C B Structures Incorporated

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: All comments from CB Structures are lies They have shown proof of nothing For example, the stair rail that they show is not part of the stairs that I previously sent They were sent photos of the doors continuing to leak They have not been on site since at least January and have no idea regarding any of the items that they are commenting on I will not provide any further responses to their unfounded comments Regards, [redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: We have paid $58,toward a $70,contract, which means there is only $11,left on the contract that has not yet been paid to CB StructuresAs it stands, the structure that CB promised in their contract far from completeIt not only has issues requiring repair per the city inspector's report, it is missing fixtires, drywall, plumbing, framing, and has many other issues needing repair or installation Per recently acquired general contractor estimates of repair needed to make the structure whole and to meet the contract specification noted in the original contract made with CB Structures, there is no way CB Structures can make those repairs with the remaining budget CB Structures has hired at least sub-contractors who are currently unlicensed in the state of [redacted] according to current records on file with the [redacted] Unfortunately, there may be more, but CB Structures refused to provide a list of sub-contractors when requested In addition, CB Structures has provided no proof of payment to the sub-contractors who have performed the work that has been done to date In CB Structures response to Revdex.com, no specificity was provided on how they intend to fix the problems they have caused, what timeframe is set to complete the repairs, which sub-contractors they intend to hire for the repairs idenitfied by the city inspectors office, what the estimate of costs or cost analysis is, or any detailed plan of action and parameters for the conclusion of this projectFinally, they never even apologized for their actions, which is inexcusable They continue to justify their actions by placing the balme on internal issues when in fact those issues are only part of the problem CB Structures vague and undetailed response to the Revdex.com failed to address key issues, such as why there was no supervision on site, or why work was allowed to be done without first obtaining city inspections and approval to conduct such workTheir lack of response to specific problems addressed in the complaint and their vague statement of wanting the opportunity to continue with the project is the same stalling tactic used on us over the last months With a track record of no on-site supervision, unlicensed contractors, unwillingnness to disclose infomration, in-fighting within thier own department, and excuses why delays continue to mount, we have no faith that we will be made whole or complete by any actions conducted by CB Strcutures Regards, [redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: While the wrapping of the handicap ramp was discussed with CB Structures in November of 2013, no change order was issued to the PLAN, and no discussion regarding footing depth or soil compaction was had with us or our excavator at that time The project manager from CB Structures at that time Nick is no longer with that company, so the statements above are hearsay and the accounts of communication with our excavator are completely in context to the construction of the ramp Even MsA [redacted] who is writing this rebuttal had no involvement with our project at that time Our excavator had clearly marked on our foundation the anticipated grade level which had not been completed when the ramp was then installed by CB structures CB Structures stopped the ramp short of completion and made the statement to us that when the ground is brought up to grade surrounding the foundation the ramp would be completed As the builder and the responsible party for supplying the ramp, CB Structures never inquired about or requested soil compaction for the installation of the ramp They clearly had no business installing the ramp at that time, and we relied on their expertise as the builder to make the decision to build the ramp By January of 2014, the ramp was sinking and numerous requests were made to CB Structures to repair the ramp It took months for CB Structures to provide a response, and they still have not provided a solution to this problem This leads to the assumption of a lack of respect for the handicap community as they have been un-willing to take the responsibility to correct their building error, and have made no statement of a willingness to complete the ramp until this complaint was formally filed to the Revdex.com Here is the exact response from the project manager of 4/4/which even says that they installed the ramp not in accordance to the plan “Deck Ramp The ramp is not as per the plan and that is an issue The ramp per plan was to extend straight away from the building, which it wraps around the side of the building as it sits today By changing the ramp from the plan the footing for the ramp are in the over dig of the foundation The excavator did not compact the soil in the over dig when he backfilled the foundation The ramp is still settling as of weeks ago when I was down at the site We dug our typical footings at frost depth and should have had compacted soil for the footing to bear on It is not acceptable to put 6’ of dirt around the foundation at a time and let the rain settle it out, it will not have the compaction it needs for bearing capacity and that is why it is still settling We can fix the ramp but there will be a cost associated with it.” The project manager admits that they deviated from plan, yet expects us to pay the cost to repair the ramp change that we did not approve in a change order! There is also no mention of a discussion at all with the excavator regarding soil compaction We paid to have a complete and functional handicap ramp installed, and the repair should not be at our cost, but at the cost of CB Structures It is their mistake It is impossible for the soil to be compacted with the ramp in place The ramp must be removed by CB Structures for soil compaction then reinstalled, or repaired with footing to virgin ground depth, or removed and reinstalled according to PLAN It is our understanding that a repair option was provided by the sub-contractor who built the ramp to CB Structures, which they have not or are not willing to acknowledge or execute Ms A***’ response to our comments calling us LIARS publicly is defamation of character Also, MsA***’ statement about us opening our business to the public with unsafe conditions is ridiculous There are other entrances to our building beyond the handicap ramp, and the ramp sadly has been blocked for public access As a small business, we cannot indefinitely wait to open our business while CB Structures did not effectively manage their subcontractors or attempt to maintain any form of a schedule The referred to timeline provided by the sales representative showing a completion date of 6/ was provided as a means to get us to sign a contract So we consider this misleading and information It has been extremely difficult to work with or get any form of update or communication from CB over the course of the project Months went by with no progress at all and an example of such is clearly shown in chronological order on our Facebook page where the building is wrapped in Tyvek in July of 2013, the exterior board and batten was started in November 2013, and still incomplete in February 2014! (This is just one of numerous examples, such as a the exterior door that leaks copious amounts of water onto our tasting room floors for almost a year, and is still not properly repaired) There was no reasonable or diligent effort to complete our building in a timely fashion which has resulted in loss of potential income, and even worse, cost us large amounts of additional investment to process and store wines with additional premium fees at other locations so that we would be stocked with inventory for opening (Which was completely unpredictable because we never knew when the building might be completed) All the while, we have made every payment to them in a timely fashion in spite of their lack of timely responses The usual course of business for payment to CB Structures has been a submission of an invoice to our lender The lender then comes out to the property to inspect the progress before releasing the payment Over the course of construction, the lender has voiced numerous concerns about CB Structures that their handling of our projectTo date, no final request for payment has been submitted to the lender Also, MsA***’ statement that our building is complete is falseWhile the building is nearly complete, there are still items missing, malfunctioning and not completely installed The project manager has not been on site for over a month (and probably more as far as we know), and should come and inspect and complete the construction before final payment is requested MsA***’ assumption our building is complete based on hearsay since no direct representative of the company has been onsite Additionally, CB Structures was contracted to install stone work around our fireplace, and a request was made by us to remove this item from the scope of work and to provide a credit for this item This was agreed upon, and we were told that the credit would be issued, but to date, this has not happened, and further inquiries regarding this credit have been ignored In closing, we do not feel that CB Structures has made a reasonable effort to resolve this issue, and we reject their response Regards, [redacted]

