[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. If you and the business have reached an agreement and compliance is set...
for a future date, we trust the business will comply. Please contact us after that time if the matter is not resolved as agreed and we will review the complaint and proceed accordingly.]
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, if Inverness follows up on its proposed resolution of reimbursing us for our loss.Next time. it would be better if the execs at Inverness would respond without the need for prompting by the Revdex.com.
Regards,
[redacted]
Inverness Homes is very concerned and committed to resolving this matter for our valued customer. We do provide a 2 year mechanical-plumbing warranty with every new Inverness Home. When we were notified of the issue, our Service Supervisor responded and scheduled a...
service inspection. There was a misunderstanding from the text message sent that was incorrectly interpreted. Once the message was discussed verbally with the customer, all parties agreed on our proposed plan of action. We have subsequently made our inspection and are in the process of repairing the defect. We are confident our customer is completely satisfied with our service at this time.
It's our position that this has been resolved. The buyer's full deposit has been refunded even though the buyer defaulted by not adhering to their obligations detailed in the "Buyers Default" section of the contract. Clearly this was a situation where it was in the best interest of...
both parties to cancel the agreement so the buyer could pursue other housing options.
As communicated Inverness Homes remains committed to completing the repairs to your satisfaction. At this time we believe there are 2 items unresolved: 1. Siding paint to touch up is not complete due to paint not being received from the siding manufacturer. We have been told it will be received at the beginning of next week. 2. The trim repair was completed but the workmanship wasn't acceptable so that is being rescheduled for the end of next week. We fully intend to have both items completed by the end of next week. Our Service Representative will contact you next week to confirm the repair date and give you the opportunity to be present to ensure your satisfaction.
Inverness Homes met with the customer and communicated that no
warranty is in effect for discoloration of the concrete of the driveway. The
customer’s driveway has a minor color variation of part of the driveway that
occurred during the finishing process which is cosmetic in nature only and...
tends
to fade somewhat over time. Additionally, Inverness Homes requested a third-party
concrete representative to inspect the driveway. Their report is attached which concludes that the
minor color variation was most likely due to the need to brush the driveway
from both sides, that there is a tendency for color variations to weather and
fade over time, and the overall craftsmanship of the driveway exceeds industry
standards. The repair or replacement of the driveway is not warranted due to a
color variation. Thank you.
Mr Brennamon called today and is going to try to have a sod and drainage person come here to look at my back yard and decide if sod would take care of the problem. In the meantime I have been in touch with [redacted] with the city of [redacted] to fin out what is involved in getting a French drain and he said a right away permit from [redacted], an Ok from the developer Ken Conway and as long as it was kept in the existing swale no permission from home owners needed. The survey taken showers my yard is six inches low on the amount of slope it should have to drain properly. Regards[redacted]
[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. If you and the business have reached an agreement and compliance is set for a future date, we trust the business will comply. Please contact us after that time if the matter is not resolved as agreed and we will review the complaint and proceed accordingly.]
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]
As homeowners and consumers the Inverness management staff understands the frustrations, inconvenience and costs associated when products fail to perform as intended. Inverness endeavors to build their homes free of defects by conducting multiple inspections throughout the construction process,...
building homes that meet or exceed local building code requirements and ensuring all homes pass the required jurisdictional building inspections. However, issues do arise and for that reason we have full time personnel dedicated to providing warranty service and advice for our homeowners during and after the documented warranty coverage period. The effectiveness of our program is based on the fundamental practice of documenting the request/issue, tracking the status and following up to ensure the issue has been addressed. The responsibility of the homeowner is to communicate the issue to our warranty department as detailed in the warranty coverage documents provided at the home closing.The first issue detailed in the complaint occurred shortly after closing which is typically when plumbing related problems occur. The root cause of the problem was identified and the repair was made by the plumbing contractor. The process worked as intended in this situation as evidenced by the fact the waterline has not leaked in the more than 5 years after the repair.The other two problems detailed are actually the same issue that was either not properly investigated to determine the root cause or was improperly repaired by the independent contractor hired by the homeowner and/or [redacted] Insurance. Based on the complaint and the documents available it is our opinion that most of the results from this situation could have been avoided had there been better communication between the homeowner and our Warranty Department. The proof of contact referred to in the complaint was an e-mail sent to our Model Home/Sales Office on Wednesday, January, 8,2014 at 7:06 PM indicating the problem and asking "What should we do with it?" Our Sales Counselor responded at 7:59 PM recommending they refer to the emergency contact numbers for the vendors that worked on their home that was provided at the closing. Also, the email suggested a call be placed to the Inverness main office to report the problem and find out the company's position. The contact name and number was provided. The only other record is a mobile phone bill indicating a call to the Inverness main line on January, 9, 2014. Inverness has no records detailing a phone conversation which likely means the conversation was with someone other than the Warranty Administrator, the communication from the Warranty Administrator was acceptable or there was to be further follow-up from one of the parties. At this time, almost 1 1/2 years after the call there is no way to determine what was communicated or what was to happen after the call. The next communication received was on Sunday, March 8, 2015 indicating the water pipe in the garage burst for a second time due to inadequate insulation or an air leak. Our Warranty Administrator responded on Monday, March 9, 2015 indicating the our Service Representative would contact them to schedule a meeting to inspect the affected area. The meeting occurred on March, 11, 2015 and