experience; that did not occur.  They told me they would have a project manager on site; that did not occur.

   

  4- As Landmark indicated, on June 23^rd, they did address some of the concerns not included in this complaint as there was additional damage to my residence.  I myself replaced a torn screen using my time and materials that I purchased, I swept the property for nails (finding over 200) with a magnetic device, they hammered in some loose nails, caulked some exposed nails, removed broken tree branches, and performed additional minor repairs.  The four items that are part of this complaint and the insurance claim remain outstanding.

   

  5- Landmark has not accurately represented the events of the day on which they came to install the strobe light.  It was August 2^nd, and the appointment was scheduled for 9:00 a.m.  I went outside my residence when ****** arrived and waved at him sitting in a Landmark truck, but he did not acknowledge me.  He appeared to be on his phone.  I went back inside the house and waited.  When I returned outside, shortly after 9:00 a.m., ****** and his truck were gone.  At 9:16 a.m., ****** sent a text message which reads as follows:

   

  *** will be here approximately 10am per his gps.  I will meet him back here at 10am.

   

  There was no mention of a need for access to the attic, and no mention of me needing to be present for the repairs at any time.  I texted ****** and advised him that I had placed the materials needed for the project on the driveway and that I would inspect the work when I returned.  Again, the appointment was scheduled for 9:00 a.m., not 10:00 a.m.

   

  ****** responded,

   

  Ok.  We were hoping to test light prior to returning to ***************.  And we need to discuss a payment, payment arrangements, or a plan.  If you can be available that is ideal.  If not, please call me to go over these details.  Thanks.

   

  Again, no mention of needing access to the attic or that I needed to be present.

   

  At 10:57 a.m., I received the following text message from ******:

   

  Everything will be re-connected and installed.  The pvc housing is actually strapped to the side of a rafter.  *** can not re-Connect the strap without access to the attic.  Therefore he will connect everything, sealed up and stable, and at your convenience you will need to s**** the strap back over the pipe holding to the rafter.  They are finishing up now.

   

  The light is not stable but is leaning against the side of a flexible rubber piece which is all that is holding it in place.  Until receiving this text, I was not aware that attic access was needed, and my subsequent inspection, and that of other contractors, has resulted in the opinion that the correct way to attach the light post is by removing the shingles and the underlayment, cutting out a piece of the plywood, reattaching or replacing the broken bracket, then repairing everything that was removed.  The interior repair option requires going through the attic access panel which is in a small closet on the second floor, consists of a 2'x2' ceiling opening, requires a ladder to reach the panel, would require another ladder to reach the bracket, and there is no flooring in the attic and minimal support to lean a ladder against.  This has been explained to ******.  The contractors who have surveyed the problem have all agreed the solution needs to come from the outside, and could be as simple as attaching a bracket, but that will require breaking the seal and potentially voiding Landmark's warranty, so no one is willing to perform the work.  The correct method would be to remove and replace that section of the roof.  Landmark stated that they are unwilling to do this.  This statement was made in the presence of Landmarks insurance inspector on Friday, August 19^th.  ****** also indicated the bracket wasnt broken, but that Landmark had unscrewed it.  If that was the case, then why couldnt they have simply screwed it back into place during the installation process?

   

  Conclusion:

   

  There are several additional concerns with Landmarks response as they have indicated they responded to these concerns timely, yet we are in our third month of these items not being repaired as Landmark has continued to low-ball the dollar amounts required to make these repairs and has offered no assistance in finding qualified contractors. 

   

  I hired ****** ******** the original installer of the gutter helmets to make their repairs and that work was completed at a cost of $600 on August 17^th.  I obtained quotes from painting companies and hired ****************** to perform the wood and paint repair at a cost of $1,118.00 and they are here today, August 22, making those repairs.  Landmark was only willing to make a $500 credit to my contract, less than half of the actual costs.

   

  I obtained quotes from lighting companies, and they ranged from $2,400 to $5,000.  Landmark was willing to make only a $500 credit for these repairs.  I have not obtained quotes for repairs to the strobe light because other companies are not willing to touch the project for fear of voiding Landmarks warranty.  I asked one roofer for a rough estimate, and he told me it would be $1,000 to $1,200 to tear off a portion of the new roof and install the light in the manner it should have been done initially. 

   

  This morning, I spoke with the insurance adjustor from *********************, to confirm Landmarks claim in their response to the BBB that our adjuster has come to a lesser amount than our original agreement of the $2,000.00 credit.  The adjustor confirmed that no final resolution has been determined as she is still waiting on the inspectors report from the inspection that was just one business day ago (Friday).  This false statement further calls into question the integrity of Landmarks other actions and responses.

   

  I simply asked for a new roof to be installed, and with that I received $3,000-$4,000 in damage to my lighting, gutter helmets, strobe light, and wood trim.  ****** has been combative and unwilling to assist in the resolution of their damages.  For these reasons, I do not accept their response.  I am expecting reimbursement from Landmark or their insurance for the actual costs incurred in repairing or replacing, as needed, the damaged sections of the gutter helmets, the damaged wood and painting of the wood, the proper strobe light repairs which will make the device fully functional again, and an allowance for the damage done to the lighting fixtures.

   

  I have never experienced a situation like this previously where a contractor damages someones property and then refuses to repair the damage.  I will be unavailable for the next two days as I will be out of town but will look for an update when I return.