Hello, I am writing to inform you that management was not aware of the customer contacting us for this issueOur construction assistant, who is a fairly new employee, was purely following our time guidelines regarding our warranty period We are willing and able to help resolve this issue Please have [redacted] contact me immediately or Brian Q***, our engineer, to assist in getting this resolvedOur contact number is ###-###-####My extension is [redacted] and Brian Q***'s extension is She can also email me at [redacted] and Brian at [redacted] We will wait to hear from her as we would like to address this issue immediately Thank you in advance Rebecca LA***, CFO

I am writing this rebuttal to the complaint in regard to C B Structures, Incas their Vice President and Chief Financial Officer What they have failed to state in their complaint is that they contracted directly with the excavator for the site work and were responsible for its management which had a direct impact on the ramp issueIn our contract, the handicap ramp was to extend straight away from the building out into the parking lot, it now wraps around the side of the building, per their requestThis was done at no charge By changing the ramp from the plan, the footing for the ramp is in the over dig of the foundationTheir excavator did not compact the soil in the over dig when he backfilled the foundationC B Structures, Incwas unaware that the soil was not compacted down 14’ to the footing when we went to dig our footingsWe dug our typical footings at frost depth per plan with the reasonable understanding that the excavator had compacted soil suitable for the ramp footing to bear on, which was their responsibility in their contract with the excavatorAfter we constructed the ramp, we discovered this was not the case by admission of their excavator to usThe 14’ deep over dig is still settling because the excavator did not compact the soil in liftsIt is problematic to put 6’ of dirt around the foundation at a time and let the rain settle it out, it will not have the compaction it needs for bearing capacity for anything let alone a ramp and that is why it is still settlingC B Structures, Incis willing to extend the ramp to compensate for the current settlement issues, once the soil conditions are correctedOtherwise the ramp will continue to settle with the ground and pull off the buildingThis exact issue was discussed with them on 4-4-and additionally documented via email and to date nothing has been done with the un-compacted soil which is their responsibility in their contract with the excavator They have known about the settlement issue for over four months and have chosen to do nothing about itNow they are trying to imply that we have done something wrongOur contract, which was a significant portion of their building, is complete and they have yet to pay the full contract, balance owing of $19,They have also chosen to open their business this past weekend knowing that there are safety concerns with the ramp area of the businessWe resent that they are stating that we do not care about the handicap community as this is an outright lie and is defamatoryThey have given a perception to the online community that is untrue by not providing all the facts in a Facebook postHopefully this clarifies where we standAlso, they state that their contract had a completion date of June and that is untrue as well, as the contract does not stipulate a completion date As we have stated, we are willing to correct the issues with the ramp once the site conditions are corrected by their excavatorIf the site conditions are not corrected, the issue will continue to occur with it sinking