our Service Representative sent a follow-up letter detailing the what was discussed at the meeting and our position as a result of the repairs being made by an independent contractor. In addition, if the repairs were made through [redacted] Insurance they had the ability to file a subrogation claim against Inverness if it was determined the issue was a result of faulty workmanship during the initial construction of the home. However, this would have been done immediately following the original repair but only after an investigation to determine the root cause was completed. We have no first hand knowledge of the actual involvement of [redacted] Insurance only that the receipts provided indicated the Reference Company as [redacted] Insurance.Our summary of the complaint is: (1) The home closed in November, 2009 with no frozen pipes until the 5th full winter (2) The initial water leak was not inspected by Inverness in 2014 (3) The root cause of the initial pipe bursting is still unknown. The root cause of the pipe bursting the second time could be the same as the original or it could be the result of an improper repair (4) The repair done in 2014 was not done properly and/or there was no investigation to determine the root cause in order to ensure there would be no reoccurrence. NOTE: the invoices provided indicated that the contractor removed wet insulation and replaced it with new during both repairs. There is no confirmation it was done properly. (5) There is no fundamental flaw in building and design. This plan has been built multiple times and the placement of bathrooms and/or laundry rooms above the garage is a common design practice. I'm confident there are hundreds of homes built in the area with this type of design layout. We certainly understand the level of frustration you are feeling. I can assure you we would have accepted full responsibility for repairing the first leak had we investigated the problem and determined the root cause was a result of the workmanship of our subcontractors. Although it is impossible to determine what caused the initial pipe to burst since the area has been compromised by an independent contractor twice, we want to take a reasonable position at this late date and willing to provide reimbursement based on what our estimated costs would have been at the time of the initial water leak. Based on the affected area and repairs detailed in the documents provided we estimate the original costs would have been $[redacted] - $[redacted]. Since the invoices received seem very high we are willing to double the high end of our estimate and provide $*,[redacted] reimbursement. It is our opinion the contractor should have investigated the problem properly, accepted responsibility for the second leak and made the follow-up repairs at no charge. Also, in order for both parties to move forward and ensure this issue doesn't reoccur we are willing to access the affected area and provide additional insulation and sealant to make sure the issue has been addressed. In conjunction with this we will provide a two year extended warranty specifically for freezing of the waterlines in the affected area. However, the warranty will not include issues arising from the workmanship of the repaired waterlines since that work was performed by a non-Inverness contractor. We sincerely hope you find this proposal reasonable and a fair resolution.
Prior to providing our response, it's important to provide our perspective to a couple statements in the complaint:1. At no point did Inverness renege, abandon or in any fashion indicate that the agreed upon work would not be completed.2. While we agree with the Homeowners statements "I hired an...
engineer" and "under the supervision of our engineer", we don't agree that an Inverness representative actually hired the Homeowners engineer to oversee the job. At the request of the Homeowner, Inverness agreed to pay for the services of their engineer to oversee the work. In reference to the complaint, on October 29, 2015 representatives from Inverness met with the Homeowner and their representative (Inspector/Engineer) at the home to review their One (1) Year Service Request. NOTE: All comments referred to as "agreed upon" in this response is defined as what occurred during this meeting at the residence. An Inverness representative completed a written summary of the meeting and One (1) Year Service Request list on November 20, 2015 and forwarded to the Homeowner for review. On December 9, 2015, the Homeowner returned the written summary with their notes. Through subsequent communications and clarifications, both parties agreed to start the interior service items on January 26, 2016. One such item, to sister floor joist below the master bedroom and master bathroom seems to be the main are of contention. Inverness believed this work involved eight (8) floor joist which was later confirmed in an email dated 2/13/2016 from the engineer hired by the Homeowner. Specifically, the email from their engineer stated:I believe where the quantity of wood became an issue is the addition of wood for your son's room.I believe there were a total of 8 joist needing sistering @ the master bedroom and master bath. Additional not added for your son's room.However, I do not think enough boards were allocated for blocking.There were also 2 boards that could not be used because of excessive crown and twist when they dried. Inverness prepared and provided ten (10) floor joist (8 for attachment to existing and 2 for blocking) to complete the agreed upon work under the master bedroom and master bathroom area of the home. In hindsight, we acknowledge that it would have been prudent to have a few extra floor joist to account for the possibility of unusable material and additional blocking. Please be assured that if it was a matter of ordering a few more floor joist to complete the original agreed upon work this would have already been scheduled for completion. However, while performing the agreed upon work, it was pointed out to our Service Technician there were additional repairs needed under the son's room which was not discussed nor agreed to during the 10/29/2015 meeting. This area was confirmed as additional in the 2/13/2016 email noted above. Therefore, Inverness requested an opportunity to inspect this area and have the right to be accompanied by an independent third party prior to commencing. At no time has Inverness communicated that we would or wouldn't make the additional repairs. In summary, Inverness requests the opportunity to inspect the affected area to determine our position of the need for the work in accordance to the meeting on October 29,2015 and the local building code. Representatives from Inverness are available during normal business hours after Wednesday, March 9, 2016. Furthermore, for this item and any future items, Inverness remains committed to completing the agreed upon work in accordance to the contractual agreement, our documented warranty standards, and the local building codes applicable at the time of construction of the home.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Revdex.com Response from
[redacted]
March 10, 2016
Note: Please let me know when I may send you additional documents including email communications and photographs. I have attached the "Service Plan" and a photograph of our roof.
