Arko Restoration & Remodeling Reviews (%countItem)
Arko Restoration & Remodeling Rating
Address: 1548 94th Ln NE, Blaine, Minnesota, United States, 55449-4321
Phone: |
Show more...
|
E-mails: |
Sign in to see
|
Add contact information for Arko Restoration & Remodeling
Add new contacts
July 2019, there was a large hail storm in Andover, we opened a case with our insurance with Arko Exteriors/Restoration as our contracting company. Several items were to be completed such as Gutters, Window/Door Wrap, Roof, and they were going to work with insurance on the damaged siding. The insurance company cut a check for the work which was signed right over to Arko (first mistake).
Finally by September 16th, they started the roof replacement (3 months later) and still have not replaced the rain redirector sheet metal over the door. The rest of the work was NEVER completed and we have officially cut ties. This seems to be a very expensive roof replacement.
Majority of the inquires went with no responses and we would be reaching out via email, text and calling about 6-8 times a month for 7 months. Promises were made but never complete. The last straw was a new case for internal ceiling damage from the moisture was basically denied due to lack of experience of the team. We brought in a third party professional with over 30 years of experience validating the claim with specifics. However, we received no support from Arko on the case. Repairs will now need to come out of our pocket.
Finally, when we came back home in March from being away, we heard a loud banging in the back of our house. Investigating, we saw the roof drip edging hanging ready to fall off (see attached picture).
Another fact is that with 5 of my other neighbors, 2 choose not to go with them due to lack of responses. One neighbor only had their roof replace and was happy. The last two neighbors had the roofs replaced around the same time but are still waiting for additional work and are NOT happy with the responses or work. Next door, it took Arko 6 months to check the siding, removed a piece and left it exposed to the elements. It took like a dozen calls to get them to cover it finally late February.
We'll be reaching out to this person this Monday (4/13/20) afternoon to address your complaints and come to a reasonable resolution.
We take negitive experiences very seriously. Our goal is always customer satifaction.
There are many issues with this persons review that we feel should be addressed. Many of the claims this person has made in his review about Arko are categorically false and unfair representations. They are address below and a time line of events as well.
Misrepresentation of the truth:
"Finally by September 16th, they started the roof replacement (3 months later) and still have not replaced the rain redirector sheet metal over the door." - Reviewer
Truth: The roof was completed 30 days from when the reviewer made material selections and provided a downpayment. The rain diverter is not in the scope of work provided by the reviewer's insurance carrier. Also the reviewer has gutters that span the entire length of the eave above the door he is referring to. It appears to be unnecessary to have a rain diverter in that location. Ifthe reviewer wants one installed anyway, we would be happy to do that for him.
"The rest of the work was NEVER completed and we have officially cut ties." - Reviewer
Truth: Reviewer decided to not to have the remaining work completed because Arko was standing by the truth in regards to the "internal ceiling damaged" aka ghosting issue. It is an unrelated issue to the claim the reviewer made with the insurance carrier.
"Majority of the inquires went with no responses and we would be reaching out via email, text and calling about 6-8 times a month for 7 months." - Reviewer
Truth: Arko has a considerable amount of notes with consistent contact being made with the reviewer. There have also been many times where Arko personnel have reached out to the reviewer with no response from him. As of recently the reviewer has not responded to our attempts to contact him since March 2nd, 2020.
"The last straw was a new case for internal ceiling damage from the moisture was basically denied due to lack of experience of the team. We brought in a third party professional with over 30 years of experience validating the claim with specifics. However, we received no support from Arko on the case. Repairs will now need to come out of our pocket." - Reviewer
Truth: The reviewer had been informed about "internal ceiling damage" many times by multiple Arko personnel as well as his insurance carrier. The issue he is referring to is the "ghosting issue" it's not damage. It's air particles gathering in an area by electromagnetic attraction or condesation. They attract to where the dense areas of the wall and ceiling (where the framing members are) usually at the corners where the ceiling and wall meet. It looks like a uniform black outline of the framing members on the surface of the wall and ceiling. Solutions for this issue would require money out of pocket from the claim as it is an unrelated issue and not covered peril according to the reviewer's insurance carrier. The reviewer has never shared the findings from the 3rd party opinion. We would be surprised if they had a different conclusion.