------ Forwarded message ----------From: Joseph S*** Date: Wed, May 18, at 11:AMSubject: RE: Copy of Response for Revdex.com Complaint #***To: "***"
***,
The repair noted below was completed Monday, 5/16, and we have contacted the customer and he has agreed that he is satisfied and will remove his complaint
Please let us know if you need any additional information
Sincerely,Joe S*General Manager ###-###-####
###-###-#### fax***
Conestoga Buildings*** *** ***New Holland, PA 17557www.ConestogaBuildings.com
Over Years in the Post Frame Industry
From: *** [mailto:***] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 3:PMTo: Joseph S*Subject: Copy of Response for Revdex.com Complaint #***
We have received the customer's response. We have been in contact with the customer and the repair is to be completed upon receipt of siding materials ordered to fix the issues. The approximate ETA for this repair to be completed is weeks, or 5/11/16. The customer is happy with our response, complimentary of the company representative who discussed this issue with him on site, and agrees to remove this complaint upon the repair completionCB Structures will notify the Revdex.com when this repair is completed

CB Structures acknowledged this customers concerns during the construction process and made adjustments to deliver the product he desired. Upon the customer contacting CB with concerns, management immediately responded and had a crew go out to the site an make corrections. The siding
was noted as a possible concern, but, could not be repaired in the weather conditions at the time. We asked *** to keep in touch regarding the vinyl siding issues, and agreed to make repairs if needed upon warmer weather. *** contacted us last Wednesday late in the afternoon, management responded early on Thursday, April 21st, that the CB construction department would be in contact shortly to schedule the repair. The Revdex.com complaint was posted on the following morning, April 22nd. In addition, we did recognize that the customer experience was not as great as we want to provide and agreed to credit the customer his final payment, +/- $1,000, for his time and troubles with some of the site clean-upThere was not any unfulfilled promises or misleading information presented to the customerCB management recognized the issues in our performance and responded professionally and in a timely manner to this customer. It is disappointing that the customer did not make a phone call to discuss the recent siding issue and sent an email, and was then offended in receiving a timely email response stating we would have our construction department be in touch to get the repair completed

Hello, [redacted].
To resolve this matter with [redacted], CB Structures is doing the following:
-          The electrical is now inspected and approved. There had been some confusion as to whether or not there was an electrical permit, but and the work has been approved.
-          With the approval of the electrical inspection, the remaining schedule will be as follows:
o   Install additional framing for drywall
o   Install R-19 in (3) walls and R-30 in ceiling of enclosed area
o   Install drywall (3) walls
o   Install outlets, switches, and fixtures
-          Per the contract, Jon D[redacted] made a site visit on 11/25/14. The contract specifically states that the addition of an opening into their home is not included in the cost of the contract. CB Structures made no implicit commitment to adding an opening into the existing home. We do not feel it prudent to contract with the homeowner for any additional work.
-          CB Structures was responsible for the concrete floor only and not tying into the existing driveway. That work is to be performed by the homeowner.
-          Once the above schedule is complete, CB Structures will have fulfilled their contractual obligations. We do not have confirmed dates on the completion, but anticipate the completion by month’s end. We will have a better estimate once we have commitment dates from the appropriate subcontractors.
Thanks