The response submitted by Inverness does not resolve the
complaint. In fact, it continues to demonstrate how the company attempts to
change facts, in addition to its verbal and written agreements.
The respondent states the company has not reneged on
agreements, and says he never agreed to reinforce joists on the left side of
the home, although I, my engineer and my wife all heard him make that agreement.Even more demonstrative is that he clearly states he agreed
to sister and block joists under the master bathroom. The work began Jan. 26,
2016 and as of March 10, 2016, that work remains undone.In fact, in a Feb. 12
email, the respondent acknowledged that this work was not necessarily scheduled
to be finished when he wrote: “Please understand that I’ll need to review any
additional joist work.”He did not respond to our request that he speak to his staff
and the engineer to get an accurate understanding of the work, and number of
joists needed, nor did he respond to my voicemail from Feb. 8. Finally, in a Feb. 25 email, he said: “I was hoping you
could provide me a few days/times that I could review the possible 15
additional joists in question. I plan to have a structural engineer join that
meeting.”No where, as he states in his response, did he say this was
to review work on the left side of the home, under my son’s room, so anyone
reading his mail would take it to mean that sorely needed work under the master
bath was also to be re-reviewed, long after it was agreed to by Inverness.We immediately gave the respondent available dates and times
for the following week, but he did not respond. We can make more dates
available, but he needs to respond when we do.The Feb. 8 episode mentioned in my original complaint,
involving an unscheduled worker showing up wanting to blow insulation into the
attic, I believe, is also telling of Inverness’s intent to abandon the remaining
work plan. As explained, that plan calls for baffles to be replaced and
correctly sized, unacceptable roof ridge lines to be repaired, an air-flow
calculation to be done and shingle overhang to be addressed. It would make no sense to blow in more
insulation prior to attic work, which will result in compression of the
insulation. The worker who was sent to the home said he knew nothing about
replacing baffles to be of the correct, Code-required size.But in his Feb. 12 email, the respondent said: “We had
planned to address the baffles and attic insulation within this phase of work.”Without being done in conjunction with all of the attic and
roof work, this would make no sense, it is on the work list for Spring, and
quite frankly appears to be a plan by Inverness to do the bare minimum and then
say it is done with the work. The respondent also seems to foreshadow this in his response
when he says: “ Inverness remains committed to completing the agreed upon work
in accordance to the contractual agreement, our documented warranty standards,
and the local building codes applicable at the time of construction of the
home.”The respondent leaves out his previous written agreements
outlining repairs. Perhaps this is because he keeps changing this plan? Warren
County, where our home is located, has an exemption from Ohio Building Code for
drip edges on the roof, which was one of our requested repairs that Inverness
does not have to do because of the exemption. This does not exempt Inverness from the agreed to repairs,
which include excessive shingle overhang, ridge lines and sheathing deviation
that violate published building standards, which Inverness wrote would be
repaired in “accordance with Industry standards.”In the interest of brevity and focusing on key issues, there
is much history that has been left out of this complaint. It is a history of
scheduling appointments, rearranging schedules, no shows on occasion ,
agreements made then reconsidered, all while important, promised work hangs in
the balance.As previously stated, I would like this complaint be kept
open until Inverness re-starts and completes the work in accordance with its
previous statements, written comments, building laws and acceptable building
standards. If the complaint process does not accommodate this, I feel that a
detailed written work plan that meets my approval is the only way to resolve
this complaint. This work plan would need to address every remaining item on
the service plan list, in addition to Inverness’s promised testing of the HVAC
system which could not be done after they repaired the system, by installing
the correct-sized piston, because of weather conditions needed for accurate
testing.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com: As a follow-up to the previous correspondences, Inverness Homes has received a copy of the [redacted] response to the customer's Claim #[redacted] (attached) that indicates that the shingles show no defects. Also, Inverness Homes hired a third-party inspection of the roof (attached). Inverness Homes agrees to hire a licensed [redacted] contractor to repair areas of raised, damaged, or missing shingles that have not adequately sealed as recommended by the report. Please provide days/times that the work can be performed. At this time, I would like to reject the offer of Mediation for complaint ID [redacted].Regards,Jeff [redacted]Inverness Homes
Inverness Homes met with the customers and reviewed their concerns and questions. In regards to the their concerns with the sump pump running, Inverness Homes hired a surveyor to complete an assessment of the grades around the home to determine if any grading adjustments are necessary. Inverness...
Homes communicated to the customer that it would make any grading adjustments necessary. While Inverness Homes does not know the exact source of the ground water or sub-surface water that has caused the customer’s concern, such occurrences are not uncommon in this area. For protection of the home from exterior water sources, Inverness Homes has installed gravel and drain tile around the footer and foundation walls, gravel and a vapor barrier under the basement slab, and applied waterproofing to the exterior of the foundation walls. The gravel and drain tile are connected to the sump pump which discharges the water into a conduit away from the home. There is no evidence of any water infiltration or damage to the structure of the home. However, because of the customer’s concern with the sump pump, Inverness Homes offered to install a second sump-pump with a battery backup to alleviate their concerns. Additionally, although Inverness Homes cannot control, guarantee, or warranty against any subsurface water sources, Inverness Homes offered to hire a third-party engineer or work with the customer’s engineer to evaluate the customers concern of sub-surface water. At this time, Inverness Homes has not received the customer’s decision regarding the use of an engineer. In regards to the other items identified by the customer in the meeting, Inverness Homes agreed to complete and or address those items in accordance to the Purchase Agreement, warranty, and industry standards. Inverness homes will be providing the customer a schedule for the completion of those items for their review and confirmation. Thank you.