"Finally, when we came back home in March from being away, we heard a loud banging in the back of our house. Investigating, we saw the roof drip edging hanging ready to fall off (see attached picture)."
Truth: This is the first time this issue has been reported. We stand behind all work we performed. We go above and beyond the requirements set forth by the State of Minnesota. We would be happy to take a look at the reviewer's issue and repair it free of charge if necessary.
"Another fact is that with 5 of my other neighbors, 2 choose not to go with them due to lack of responses. One neighbor only had their roof replace and was happy. The last two neighbors had the roofs replaced around the same time but are still waiting for additional work and are NOT happy with the responses or work." - Reviewer
Truth: The reviewer's statement is not fact. Arko does not have any recorded incidents or complaints from either of the people the reviewer is referring to. Here is a fact. Two of the people the reviewer is referring to have decided to pause work due to winter or holiday decorations. Also we were recently dealing with spring road restrictions which limits are ability to deliver material. Also COVID-19 has had an effect. We're excited to be resuming those projects shortly.
"Next door, it took Arko 6 months to check the siding, removed a piece and left it exposed to the elements. It took like a dozen calls to get them to cover it finally late February." - Reviewer
Truth: This is an unrelated to the interaction and transaction between Arko and the reviewer. To address this so there is understanding and fairness: Supplementing siding can be a lenthy process with many hoops to go through with insurance carriers. Many insurance claims can take months to come to an agreement. If there is house wrap moisture barrier on the wall sheathing under the siding then it should be protected from the elements.
Timeline of events:
-Hail damage to the reviewers property occured on July 26th, 2019.
-The reviewers insurance company inspected his home July 31st, 2019 and approved roof on house and shed, aluminum door wrap, and some gutter.
-The reviewer selected roofing shingles and provided Arko a downpayment on August 19th, 2019. Also on 8/19/19 Arko Project Manager photographed "ghosting" streaks on the interior of the ceiling and walls. At that time Arko Project Manager did not believe the ghosting streaks were related to the storm that happened on July 26th, 2019. The Arko Project Manager was also informed by the reviewers daughter, which is a good friend of the Arko Project Manager that those "ghosting" streaks on the walls and ceiling have been there prior to the storm and there for a long time. The reviewer was adement about trying to get the interior ghosting issues included as part of the insurance claim made for the date of loss of 7/26/19
-Arko Production Deptmartment applied for Roofing building permit on August 21st, 2019
-On September 4th, 2019 Arko Project Manager visited the reviewers home to document the siding damages caused by the July 26th, 2019 storm to begin the supplementing process for damages his insurance carrier did not include in their initial inspection.
-On September 10th, 2019 the reviewer was informed by Arko Production Department that his roof was scheduled for replacement on 9/19/19.
-On September 16th, 2019 the Arko Project Manager visited the reviewer's home to take pre-production photos.
-On September 19th, 2019 the roof on the reviewer's home and shed were replaced by Arko
-On September 20th, 2019 Arko Production Department called for final inspection of the roofing permit.
-On September 24th, 2019 the city of Andover, MN building inspecter inspected the work completed and finaled the roofing permit. Result: passed.
-On October 25th, 2019 The reviewer's insurance carrier requested additional information from Arko in regards to siding damages.
-On October 31st, 2019 Arko Customer Service called the reviewer - No answer, no call back.
-November 22nd, 2019 Arko Project Manager reached out to the reviewer and was informed he was out of town until 11/25/19. Also on this date Arko Project Manager reached out to insurance carrier. No updated provided by the insurance carrier.
-On November 26th, 2019 Arko Project Manager reached out to the reviewer's insurance carrier in regards to the siding approval and was informed it was still pending review.
-December 17th, 2019 Arko Customer Service department called the reviewer. No answer. No return call.
-On January 7th, 2020 the reviewer's insurance carrier finished their review of the additional damages to the siding. Provided updated estimat of scope of loss. Insurance carrier approved approx 3sq of siding.