I am writing this rebuttal to the complaint in regard to C B Structures, Inc. as their Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.
What they have failed to state in their complaint is that they contracted directly with the excavator for the site work and were responsible for its management which...

had a direct impact on the ramp issue. In our contract, the handicap ramp was to extend straight away from the building out into the parking lot, it now wraps around the side of the building, per their request. This was done at no charge.
By changing the ramp from the plan, the footing for the ramp is in the over dig of the foundation. Their excavator did not compact the soil in the over dig when he backfilled the foundation. C B Structures, Inc. was unaware that the soil was not compacted down 14’ to the footing when we went to dig our footings. We dug our typical footings at normal frost depth per plan with the reasonable understanding that the excavator had compacted soil suitable for the ramp footing to bear on, which was their responsibility in their contract with the excavator. After we constructed the ramp, we discovered this was not the case by admission of their excavator to us. The 14’ deep over dig is still settling because the excavator did not compact the soil in lifts. It is problematic to put 6’ of dirt around the foundation at a time and let the rain settle it out, it will not have the compaction it needs for bearing capacity for anything let alone a ramp and that is why it is still settling. C B Structures, Inc. is willing to extend the ramp to compensate for the current settlement issues, once the soil conditions are corrected. Otherwise the ramp will continue to settle with the ground and pull off the building. This exact issue was discussed with them on 4-4-14 and additionally documented via email and to date nothing has been done with the un-compacted soil which is their responsibility in their contract with the excavator.
They have known about the settlement issue for over four months and have chosen to do nothing about it. Now they are trying to imply that we have done something wrong. Our contract, which was a significant portion of their building, is complete and they have yet to pay the full contract, balance owing of $19,049. They have also chosen to open their business this past weekend knowing that there are safety concerns with the ramp area of the business. We resent that they are stating that we do not care about the handicap community as this is an outright lie and is defamatory. They have given a perception to the online community that is untrue by not providing all the facts in a Facebook post. Hopefully this clarifies where we stand. Also, they state that their contract had a completion date of June 2013 and that is untrue as well, as the contract does not stipulate a completion date.
As we have stated, we are willing to correct the issues with the ramp once the site conditions are corrected by their excavator. If the site conditions are not corrected, the issue will continue to occur with it sinking.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
While the wrapping of the handicap ramp was
discussed with CB Structures in November of 2013, no change order was issued to
the PLAN, and no discussion regarding footing depth or soil compaction was had
with us or our excavator at that time. 
The project manager from CB Structures at that time Nick is no longer
with that company, so the statements above are hearsay and the accounts of
communication with our excavator are completely FALSE in context to the
construction of the ramp.  Even Ms. A[redacted]
who is writing this rebuttal had no involvement with our project at that
time.  Our excavator had clearly marked
on our foundation the anticipated grade level which had not been completed when
the ramp was then installed by CB structures. 
CB Structures stopped the ramp short of completion and made the
statement to us that when the ground is brought up to grade surrounding the
foundation the ramp would be completed. 
As the builder and the responsible party for supplying the ramp, CB
Structures never inquired about or requested soil compaction for the
installation of the ramp.  They clearly
had no business installing the ramp at that time, and we relied on their
expertise as the builder to make the decision to build the ramp.  By January of 2014, the ramp was sinking and
numerous requests were made to CB Structures to repair the ramp.  It took 4 months for CB Structures to provide
a response, and they still have not provided a solution to this problem.  This leads to the assumption of a lack of
respect for the handicap community as they have been un-willing to take the
responsibility  to correct their building
error, and have made no statement of a willingness to complete the ramp until this
complaint was formally filed to the Revdex.com.  Here is the exact response from the project
manager of 4/4/14 which even says that they installed the ramp not in
accordance to the plan. 
“Deck
Ramp
The ramp is not as per the plan and that is an issue.  The
ramp per plan was to extend straight away from the building, which it wraps
around the side of the building as it sits today.
By changing the ramp from the plan the footing for the ramp are
in the over dig of the foundation.  The excavator did not compact the soil
in the over dig when he backfilled the foundation.
The ramp is still settling as of 2 weeks ago when I was down at
the site.  We dug our typical footings at normal frost depth and should have
had compacted soil for the footing to bear on.
It is not acceptable to put 6’ of dirt around the foundation at
a time and let the rain settle it out, it will not have the compaction it needs
for bearing capacity and that is why it is still settling.  We can fix the
ramp but there will be a cost associated with it.”
The project manager admits that they
deviated from plan, yet expects us to pay the cost to repair the ramp change
that we did not approve in a change order! There is also no mention of a
discussion at all with the excavator regarding soil compaction.  We paid to have a complete and functional
handicap ramp installed, and the repair should not be at our cost, but at the
cost of CB Structures.  It is their
mistake.
It is impossible for the soil to be
compacted with the ramp in place.  The
ramp must be removed by CB Structures for soil compaction then reinstalled, or
repaired with footing to virgin ground depth, or removed and reinstalled
according to PLAN.  It is our understanding
that a repair option was provided by the sub-contractor who built the ramp to
CB Structures, which they have not or are not willing to acknowledge or execute.    Ms.
A[redacted]’ response to our comments calling us LIARS publicly is defamation of
character.  Also, Ms. A[redacted]’ statement
about us opening our business to the public with unsafe conditions is
ridiculous.  There are other entrances to
our building beyond the handicap ramp, and the ramp sadly has been blocked for public
access.  As a small business, we cannot
indefinitely wait to open our business while CB Structures did not effectively
manage their subcontractors or attempt to maintain any form of a schedule.  The referred to timeline provided by the sales
representative showing a completion date of 6/2013  was provided as a means to get us to sign a
contract.  So we consider this misleading
and false information.  It has been extremely
difficult to work with or get any form of update or communication from CB over
the course of the project.  Months went
by with no progress at all and an example of such  is clearly shown in chronological order on our
Facebook page where the building is wrapped in Tyvek in July of 2013, the
exterior board and batten was started in November 2013, and still incomplete in
February 2014! (This is just one of numerous examples, such as a the exterior
door that leaks copious amounts of water  onto our tasting room floors for almost a year,
and is still not properly repaired) There was no reasonable or diligent effort
to complete our building in a timely fashion which has resulted in loss of
potential income, and even worse, cost us large amounts of additional investment
to process  and store wines with additional
premium fees at other locations so that we would be stocked with inventory for
opening.  (Which was completely
unpredictable because we never knew when the building might be completed) All
the while, we have made every payment to them in a timely fashion in spite of
their lack of timely responses.  The
usual course of business for payment to CB Structures has been a submission of an
invoice to our lender.  The lender then
comes out to the property to inspect the progress before releasing the
payment.  Over the course of construction,
the lender has voiced numerous concerns about CB Structures that their handling
of our project. To date, no final request for payment has been submitted to the
lender.  Also, Ms. A[redacted]’ statement that
our building is complete is false. While the building is nearly complete, there
are still items missing, malfunctioning and not completely installed.  The project manager has not been on site for
over a month (and probably more as far as we know), and should come and inspect
and complete the construction before final payment is requested.  Ms. A[redacted]’ assumption our building is
complete based on hearsay since no direct representative of the company has
been onsite.  Additionally, CB Structures
was contracted to install stone work around our fireplace, and a request was
made by us to remove this item from the scope of work and to provide a credit
for this item.  This was agreed upon, and
we were told that the credit would be issued, but to date, this has not
happened, and further inquiries regarding this credit have been ignored.   In
closing, we do not feel that CB Structures has made a reasonable effort to
resolve this issue, and we reject their response.
Regards,
[redacted]