]
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. I must note, however, that the Revdex.com has not followed its own rules, and had I not reactivated communications with the AG's Office, Mr. Jeff [redacted] would, no doubt, have continued to thumb his nose at this process. Each time there has been a response, I have been given one week to answer, and have received urgent, automated phone reminders. At the time I re-activated communications with the AG's office, Mr. [redacted] had refused to respond for more than two weeks. More distressing is that before I contacted the AG's Office, I emailed Ms. [redacted] for a status update two times, and she did not respond.While his company acknowledged its responsibilities for repairing our home a year ago, Mr. [redacted] has continued to make every effort not to honor actions his company promised, and even crafted a plan to walk off the job and refuse to do the repairs after his employees put a service plan in writing. Ms. [redacted] aided Mr. [redacted] toward this end. It was not until Mr. [redacted] received notice of an AG's investigation last Tuesday then received one more attempt by the Revdex.com Thursday for his answer, that he instantly responded on Friday, agreeing to the listed items, long after his company agreed to them, then reneged on doing them. Please tell Mr. [redacted] that new complaints will be filed the instant his company reneges again. I expect an email communication from Inverness to begin rescheduling the work as I am now convinced all communication should be in writing.Thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely,[redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.First I would like consumers and the Revdex.com to take notice that they never addressed the out right lies from the framing guy that was sent over to my home. This is proof that the company not only allow this but also supports it. This is not the only lie that I have been told regarding my quarter of a million dollar investment.Inverness Homes is omitting facts and not telling the truth this is why this complaint needs to be documented and sent to all past customers and future customers so they are able to pick another builder. Inverness put in their response that the floors are in compliance, however when they came to my home to do the walk through they stated the opposite about the foyer. Now that they are caught in another complaint they have taken back that statement. I have attached pictures to show the actual amount that the floor is uneven (proof that they lied). It far surpasses the amount that even Inverness Homes has in their warranty. This level is not industry standard. They have yet to do anything with standard of workmanship. I have not been able to do the work I would like to do in my house because of the unprofessional work ethic and absolutely poor workmanship. Due to the poor workmanship on the floor my steps are uneven as well. This is cause for concerns as my kids rooms are upstairs and they travel those steps everyday. The longer it takes Inverness to fix what should have been done right the first time, the more of a trip hazard it can become to my kids. I fear for other consumers that if Inverness would do this to me a public servant (police Officer) they would have no problem doing this to anyone. I am requesting to Inverness bring their guy in within a week from Monday June 19, 2017 to come evaluate the fix for the foyer kitchen and other uneven points throughout the entire first floor. After that week I would request Inverness to get the work completed within 2 weeks to include replacing my floor with the requested LVT. Regards,[redacted]
The customer has been contacted requesting a meeting to review the items in accordance to the industry standards and warranty provided on the home. Thank you.
Inverness Homes and the customer have reviewed the levelness of the subfloor in the foyer and the kitchen. Inverness Homes communicated to the customer that the subfloor in both areas is within the tolerances of the warranty and industry standards. However, in the foyer, Inverness Homes is willing...
to improve the levelness of the subfloor in accordance to a method determined by an engineer and then restore the floor to existing materials. Of note, the customer does not agree with the method of measurement utilized to determine the levelness of the subfloor. Therefore, Inverness Homes is agreeable to an independent third-party such as offered by the Building Industry Association of [redacted] or with an agreeable third-party engineer measure the levelness of the subfloor in accordance to the warranty and the National Association of Home Builder’s industry standards. We ask the customer to please advise as to the acceptability of improving the foyer area as determined by an engineer and if necessary their preferred independent third-party process. Thank you.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.The information from the builder is inaccurate. The grout situation was part of the yearly checklist and that was not included in the PDF provided. They only provided the 30 and 60 day reviews. This was an issue that started prior to the warranty running out and even after so-called homeowner maintenance. I have done it continues to be a problem 6 1/2 years later due to the builder not addressing the issue prior to the warranty running out. We were told the issue was because we were using our garden tub. The previous issue has nothing to do with the shower door The shower door not closing correctly happened after the plywood rotted and is a completely separate issue. The soft floor and cracking grout have now occurred because the initial issue was never addressed properly so continues to get worse.We were never notified after December 1 that the project manager visited our house to inspect gutters or siding on the rear of our house. The project manager took my information to contact me with a date and time when they would inspect the outside, but never reached out to me. He also said he would contact me with possible contractors to help address the problem, but have yet to hear back. I have emailed him numerous times, but never received a response. Based on the feedback I received through Revdex.com on this issue it seems that the company will not own up to their warranty. The best I can do is continue to stress to future buyers to build with another company. My wife and I should have listened to our friends who also encountered leaks in their bathroom similar to ours that led to ceiling damage.
Regards,
[redacted]
Brian Lambert never gave me a copy of the survey for my property. He has not been in touch with me since the survey was done. Please contact Brian Lambert and ask for a copy of my survey or please tell me what my next action should be. Regards [redacted]
[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. If you and the business have reached an agreement and compliance is set...
for a future date, we trust the business will comply. Please contact us after that time if the matter is not resolved as agreed and we will review the complaint and proceed accordingly.]
