In response to the complaint issued by the complainant, I would like to present my perspective of the issueFirst, I am in full agreement with the fact that Damage Doctors of Indianapolis never entered into any contract with the complainant to perform roofing, nor any other service on their homeSecond, the inspection of their home by a licensed inspector took place two months after we installed a new roof on the home for the prior homeownerWith this, I also agree that the inspector found and reported no issue relating to the elements outlined in their complaint In September, two months after the home had been purchased, I did receive a call from the complainant to look at a moisture issue in a skylight in their bathroomAt first glance it appeared as though it was condensationI made the suggestion they keep their eye on it and call me if things progressThe moisture issue did get worse and I went back to the complainant's home to inspect the issue furtherThis time I got on the roof and looked more fully into the problemAt this point I noticed that the so called "window" was actually two pieces of plexiglass that were sandwiched together by silicone caulkThe inside piece of plexiglass was flat and the outside piece was domedThe outside piece had a crack in it about 5" longI told the complainant about the structure of the window and suggested they get an actual window installed, not just pieces of plexiglass-I felt bad for the complainant— being new homeowners — and offered to repair the drywall that had been affected by the leaking skylight, which amounted to patching a couple of failing seams (approximately linear inches total) Time passed and the complainantapparently took my suggestion and hired a window company to install a new window(The new window is an actual window and not a like-for-like replacement of the plexiglass, which I believe was a good decision on their part.) I was called back this spring to the complainant to perform the repairs that I had discussed and noticed that the drywall work around the new skylight had not been completedThere was more drywall work to be done than had originally existed when I said I would repair the damage from the waterSo I estimated the cost for the extra amount of work and provided them a quote for $(this is our minimum charge) Obviously, this must seem like an unfair proposal to the complainant, because I am now being asked to pay for a new skylight, the installation of a new skylight, and to provide work for ALL the drywall repairs, entirely at no chargeThe complainant insists that our roof replacement caused the issues with the skylight, yet the previous owners had no issues for several months after we completed the roofThe home inspector reported no issues pertaining to the skylight or roofI pointed out the defect in the skylight to the complainant, so I was not trying to hide anythingAnd finally, I have been provided no photographic evidence to show that my roofing crew was negligent in installing the roof As a homeowner, I empathize with the complainantUnexpected home repairs are not funHowever, as a business owner, I cannot provide additional services gratis without limitAnyone who knows me will confirm that I don't claim to be perfect, but I will fix anything I, or mysrew, did not perform well until my customer is satisfiedYes, even if the repairs or rework cost more than the overall jobI don't see any evidence to the fact, nor believe, that the issue with this skylight is my fault in any way, and therefore do not believe I have the responsibility to restore the situation at my expense Please feel free to contact me, should you have any questions or wish to discuss further Sincerely, Craig [redacted] President Damage Doctors, Indianapolis 317-800- [email protected]
mso-fareast-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"'>In response to the complaint issued by the complainant, I would like to present my perspective of the issue. First, I am in full agreement with the fact that Damage Doctors of Indianapolis never entered into any contract with the complainant to perform roofing, nor any other service on their home. Second, the inspection of their home by a licensed inspector took place two months after we installed a new roof on the home for the prior homeowner. With this, I also agree that the inspector found and reported no issue relating to the elements outlined in their complaint.
In September, two months after the home had been purchased, I did receive a call from the complainant to look at a moisture issue in a skylight in their bathroom. At first glance it appeared as though it was condensation. I made the suggestion they keep their eye on it and call me if things progress. The moisture issue did get worse and I went back to the complainant's home to inspect the issue further. This time I got on the roof and looked more fully into the problem. At this point I noticed that the so called "window" was actually two pieces of plexiglass that were sandwiched together by silicone caulk. The inside piece of plexiglass was flat and the outside piece was domed. The outside piece had a crack in it about 5" long. I told the complainant about the structure of the window and suggested they get an actual window installed, not just pieces of plexiglass. -I felt bad for the complainant— being new homeowners — and offered to repair the drywall that had been affected by the leaking skylight, which amounted to patching a couple of failing seams (approximately 18 linear inches total).
Time passed and the complainantapparently took my suggestion and hired a window company to install a new window. (The new window is an actual window and not a like-for-like replacement of the plexiglass, which I believe was a good decision on their part.) I was called back this spring to the complainant to perform the repairs that I had discussed and noticed that the drywall work around the new skylight had not been completed. There was more drywall work to be done than had originally existed when I said I would repair the damage from the water. So I estimated the cost for the extra amount of work and provided them a quote for $350.00 (this is our minimum charge).
Obviously, this must seem like an unfair proposal to the complainant, because I am now being asked to pay for a new skylight, the installation of a new skylight, and to provide work for ALL the drywall repairs, entirely at no charge. The complainant insists that our roof replacement caused the issues with the skylight, yet the previous owners had no issues for several months after we completed the roof. The home inspector reported no issues pertaining to the skylight or roof. I pointed out the defect in the skylight to the complainant, so I was not trying to hide anything. And finally, I have been provided no photographic evidence to show that my roofing crew was negligent in installing the roof.
As a homeowner, I empathize with the complainant. Unexpected home repairs are not fun. However, as a business owner, I cannot provide additional services gratis without limit. Anyone who knows me will confirm that I don't claim to be perfect, but I will fix anything I, or mysrew, did not perform well until my customer is satisfied. Yes, even if the repairs or rework cost more than the overall job. I don't see any evidence to the fact, nor believe, that the issue with this skylight is my fault in any way, and therefore do not believe I have the responsibility to restore the situation at my expense.
Please feel free to contact me, should you have any questions or wish to discuss further.