Hello,
I am writing to inform you that management was not aware of the customer contacting us for this issue. Our construction assistant, who is a fairly new employee, was purely following our time guidelines regarding our warranty period.
We are willing and able to help resolve this issue....

Please have [redacted] contact me immediately or Brian Q[redacted], our engineer, to assist in getting this resolved. Our contact number is ###-###-####. My extension is [redacted] and Brian Q[redacted]'s extension is 125. She can also email me at [redacted] and Brian at [redacted]
We will wait to hear from her as we would like to address this issue immediately.
Thank you in advance.
Rebecca L. A[redacted], CFO

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
All comments from CB Structures are lies.  They have shown proof of nothing.  For example, the stair rail that they show is not part of the stairs that I previously sent.  They were sent photos of the doors continuing to leak.  They have not been on site since at least January and have no idea regarding any of the items that they are commenting on.  I  will not provide any further responses to their unfounded comments.
Regards,
[redacted]

In response to [redacted]:We are currently working with our attorney on this account who has advised us to limit our response.  The only item that was not complete was minor and it was overhead door trim, of which the material was on site and the [redacted]’s would not allow us to return to...

complete as was conveyed through their attorney.We also take issue with the quote they had received from a subcontractor to fix repairs as I had called this subcontractor to discuss and he would not talk to me about the perceived issues.  It is questionable that he is an ongoing construction business.There are certain deadlines in filing mechanics liens in each state to protect our rights.  We are in the process of filing a lien on the [redacted]’s property based on the criteria.  This will be our final communication regarding this complaint and the issues will be decided in court.