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, if Inverness follows up on its proposed resolution of reimbursing us for our loss.Next time. it would be better if the execs at Inverness would respond without the need for prompting by the Revdex.com.
Regards,
[redacted]
Inverness Homes is very concerned and committed to resolving this matter for our valued customer. We do provide a 2 year mechanical-plumbing warranty with every new Inverness Home. When we were notified of the issue, our Service Supervisor responded and scheduled a...
service inspection. There was a misunderstanding from the text message sent that was incorrectly interpreted. Once the message was discussed verbally with the customer, all parties agreed on our proposed plan of action. We have subsequently made our inspection and are in the process of repairing the defect. We are confident our customer is completely satisfied with our service at this time.
It's our position that this has been resolved. The buyer's full deposit has been refunded even though the buyer defaulted by not adhering to their obligations detailed in the "Buyers Default" section of the contract. Clearly this was a situation where it was in the best interest of...
both parties to cancel the agreement so the buyer could pursue other housing options.
As communicated Inverness Homes remains committed to completing the repairs to your satisfaction. At this time we believe there are 2 items unresolved: 1. Siding paint to touch up is not complete due to paint not being received from the siding manufacturer. We have been told it will be received at the beginning of next week. 2. The trim repair was completed but the workmanship wasn't acceptable so that is being rescheduled for the end of next week. We fully intend to have both items completed by the end of next week. Our Service Representative will contact you next week to confirm the repair date and give you the opportunity to be present to ensure your satisfaction.
Inverness Homes met with the customer and communicated that no
warranty is in effect for discoloration of the concrete of the driveway. The
customer’s driveway has a minor color variation of part of the driveway that
occurred during the finishing process which is cosmetic in nature only and...
tends
to fade somewhat over time. Additionally, Inverness Homes requested a third-party
concrete representative to inspect the driveway. Their report is attached which concludes that the
minor color variation was most likely due to the need to brush the driveway
from both sides, that there is a tendency for color variations to weather and
fade over time, and the overall craftsmanship of the driveway exceeds industry
standards. The repair or replacement of the driveway is not warranted due to a
color variation. Thank you.
Mr Brennamon called today and is going to try to have a sod and drainage person come here to look at my back yard and decide if sod would take care of the problem. In the meantime I have been in touch with [redacted] with the city of [redacted] to fin out what is involved in getting a French drain and he said a right away permit from [redacted], an Ok from the developer Ken Conway and as long as it was kept in the existing swale no permission from home owners needed. The survey taken showers my yard is six inches low on the amount of slope it should have to drain properly. Regards[redacted]
For clarification the leak was not caused by any plumbing failures. Thanks
[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. If you and the business have reached an agreement and compliance is set for a future date, we trust the business will comply. Please contact us after that time if the matter is not resolved as agreed and we will review the complaint and proceed accordingly.]
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]
As homeowners and consumers the Inverness management staff understands the frustrations, inconvenience and costs associated when products fail to perform as intended. Inverness endeavors to build their homes free of defects by conducting multiple inspections throughout the construction process,...
building homes that meet or exceed local building code requirements and ensuring all homes pass the required jurisdictional building inspections. However, issues do arise and for that reason we have full time personnel dedicated to providing warranty service and advice for our homeowners during and after the documented warranty coverage period. The effectiveness of our program is based on the fundamental practice of documenting the request/issue, tracking the status and following up to ensure the issue has been addressed. The responsibility of the homeowner is to communicate the issue to our warranty department as detailed in the warranty coverage documents provided at the home closing.The first issue detailed in the complaint occurred shortly after closing which is typically when plumbing related problems occur. The root cause of the problem was identified and the repair was made by the plumbing contractor. The process worked as intended in this situation as evidenced by the fact the waterline has not leaked in the more than 5 years after the repair.The other two problems detailed are actually the same issue that was either not properly investigated to determine the root cause or was improperly repaired by the independent contractor hired by the homeowner and/or [redacted] Insurance. Based on the complaint and the documents available it is our opinion that most of the results from this situation could have been avoided had there been better communication between the homeowner and our Warranty Department. The proof of contact referred to in the complaint was an e-mail sent to our Model Home/Sales Office on Wednesday, January, 8,2014 at 7:06 PM indicating the problem and asking "What should we do with it?" Our Sales Counselor responded at 7:59 PM recommending they refer to the emergency contact numbers for the vendors that worked on their home that was provided at the closing. Also, the email suggested a call be placed to the Inverness main office to report the problem and find out the company's position. The contact name and number was provided. The only other record is a mobile phone bill indicating a call to the Inverness main line on January, 9, 2014. Inverness has no records detailing a phone conversation which likely means the conversation was with someone other than the Warranty Administrator, the communication from the Warranty Administrator was acceptable or there was to be further follow-up from one of the parties. At this time, almost 1 1/2 years after the call there is no way to determine what was communicated or what was to happen after the call. The next communication received was on Sunday, March 8, 2015 indicating the water pipe in the garage burst for a second time due to inadequate insulation or an air leak. Our Warranty Administrator responded on Monday, March 9, 2015 indicating the our Service Representative would contact them to schedule a meeting to inspect the affected area. The meeting occurred on March, 11, 2015 and our Service Representative sent a follow-up letter detailing the what was discussed at the meeting and our position as a result of the repairs being made by