-On January 9th, 2020 Arko Project Manager discussed the revised insurance claim with the reviewer. At that time the reviewer brought up the ghosting streaks again and requested that Arko sends a supplement for that issue to his insurance carrier.
-On January 10th, 2020 an Arko Interior Restoration Project Manager reached out to the reviewer and set up a meeting with the reviewer at his home for January 15th, 2020
-On January 15th. 2020 Arko Interior Restoration Project Manager inspected and discussed the issue with the reviewer explaining the cause of the ghosting issue. Mr. Colstrom was still adamant about Arko submitting an estimate to his insurance carrier regarding the ghosting issues. Arko Interior Restoration Project Manager agreed to write an estimate and submit to the reviewer's insurance carrier.
- January 20th, 2020 Arko Interior Restoration Project Manager submitted estimate in regards to the ghosting streak issue to insurance carrier
-January 29th, 2020 Insurance carrier adjuster inspected the ghosting streak issue in the interior of the reviewer's home and came to the conclusion that the issue is not a cover peril and was not related to the claim made for damages caused by the July 26th, 2020 storm.
- February 3rd, 2020 Arko Interior Restoration Project Manager and the reviewer talked on the phone and the reviewer stated he was going to escalate the issue with his insurance agent.
-Februrary 3rd & 4th, 2020 the reviewer emailed back and forth with Arko Interior Project Manager with a request for Arko to write a letter on his behalf to his insurance carrier.
On February 5th, 2020 Arko Interior Restoration Project Manager was uncomfortable about the request from the reviewer and escalated the issue to Arko General Manager. Arko General Manager reached out to the reviewer via phone to discuss the issue. At this point it was explained to the reviewer for the 4th time that the issue he is referring to is called "ghosting" and it is unrelated to the claim for hail damage and was likely an ongoing issue over long period of time. It was also explained to the reviewer what ghosting steaks are and how they form. Arko General Manager informed the reviewer that Arko cannot write the letter the reviewer is requesting because it does not represent the truth.
-March 2nd, 2020 The reviewer emailed Arko General Manager about status of the interior ghosting issue with insurance carrier. Arko General Manager refered to the previous conversation from February 5th, 2020 and provided information about ghosting streaks. Arko General Manager offered suggestions to help minimize ghosting issues in the future. responded back with essentially the message that he would cancel remaining work Arko if we did not continue to pursue the ghosting issue with his insurance company.
-Since March 2nd, 2020 the reviewer has not responded to Arko personnel attempts to contact.
Customer has received the Contractors response of their claims (so called Facts) are all not factual. I have phone records and emails records proving their claims as FALSE. Majority of the issues are with the responses and professionalism of both Casey J and Rick P dealing with the siding and ceiling concerns. It is also not professional to complain about a customer to another prior Arko customer (my daughter) and trying to gain information. This shows the lack of integrity or experience this team has. In their comments, they indicated that they would reach out to myself 4/13, surprising they just sent out a note at the end of day today asking for addition $767 and the original work has not been completed.
Fact: It's interesting that we have heard nothing from Casey again for weeks until this Revdex.com review was posted where he is trying to fix a claim based on several negative responses. Fact: Two of my neighbors have now indicated that they have recently heard back on the week of April 6th from Arko to continue work on their cases open July 2019.
Case #1. Fact: Shed does not have gutters and Arko agreed to replace the rain diverter it as they removed it. Their claim talked about the house which is not accurate.
Case #2. Arko claims that they have reached out with no response, only recorded case was that first period of November when we informed Arko Mid-October that we were going on a trip. Upon return, customer reached out for a status on the siding. Casey Jensen has responded to a total of 2 (now 3 with asking for additional money) emails (based on responding my inquiry) and have records of 2 calls and has not step foot on this property, thus has only tacit knowledge.
As a customer, we are not out to get Arko, we want others to be informed of our experience prior to making the same choice. Arko as a company should look to resolve customers concerns vs. writing up inaccurate data as a response. Another mistake was I was looking to help a small company out by recommending Arko to 7 other neighbors. Lessons learned, I do NOT recommend this company anymore. It also looks like prior Revdex.com reviews of ARKO have been removed.
I stand by my prior review