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
[redacted]

In
response to [redacted]In April, CB Structures was made aware
of leaking doors during every rain storm damaging our hard wood floors.
 The doors continue to leak and have not been properly repaired.
 They had tried to repair these doors 3 times, yet they continue to leak
and damage our floors.  They are defective and should be replaced.  I
am also attaching the Scope of Work where [redacted] doors were defined, but not
supplied.  The door contractor stated that the issues were
corrected.  As we have a difference of
opinion on the issue with the doors, we are suggesting that an impartial
opinion be obtained from a contractor that we both can mutually agree upon to
visit the site and inspect the doors for a determination on what, if any issues
need to be resolved.  Regarding [redacted] doors being defined in the scope of work, there
was an updated scope of work issued in April 2013 which does not state [redacted]
doors after numerous changes were made and agreed upon (previously
submitted).  In addition, our Project
Manager assigned to the job at that time is willing to testify in court how he
strongly recommended not going with [redacted] doors due to prior issues and
recommended alternates that were agreed upon.On July 3 CB Structures was made aware
that the building front doors have a wide gap and do not stay closed correctly.
 Also that the weather striping was off the bottom of one of the doors.
 They have not corrected this. The doors are double doors which by design have clearance
between the two panels. The weather stripping was intact when the building was
substantially complete, we believe it was damaged by the owner or the owners
other contractors. Brent, our project manager, did address this with the
[redacted].On July 3 CB Structures was informed
that one of the wood window grills was broken as a result of their
installation, yet they have not replaced this. We had replaced the window grill.  If another was damaged it wasn’t by a C B
Structures, Inc. employee.  Brent did
address this with the [redacted].In addition, a flight of stairs to our
cellar was installed without handrails (photo attached) which is against IBC
code. According to our scope of work the basement was to be
unfinished.  As you can see from the
attached picture, we provided a handrail for construction with the knowledge
that the [redacted] were to finish off the basement themselves.  The handrails are normally installed when a
basement is finished, which the [redacted]’s are responsible for and not in our
scope of work.  This is a minor item that
we have just learned about, and we would be willing to install a standard
handrail.  Our scope of work (attached) calls for
ADA compliant restrooms (2), but no hardware was installed.  At minimum
hand rails should be installed. Upon review, the restrooms are ADA compliant except for the
handrails that we inadvertently did not install. This is minor and we can
correct very easily and will do so.Last, we believe the handicap ramp is
to be completed by CB Structures.  Per your phone conversation with [redacted] Construction, the sinking ramp was repaired at a cost of $500 to us, and per
your conversation with Darwin, you were told that in his expert opinion, the
ramp is repaired and is in fact "not going anywhere".  Since the
repair, we have also installed at our own expense a concrete pad brought out to
virgin soil, with 4" of gravel and rebarb embedded into the concrete
foundation for entrance to the ramp.  You will see in the attached photos
that CB structures stopped the ramp short of ground level and had planned to
finish the ramp when the surrounding soil was brought to ground level.
 Per the measurement shown, we approximate the distance to be 70" to
bring the ramp to down to ground level.  To be clear, the height that you
see the ramp at has NOTHING to do with ground sinking, and is at the height for
the reason that just outlined.  Regarding the handicap ramp and as previously stated
numerous times, we still stand firm that the ground is sinking due to not being
compacted properly by the [redacted]’s excavation subcontractor.   The statement that Sky Construction is an
expert opinion is invalid as he is not an engineer.  [redacted] Construction is one of our subcontractors
and is a good contractor to a set of engineered drawings, but does not have the
knowledge to definitively determine if the repair was structurally sound.  Our engineer’s opinion, who is certified,  and has been previously accepted by the courts
as an expert, states that there will be sinking issues continuing as the ground
was not compacted.  Therefore, we will
not complete any activity with the ramp until that is corrected as we believe
to be unsafe, particularly when a handicap person in a wheelchair would be
accessing it.  We have even been in touch
with our lawyer who issued a letter to the [redacted]’ s regarding our concern on
the compaction issue that we can’t be held liable should injury occur.  Also, we are working with our attorney’s to
determine whether we are required to report an unsafe condition to any township
or other jurisdiction.         I also would like to point out that
while [redacted] claims that we have held off on the punch list to further
damage her company, we have invited members of her company to come and see
things for themselves multiple times. I had asked Brent Whary to come onsite on
July 9th, and prior to that we had asked Bill W[redacted] and Rick H[redacted] to come and
visit.  We never got responses.  We disagree with the statement that we are not
responding.  We have asked for a punch
list numerous times as we want to determine what is in our scope of work, as
previous items stated were not in our scope of work.   We question the sincerity of her desire to
get a punch list done as we asked Ms. [redacted] for one, and she stated all
communication should go through her husband. 
When we contacted him, he stated in an email “Why
don't you reach out to the Revdex.com and resolve the complaint
about the handicap ramp and leaking doors for starters?”  This shows two opportunities for them to
provide a list, and we still have not received it.  We want a complete list so that we do not
have to make multiple trips and flush out what is not in the scope of our
contract as they have repeatedly requested punch list items that are not ours
to correct.  Keep in mind we are not the
general contractor on this job, only a subcontractor.  The [redacted]’s are the general contractor
coordinating many trades.Regarding times for them to complete
the work, they can come on a Monday or Wednesday after 10am, and they must make
an appointment with [redacted] prior to coming.  They have [redacted] contact informationWe did try and communicate with **. [redacted] and as stated
in the above, this was his response“Why don't you reach
out to the Revdex.com and resolve the complaint about the handicap
ramp and leaking doors for starters?”