an independent contractor. In addition, if the repairs were made through [redacted] Insurance they had the ability to file a subrogation claim against Inverness if it was determined the issue was a result of faulty workmanship during the initial construction of the home. However, this would have been done immediately following the original repair but only after an investigation to determine the root cause was completed. We have no first hand knowledge of the actual involvement of [redacted] Insurance only that the receipts provided indicated the Reference Company as [redacted] Insurance.Our summary of the complaint is: (1) The home closed in November, 2009 with no frozen pipes until the 5th full winter (2) The initial water leak was not inspected by Inverness in 2014 (3) The root cause of the initial pipe bursting is still unknown. The root cause of the pipe bursting the second time could be the same as the original or it could be the result of an improper repair (4) The repair done in 2014 was not done properly and/or there was no investigation to determine the root cause in order to ensure there would be no reoccurrence. NOTE: the invoices provided indicated that the contractor removed wet insulation and replaced it with new during both repairs. There is no confirmation it was done properly. (5) There is no fundamental flaw in building and design. This plan has been built multiple times and the placement of bathrooms and/or laundry rooms above the garage is a common design practice. I'm confident there are hundreds of homes built in the area with this type of design layout. We certainly understand the level of frustration you are feeling. I can assure you we would have accepted full responsibility for repairing the first leak had we investigated the problem and determined the root cause was a result of the workmanship of our subcontractors. Although it is impossible to determine what caused the initial pipe to burst since the area has been compromised by an independent contractor twice, we want to take a reasonable position at this late date and willing to provide reimbursement based on what our estimated costs would have been at the time of the initial water leak. Based on the affected area and repairs detailed in the documents provided we estimate the original costs would have been $[redacted] - $[redacted]. Since the invoices received seem very high we are willing to double the high end of our estimate and provide $*,[redacted] reimbursement. It is our opinion the contractor should have investigated the problem properly, accepted responsibility for the second leak and made the follow-up repairs at no charge. Also, in order for both parties to move forward and ensure this issue doesn't reoccur we are willing to access the affected area and provide additional insulation and sealant to make sure the issue has been addressed. In conjunction with this we will provide a two year extended warranty specifically for freezing of the waterlines in the affected area. However, the warranty will not include issues arising from the workmanship of the repaired waterlines since that work was performed by a non-Inverness contractor. We sincerely hope you find this proposal reasonable and a fair resolution.
Prior to providing our response, it's important to provide our perspective to a couple statements in the complaint:1. At no point did Inverness renege, abandon or in any fashion indicate that the agreed upon work would not be completed.2. While we agree with the Homeowners statements "I hired an...
engineer" and "under the supervision of our engineer", we don't agree that an Inverness representative actually hired the Homeowners engineer to oversee the job. At the request of the Homeowner, Inverness agreed to pay for the services of their engineer to oversee the work. In reference to the complaint, on October 29, 2015 representatives from Inverness met with the Homeowner and their representative (Inspector/Engineer) at the home to review their One (1) Year Service Request. NOTE: All comments referred to as "agreed upon" in this response is defined as what occurred during this meeting at the residence. An Inverness representative completed a written summary of the meeting and One (1) Year Service Request list on November 20, 2015 and forwarded to the Homeowner for review. On December 9, 2015, the Homeowner returned the written summary with their notes. Through subsequent communications and clarifications, both parties agreed to start the interior service items on January 26, 2016. One such item, to sister floor joist below the master bedroom and master bathroom seems to be the main are of contention. Inverness believed this work involved eight (8) floor joist which was later confirmed in an email dated 2/13/2016 from the engineer hired by the Homeowner. Specifically, the email from their engineer stated:I believe where the quantity of wood became an issue is the addition of wood for your son's room.I believe there were a total of 8 joist needing sistering @ the master bedroom and master bath. Additional not added for your son's room.However, I do not think enough boards were allocated for blocking.There were also 2 boards that could not be used because of excessive crown and twist when they dried. Inverness prepared and provided ten (10) floor joist (8 for attachment to existing and 2 for blocking) to complete the agreed upon work under the master bedroom and master bathroom area of the home. In hindsight, we acknowledge that it would have been prudent to have a few extra floor joist to account for the possibility of unusable material and additional blocking. Please be assured that if it was a matter of ordering a few more floor joist to complete the original agreed upon work this would have already been scheduled for completion. However, while performing the agreed upon work, it was pointed out to our Service Technician there were additional repairs needed under the son's room which was not discussed nor agreed to during the 10/29/2015 meeting. This area was confirmed as additional in the 2/13/2016 email noted above. Therefore, Inverness requested an opportunity to inspect this area and have the right to be accompanied by an independent third party prior to commencing. At no time has Inverness communicated that we would or wouldn't make the additional repairs. In summary, Inverness requests the opportunity to inspect the affected area to determine our position of the need for the work in accordance to the meeting on October 29,2015 and the local building code. Representatives from Inverness are available during normal business hours after Wednesday, March 9, 2016. Furthermore, for this item and any future items, Inverness remains committed to completing the agreed upon work in accordance to the contractual agreement, our documented warranty standards, and the local building codes applicable at the time of construction of the home.
We have contacted the customer and agreed on a resolution. Thank you.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Revdex.com Response from
[redacted]
March 10, 2016
Note: Please let me know when I may send you additional documents including email communications and photographs. I have attached the "Service Plan" and a photograph of our roof.
