Berman Studios

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2017/06/28) */ Mr [redacted] signed a contract for the exact scope of work his insurance approvedThe gable corner returns were not on the insurance estimate and were not included in the scope of workThe estimate software both Arnett and the Insurance company use allows for that exact item to be included but was not included by the Insurance Company, therefore it was not preformedAs for Mr [redacted] 's leak, I sent a representative out to address his complaint immediately and was noted that it could have been prior damage to our roof installationAt that point nothing was said or done and large amounts of time would come and go until Mr [redacted] would contact us againfinally it was brought to my attention that Mr [redacted] was unhappy and I immediately made an appointment with Mrs [redacted] for Tuesday, June at 11:EST, at which time I had showed up and she was completely surprised to see meI then continued to document the inside of the home, during the time of documenting the room there was similar damage throughout other portions of the room making it clear that these issues had occurred prior to any work preformed by Arnett ConstructionAfter the site visit on the 13th of June approximately a week later Mr [redacted] contacted me directly and verbally threatened me over the phone, I indicated to him that I would not be communicating any further due to the threatWe are 100% sure that we fulfilled our contract and we do not wish to preform any further work for Mr [redacted] In conclusion, we made an effort verbally to complete repairs on the inside even though we were uncertain it was directly related to any work preformed by Arnett ConstructionMr [redacted] refused to allow us to preform any repairsOur estimate from our interior repair crew to preform the interior word was [redacted] and we are willing to send that amount for the repairs Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2017/06/28) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I have uploaded a copy of the contract which I signedAs you will notice in paragraph Bit says I agreed to have Arnett to purse my best interestThis means Arnett Construction had a fiduciary responsibility to do what was in my best interestMy best interest was to have all the old shingles removed and replaced including the cornices, especially since we decided to change the color at the timeI asked MrArnett several times whose responsibility it was to add the cornices if they were not on the original estimate, he would only answer similar to what he does hereI asked my insurance company whose responsibility it was and was told it rested upon Arnett ConstructionMy insurance company said, all that was needed was for Arnett to submit the additional work and it would most likely have been approvedI find it odd that they would run a ridge of new shingles down the cornice that was most visible from the ground and do nothing to the remainder as well and not mentioning the color would be different because the insurance company did not include the cornices in the original estimateMy Insurance has told me they will now only pay actual cash value not replacement cost because it is past the two-year timeSo, Arnett, due to not fulfilling their responsibility to act in my best interest has cost me addition money here as wellIn addition, in their response to this complaint, he admits that both software programs allowed for them to be included yet he didn't hold up to his fiduciary responsibility to act in my best interest and bring that to the attention of the insurance company or myselfThis alone is enough to warrant his corporation in completing them As for my leakThere is no other similar damage! This is completely false! In the area that was damaged due to the work of Arnett Construction, there had been a leak that effected that area a few years before but it had been repaired with no leaks sinceIt was completely different and separate from the flawed work of ArnettThis does not relieve Arnett of their responsibility since they clearly admit their work was flawed and caused a leak that damaged that areaThe day his employee came to collect the check, "after the work by Arnett Construction," it had rained and I showed a picture to his employee of water running in and, as stated he went to my home immediately and stopped the leak and it has not leaked sinceHe told me something was left that should have been removedAt that time, September of 2014, he promise they would repair the damage but it would be a while because they were busyI agreed and gave them plenty of time to follow up I contacted this representative multiple times over the course of the last 3/yearsEach time I was promised the damage would be fixedIt was looked at no less than times and I was always promised it would be fixedI finally sent a message via Facebook on May 20th that included picturesI had to continue to contact MrArnett to get him to come to my homeAfter much debate, I finally asked him what I could count on him to doI was told he would fix my damage and get an estimate to my insurance company for the cornice work, neither have been done to dateHad I not stayed after him I doubt he would have made it to my home on June 13thAlthough I feel it is due to the failure of Arnett to work in my best interest that the cornice are not completeI was willing to work with them and my insurance company to get it done Once I noticed the cornices I was told they should never have been left that way and they would be fixed right awayHis employee said he would come and do it himselfHe never followed through As far as a "verbal threat"I did not threaten any physical harm to MrArnettI made him a promise that I would do what I needed to in order to get this corrected which included this report to the Revdex.com as well as legal action if necessaryI also told him I didn't want to have to go that direction but I would if need beClearly that is the direction I have to go; therefore, it can no longer be seen as a "threat" but fulfillment of my promise After MrArnett visited my home to review the damage on June 13th, due to the tendency to not follow through unless I was continually calling him, I waited week to allow MrArnett to contact me concerning the plans to repair the damageI then left him a message every day asking him to return my call so we could discuss the next stepsHe finally called me back after I left a message telling him I was taking the next steps upon hanging up My wife being surprised to see him has nothing to do with this dispute, that is simply nonsenseThe day MrArnett showed up to my house he was left alone to do what he neededThey left without