I am rejecting this response because the company failed to provide us with a completion date and still not keeping their words on the project. On their last response on January 8, 2015, they say the insulation install was scheduled for the week of January 12, 2015 we had a no show and no call. We would like our money back so that we can get another company to finish the job. We are very unsatisfied with this work and just want our money back. This is unacceptable. We don't trust them.
Regards,
[redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed...

Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
We have paid $58,900 toward a $70,156 contract, which means there is only $11,000 left on the contract that has not yet been paid to CB Structures. As it stands, the structure that CB promised in their contract far from complete. It not only has issues requiring repair per the city inspector's report, it is missing fixtires, drywall, plumbing, framing, and has many other issues needing repair or installation.  Per recently acquired general contractor estimates of repair needed to make the structure whole and to meet the contract specification noted in the original contract made with CB Structures, there is no way CB Structures can make those repairs with the remaining budget.   
CB Structures has hired at least 2 sub-contractors who are currently unlicensed in the state of ** according to current records on file with the [redacted].  Unfortunately, there may be more, but CB Structures refused to provide a list of  sub-contractors when requested.
In addition, CB Structures has provided no proof of payment to the sub-contractors who have performed the work that has been done to date.  
In CB Structures response to Revdex.com, no specificity was provided on how they intend to fix the problems they have caused, what timeframe is set to complete the repairs, which sub-contractors they intend to hire for the repairs idenitfied by the city inspectors office, what the estimate of costs or cost analysis is, or any detailed plan of action and parameters for the conclusion of this project. Finally, they never even apologized for their actions, which is inexcusable.  They continue to justify their actions by placing the balme on internal issues when in fact those issues are only part of the problem. 
CB Structures vague and undetailed response to the Revdex.com failed to address key issues, such as why there was no supervision on site, or why work was allowed to be done without first obtaining city inspections and approval to conduct such work. Their lack of response to specific problems addressed in the complaint and  their vague statement of wanting the opportunity to continue with the project is the same stalling tactic used on us over the last 15 months.  With a  track record of no on-site supervision, unlicensed contractors, unwillingnness to disclose infomration, in-fighting within thier own department, and excuses why delays continue to mount, we have no faith that we will be made whole or complete by any actions conducted by CB Strcutures. 
Regards,[redacted]

Response
to Complaint by [redacted]A
meeting with [redacted] and Moses C[redacted] resulted in an
agreement to move forward with C B Structures, Inc to build a small
addition and a garage. In the preliminary conversations with
[redacted] and her husband a discussion on how to...