The response submitted by Inverness does not resolve the
complaint. In fact, it continues to demonstrate how the company attempts to
change facts, in addition to its verbal and written agreements.
The respondent states the company has not reneged on
agreements, and says he never agreed to reinforce joists on the left side of
the home, although I, my engineer and my wife all heard him make that agreement.Even more demonstrative is that he clearly states he agreed
to sister and block joists under the master bathroom. The work began Jan. 26,
2016 and as of March 10, 2016, that work remains undone.In fact, in a Feb. 12
email, the respondent acknowledged that this work was not necessarily scheduled
to be finished when he wrote: “Please understand that I’ll need to review any
additional joist work.”He did not respond to our request that he speak to his staff
and the engineer to get an accurate understanding of the work, and number of
joists needed, nor did he respond to my voicemail from Feb. 8. Finally, in a Feb. 25 email, he said: “I was hoping you
could provide me a few days/times that I could review the possible 15
additional joists in question. I plan to have a structural engineer join that
meeting.”No where, as he states in his response, did he say this was
to review work on the left side of the home, under my son’s room, so anyone
reading his mail would take it to mean that sorely needed work under the master
bath was also to be re-reviewed, long after it was agreed to by Inverness.We immediately gave the respondent available dates and times
for the following week, but he did not respond. We can make more dates
available, but he needs to respond when we do.The Feb. 8 episode mentioned in my original complaint,
involving an unscheduled worker showing up wanting to blow insulation into the
attic, I believe, is also telling of Inverness’s intent to abandon the remaining
work plan. As explained, that plan calls for baffles to be replaced and
correctly sized, unacceptable roof ridge lines to be repaired, an air-flow
calculation to be done and shingle overhang to be addressed. It would make no sense to blow in more
insulation prior to attic work, which will result in compression of the
insulation. The worker who was sent to the home said he knew nothing about
replacing baffles to be of the correct, Code-required size.But in his Feb. 12 email, the respondent said: “We had
planned to address the baffles and attic insulation within this phase of work.”Without being done in conjunction with all of the attic and
roof work, this would make no sense, it is on the work list for Spring, and
quite frankly appears to be a plan by Inverness to do the bare minimum and then
say it is done with the work. The respondent also seems to foreshadow this in his response
when he says: “ Inverness remains committed to completing the agreed upon work
in accordance to the contractual agreement, our documented warranty standards,
and the local building codes applicable at the time of construction of the
home.”The respondent leaves out his previous written agreements
outlining repairs. Perhaps this is because he keeps changing this plan? Warren
County, where our home is located, has an exemption from Ohio Building Code for
drip edges on the roof, which was one of our requested repairs that Inverness
does not have to do because of the exemption. This does not exempt Inverness from the agreed to repairs,
which include excessive shingle overhang, ridge lines and sheathing deviation
that violate published building standards, which Inverness wrote would be
repaired in “accordance with Industry standards.”In the interest of brevity and focusing on key issues, there
is much history that has been left out of this complaint. It is a history of
scheduling appointments, rearranging schedules, no shows on occasion ,
agreements made then reconsidered, all while important, promised work hangs in
the balance.As previously stated, I would like this complaint be kept
open until Inverness re-starts and completes the work in accordance with its
previous statements, written comments, building laws and acceptable building
standards. If the complaint process does not accommodate this, I feel that a
detailed written work plan that meets my approval is the only way to resolve
this complaint. This work plan would need to address every remaining item on
the service plan list, in addition to Inverness’s promised testing of the HVAC
system which could not be done after they repaired the system, by installing
the correct-sized piston, because of weather conditions needed for accurate
testing.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com: As a follow-up to the previous correspondences, Inverness Homes has received a copy of the [redacted] response to the customer's Claim #[redacted] (attached) that indicates that the shingles show no defects. Also, Inverness Homes hired a third-party inspection of the roof (attached). Inverness Homes agrees to hire a licensed [redacted] contractor to repair areas of raised, damaged, or missing shingles that have not adequately sealed as recommended by the report. Please provide days/times that the work can be performed. At this time, I would like to reject the offer of Mediation for complaint ID [redacted].Regards,Jeff [redacted]Inverness Homes
Inverness Homes met with the customers and reviewed their concerns and questions. In regards to the their concerns with the sump pump running, Inverness Homes hired a surveyor to complete an assessment of the grades around the home to determine if any grading adjustments are necessary. Inverness...
Homes communicated to the customer that it would make any grading adjustments necessary. While Inverness Homes does not know the exact source of the ground water or sub-surface water that has caused the customer’s concern, such occurrences are not uncommon in this area. For protection of the home from exterior water sources, Inverness Homes has installed gravel and drain tile around the footer and foundation walls, gravel and a vapor barrier under the basement slab, and applied waterproofing to the exterior of the foundation walls. The gravel and drain tile are connected to the sump pump which discharges the water into a conduit away from the home. There is no evidence of any water infiltration or damage to the structure of the home. However, because of the customer’s concern with the sump pump, Inverness Homes offered to install a second sump-pump with a battery backup to alleviate their concerns. Additionally, although Inverness Homes cannot control, guarantee, or warranty against any subsurface water sources, Inverness Homes offered to hire a third-party engineer or work with the customer’s engineer to evaluate the customers concern of sub-surface water. At this time, Inverness Homes has not received the customer’s decision regarding the use of an engineer. In regards to the other items identified by the customer in the meeting, Inverness Homes agreed to complete and or address those items in accordance to the Purchase Agreement, warranty, and industry standards. Inverness homes will be providing the customer a schedule for the completion of those items for their review and confirmation. Thank you.