Sincerely,
Craig [redacted] President
Damage Doctors, Indianapolis 317-800-1170 [email protected]
In response to the complaint issued by the complainant, I would like to present my perspective of the issueFirst, I am in full agreement with the fact that Damage Doctors of Indianapolis never entered into any contract with the complainant to perform roofing, nor any other service on their homeSecond, the inspection of their home by a licensed inspector took place two months after we installed a new roof on the home for the prior homeownerWith this, I also agree that the inspector found and reported no issue relating to the elements outlined in their complaint In September, two months after the home had been purchased, I did receive a call from the complainant to look at a moisture issue in a skylight in their bathroomAt first glance it appeared as though it was condensationI made the suggestion they keep their eye on it and call me if things progressThe moisture issue did get worse and I went back to the complainant's home to inspect the issue furtherThis time I got on the roof and looked more fully into the problemAt this point I noticed that the so called "window" was actually two pieces of plexiglass that were sandwiched together by silicone caulkThe inside piece of plexiglass was flat and the outside piece was domedThe outside piece had a crack in it about 5" longI told the complainant about the structure of the window and suggested they get an actual window installed, not just pieces of plexiglass-I felt bad for the complainant— being new homeowners — and offered to repair the drywall that had been affected by the leaking skylight, which amounted to patching a couple of failing seams (approximately linear inches total) Time passed and the complainantapparently took my suggestion and hired a window company to install a new window(The new window is an actual window and not a like-for-like replacement of the plexiglass, which I believe was a good decision on their part.) I was called back this spring to the complainant to perform the repairs that I had discussed and noticed that the drywall work around the new skylight had not been completedThere was more drywall work to be done than had originally existed when I said I would repair the damage from the waterSo I estimated the cost for the extra amount of work and provided them a quote for $(this is our minimum charge) Obviously, this must seem like an unfair proposal to the complainant, because I am now being asked to pay for a new skylight, the installation of a new skylight, and to provide work for ALL the drywall repairs, entirely at no chargeThe complainant insists that our roof replacement caused the issues with the skylight, yet the previous owners had no issues for several months after we completed the roofThe home inspector reported no issues pertaining to the skylight or roofI pointed out the defect in the skylight to the complainant, so I was not trying to hide anythingAnd finally, I have been provided no photographic evidence to show that my roofing crew was negligent in installing the roof As a homeowner, I empathize with the complainantUnexpected home repairs are not funHowever, as a business owner, I cannot provide additional services gratis without limitAnyone who knows me will confirm that I don't claim to be perfect, but I will fix anything I, or mysrew, did not perform well until my customer is satisfiedYes, even if the repairs or rework cost more than the overall jobI don't see any evidence to the fact, nor believe, that the issue with this skylight is my fault in any way, and therefore do not believe I have the responsibility to restore the situation at my expense Please feel free to contact me, should you have any questions or wish to discuss further Sincerely, Craig [redacted] President Damage Doctors, Indianapolis 317-800- [email protected]
mso-fareast-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"'>In response to the complaint issued by the complainant, I would like to present my perspective of the issue. First, I am in full agreement with the fact that Damage Doctors of Indianapolis never entered into any contract with the complainant to perform roofing, nor any other service on their home. Second, the inspection of their home by a licensed inspector took place two months after we installed a new roof on the home for the prior homeowner. With this, I also agree that the inspector found and reported no issue relating to the elements outlined in their complaint.
In September, two months after the home had been purchased, I did receive a call from the complainant to look at a moisture issue in a skylight in their bathroom. At first glance it appeared as though it was condensation. I made the suggestion they keep their eye on it and call me if things progress. The moisture issue did get worse and I went back to the complainant's home to inspect the issue further. This time I got on the roof and looked more fully into the problem. At this point I noticed that the so called "window" was actually two pieces of plexiglass that were sandwiched together by silicone caulk. The inside piece of plexiglass was flat and the outside piece was domed. The outside piece had a crack in it about 5" long. I told the complainant about the structure of the window and suggested they get an actual window installed, not just pieces of plexiglass. -I felt bad for the complainant— being new homeowners — and offered to repair the drywall that had been affected by the leaking skylight, which amounted to patching a couple of failing seams (approximately 18 linear inches total).
Time passed and the complainantapparently took my suggestion and hired a window company to install a new window. (The new window is an actual window and not a like-for-like replacement of the plexiglass, which I believe was a good decision on their part.) I was called back this spring to the complainant to perform the repairs that I had discussed and noticed that the drywall work around the new skylight had not been completed. There was more drywall work to be done than had originally existed when I said I would repair the damage from the water. So I estimated the cost for the extra amount of work and provided them a quote for $350.00 (this is our minimum charge).
Obviously, this must seem like an unfair proposal to the complainant, because I am now being asked to pay for a new skylight, the installation of a new skylight, and to provide work for ALL the drywall repairs, entirely at no charge. The complainant insists that our roof replacement caused the issues with the skylight, yet the previous owners had no issues for several months after we completed the roof. The home inspector reported no issues pertaining to the skylight or roof. I pointed out the defect in the skylight to the complainant, so I was not trying to hide anything. And finally, I have been provided no photographic evidence to show that my roofing crew was negligent in installing the roof.
As a homeowner, I empathize with the complainant. Unexpected home repairs are not fun. However, as a business owner, I cannot provide additional services gratis without limit. Anyone who knows me will confirm that I don't claim to be perfect, but I will fix anything I, or mysrew, did not perform well until my customer is satisfied. Yes, even if the repairs or rework cost more than the overall job. I don't see any evidence to the fact, nor believe, that the issue with this skylight is my fault in any way, and therefore do not believe I have the responsibility to restore the situation at my expense.
Please feel free to contact me, should you have any questions or wish to discuss further.
Sincerely,
Craig [redacted] President
Damage Doctors, Indianapolis 317-800-1170
[email protected]