open the
existing wall into the new space took place. Moses C[redacted] explained
that when one opens an existing gable end wall there may be some
issues that could make that expensive. Moses C[redacted] explained that
there could be several utilities that may have to be dealt with. It
was also explained that there may be no utilities to deal with. It
was the desire of Mr. C[redacted] to give as much information to the
Angrand's about what is involved in the opening of the wall. He did
not promise or ever imply that C B Structures, Inc. would create the
openings. It was stated that if the Angrand’s wanted C B
Structures, Inc. to do this work it would add additional expense.
Mrs. Angrand said that they would take care of making the openings in
the wall. Moses C[redacted] made several trips to take pictures of the
house, yard, interior circuit breaker, and was not able to take
pictures of the attic trusses. This was done in order to facilitate
the construction process. Upon the signing of the contract it was
made clear in the contract that the Pricing
does not include openings into existing structure.
This was made bold to emphasis the fact that C B Structures, Inc. was
not contracted to do that aspect of the project. Furthermore the
plan drawings did not show any openings into the existing structure.
All this was approved and signed by the Angrand’s. Once
the contact was signed Moses C[redacted] received a call from Mrs. Angrand
offering her services to go to the Township Building to begin the
process of pulling permits. He was surprised by that offer since C B
Structures, Inc. was contracted to do this and he never called her to
do this. She wanted to get the process moving and since she was very
intent on doing this and volunteered to do this Mr. C[redacted] did not
discourage her. In fact he tried to help her in the process. There
are some misunderstandings on the part of Mrs. Angrand on how we
conduct our business. It is a common practice that a builder like C B
Structures, Inc. hires subcontractors to do the various steps in the
construction process. There is excavation, framing, concrete, doors
and windows, electrical, gutter, etc. and these trades are usually
subcontracted. The
payments to date that she is stating is dictated by the contract
which was agreed upon when signing the contract. We have not asked
for anything beyond the contractual agreement. In a telephone
conversation with Brian Quarry from our office on December 17th,
he was trying to inform Mrs. Angrand what to expect and she hung up
on him. We
are currently working on this project and have been since starting it
at the end of October. When a building has multiple trades as this
one does, we work diligently on scheduling. As in any construction
project, unforeseen circumstances can arise which causes schedules to
be realigned. We completed the concrete work on December 8 and
installed gutters on December 19th.
There is a framing inspection scheduled with the township for
tomorrow, January 8, 2015. Currently, we have the insulation install
scheduled for the week of January 12, 2015. We are in the process of
scheduling the electrical inspection and once that occurs, we will
schedule the drywall installation.I
have attached a few pictures of the project for your review. We are
currently working on this project and fully intend to honor the
contractual obligations that we have. At no time did we indicate we
would not.

We are investigating this complaint and need more time to respond.
 
[redacted]
CFO

Review: We went under contract with CB Structures Inc in June 2014. They promised the would start our job the third week of July and it wasn't started until August 2014. The Sub they hired to build our garage didn't build it to the plans attached to our contract. The building failed County inspections and we had to fight tooth and nail with CB Structures to repair the few little things they did repair. We contacted and sent pictures of our garage showing the damages...the metal was cut to short, the screws weren't tightened properly, alot of the framing is incorrect and our garage is 1 month old and the roof is leaking in numerous places to no avail. We have had to contact an Attorney to help us try and get them to resolve the issues or pay for the damages... to no avail. The employees of this company are the rudest people I ever meet or tried to work with. They lie to your face, laugh in your face and make promises that don't even last long enough to hang up the phone. We have had another Contractor come out and look at our garage and he gave us an estimate to repair of $10,200.Desired Settlement: We feel we should be compensated for the repairs of $10,200 plus our Attorney fees and mental anguish.

Business

Response:

In response to [redacted]:We are currently working with our attorney on this account who has advised us to limit our response. The only item that was not complete was minor and it was overhead door trim, of which the material was on site and the [redacted]’s would not allow us to return to complete as was conveyed through their attorney.We also take issue with the quote they had received from a subcontractor to fix repairs as I had called this subcontractor to discuss and he would not talk to me about the perceived issues. It is questionable that he is an ongoing construction business.There are certain deadlines in filing mechanics liens in each state to protect our rights. We are in the process of filing a lien on the [redacted]’s property based on the criteria. This will be our final communication regarding this complaint and the issues will be decided in court.