]
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. I must note, however, that the Revdex.com has not followed its own rules, and had I not reactivated communications with the AG's Office, Mr. Jeff [redacted] would, no doubt, have continued to thumb his nose at this process. Each time there has been a response, I have been given one week to answer, and have received urgent, automated phone reminders. At the time I re-activated communications with the AG's office, Mr. [redacted] had refused to respond for more than two weeks. More distressing is that before I contacted the AG's Office, I emailed Ms. [redacted] for a status update two times, and she did not respond.While his company acknowledged its responsibilities for repairing our home a year ago, Mr. [redacted] has continued to make every effort not to honor actions his company promised, and even crafted a plan to walk off the job and refuse to do the repairs after his employees put a service plan in writing. Ms. [redacted] aided Mr. [redacted] toward this end. It was not until Mr. [redacted] received notice of an AG's investigation last Tuesday then received one more attempt by the Revdex.com Thursday for his answer, that he instantly responded on Friday, agreeing to the listed items, long after his company agreed to them, then reneged on doing them. Please tell Mr. [redacted] that new complaints will be filed the instant his company reneges again. I expect an email communication from Inverness to begin rescheduling the work as I am now convinced all communication should be in writing.Thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely,[redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.First I would like consumers and the Revdex.com to take notice that they never addressed the out right lies from the framing guy that was sent over to my home. This is proof that the company not only allow this but also supports it. This is not the only lie that I have been told regarding my quarter of a million dollar investment.Inverness Homes is omitting facts and not telling the truth this is why this complaint needs to be documented and sent to all past customers and future customers so they are able to pick another builder. Inverness put in their response that the floors are in compliance, however when they came to my home to do the walk through they stated the opposite about the foyer. Now that they are caught in another complaint they have taken back that statement. I have attached pictures to show the actual amount that the floor is uneven (proof that they lied). It far surpasses the amount that even Inverness Homes has in their warranty. This level is not industry standard. They have yet to do anything with standard of workmanship. I have not been able to do the work I would like to do in my house because of the unprofessional work ethic and absolutely poor workmanship. Due to the poor workmanship on the floor my steps are uneven as well. This is cause for concerns as my kids rooms are upstairs and they travel those steps everyday. The longer it takes Inverness to fix what should have been done right the first time, the more of a trip hazard it can become to my kids. I fear for other consumers that if Inverness would do this to me a public servant (police Officer) they would have no problem doing this to anyone. I am requesting to Inverness bring their guy in within a week from Monday June 19, 2017 to come evaluate the fix for the foyer kitchen and other uneven points throughout the entire first floor. After that week I would request Inverness to get the work completed within 2 weeks to include replacing my floor with the requested LVT. Regards,[redacted]
The customer has been contacted requesting a meeting to review the items in accordance to the industry standards and warranty provided on the home. Thank you.
Inverness Homes and the customer have reviewed the levelness of the subfloor in the foyer and the kitchen. Inverness Homes communicated to the customer that the subfloor in both areas is within the tolerances of the warranty and industry standards. However, in the foyer, Inverness Homes is willing...
to improve the levelness of the subfloor in accordance to a method determined by an engineer and then restore the floor to existing materials. Of note, the customer does not agree with the method of measurement utilized to determine the levelness of the subfloor. Therefore, Inverness Homes is agreeable to an independent third-party such as offered by the Building Industry Association of [redacted] or with an agreeable third-party engineer measure the levelness of the subfloor in accordance to the warranty and the National Association of Home Builder’s industry standards. We ask the customer to please advise as to the acceptability of improving the foyer area as determined by an engineer and if necessary their preferred independent third-party process. Thank you.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.The information from the builder is inaccurate. The grout situation was part of the yearly checklist and that was not included in the PDF provided. They only provided the 30 and 60 day reviews. This was an issue that started prior to the warranty running out and even after so-called homeowner maintenance. I have done it continues to be a problem 6 1/2 years later due to the builder not addressing the issue prior to the warranty running out. We were told the issue was because we were using our garden tub. The previous issue has nothing to do with the shower door The shower door not closing correctly happened after the plywood rotted and is a completely separate issue. The soft floor and cracking grout have now occurred because the initial issue was never addressed properly so continues to get worse.We were never notified after December 1 that the project manager visited our house to inspect gutters or siding on the rear of our house. The project manager took my information to contact me with a date and time when they would inspect the outside, but never reached out to me. He also said he would contact me with possible contractors to help address the problem, but have yet to hear back. I have emailed him numerous times, but never received a response. Based on the feedback I received through Revdex.com on this issue it seems that the company will not own up to their warranty. The best I can do is continue to stress to future buyers to build with another company. My wife and I should have listened to our friends who also encountered leaks in their bathroom similar to ours that led to ceiling damage.
Regards,
[redacted]
Brian Lambert never gave me a copy of the survey for my property. He has not been in touch with me since the survey was done. Please contact Brian Lambert and ask for a copy of my survey or please tell me what my next action should be. Regards [redacted]