giving my wife any indication of what needed to be done or when they would be back in touchWhen I finally received a call back from him I was told that I can't expect for them to be ready at my every beck and callIn September, it will be three yearsI think I have given them more than enough time to reconcile this I DID NOT refuse to allow them to do the repairs, this too is completely falseAs far as their verbal commitments...it's been nearly years with no follow through, you be the judgeI was simply told he did not have a cost or date to do the repairsThis is the first I have heard from Arnett concerning the estimate for repairs MrArnett told me that he would turn this over to his lawyer (so, is that a threat?) due to my promise to take the steps necessary to settle this, I told him that was probably the best option and then I was told I didn't deserve to have the repairs doneMy last words to him were "we'll see, won't we" As I stated in my complaint, I am in the process of getting estimates to complete the workI will accept full reimbursement onlyThe ceiling requires repainting as does my wall (you can't just paint the area without seeing the difference),and my cornices need to be finishedI have an idea that his offer is much too small to cover all costs I have attached pictures of the one cornice that they did the ridge onlyas well as the damage to the ceiling Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 24, 2017/07/26) */ We have reviewed the estimates which were submitted by Mr [redacted] While the estimates greatly exceed the amount our subcontractor is willing to accept to make the repairs, as a sign of good will, and due to the fact that we believe that some of the water damage was pre-existing, Arnett Construction is willing to offer the sum of [redacted] to completely resolve this matterIf the [redacted] is not acceptable, the parties will simply have to resolve this matter in the court system Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 26, 2017/07/27) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Without revisiting the entire complaint, in my opinion, Arnett Construction once again is showing their lack of concern for me as their customer as well as their tendency to get by with the least possibleAfter three years of broken promises to finish the cornices as well as repair the damage, they offered an amount to repair the damage [redacted] as if I my concern was over a negligible issueOnce they received a true estimate, completed by a national professional organization, they offer half of the estimated costs When you sign a contract for work, you have a right to expect complete and quality workIf your home is damaged by that contractor, the customer rightly should expect a complete and quality repair For those who read this complaint, here are the important repair estimate detailsYou be the judgeIs the new offer of [redacted] fair and equitable? Will it allow me to have a complete and quality repair for the dollars offered? The estimate to repair the dry wall is [redacted] for 3-hours work at [redacted] per hourBased on the offer by Arnett Construction, this leaves me with [redacted] to cover the cost of paintingThe following is a quote from the estimate concerning the painting"The work will cause the need to paint the ceiling and the two (2) wallsThe ceiling itself will require us to use a scaffold to access the higher area and that requires that I use men for about a dayThe second man is charged out at a discounted rate of [redacted] making the day rate for two men [redacted] In addition, according to the estimate, this does not include the cost of paint or other materials As you can see, the offer of [redacted] doesn't even cover the estimate to re-paint the walls and ceiling or the paint itselfSo, even though Arnett's subcontractor is not willing to accept this amount to make repairs, it is not surprising and it doesn't' matter since they will not be allowed into my home to make repairsClearly, based on their first and follow up offers, they intend to do as little as possible to rectify this complaint Arnett was made aware that the area had been damaged due to a prior roof leak in that general area from the very beginningHowever, as I stated it was repaired several years priorThis in no way releases Arnett from their responsibility to fix their mistakeIf your car is damaged in an accident and three years after being fully repaired it is hit in the same general area once again, you still expect the cost to repair that area to be fully covered by the one at faultThe previous damage has no bearing on the second incidentThat is how I view the responsibility of Arnett Construction as it relates to the damage they caused to my ceiling In order to assist Arnett Construction in understanding my intent...I am not naiveI understand an estimate is just that, it is not a solid figure, it could be more or less, depending the actual time and materials usedI also understand what it means to have a fiduciary responsibility which is the role your contract places you inI am a reasonable person, this is why I took you at your word for 1/years before taking additional actionAs a sign of goodwill, I will consider any reasonable offer, clearly you have not made one to dateIf you wish to settle this in the court system, then so be itI have spent much time during my working hours filling your role as a fiduciaryI have communicated with my insurance company attempting to resolve the issue of the half-completed cornices, getting a quality roofing company to give me an estimate to finish your work and getting a professional estimate to fix my ceilingFiling a claim in small claims court will add additional costs and time to my rightful position of resolving this issueI will seek to be compensated for all court costs and my time as well Your offer of [redacted] is hereby rejected

Revdex.com:Arnett Construction contacted me direct the very next day after this complaint was filed They came out first thing in the morning the 2nd day and corrected the job The shingles all match and the roof looks complete Very pleased that the roof looks now as it should Thank you

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2016/12/13) */ We have met with the homeowner today and addressed the issuesThe homeowner was present and stated to us that they are satisfied with the issues being corrected

In response to Mr [redacted] 's complaint we offer the following: The roofing contract with Mr [redacted] came with a ten (10) year workmanship warrantyMr [redacted] had an issue with his roof in and it was addressed and completed to his satisfaction Arnett Construction has no control when a manufacture changes a product in their line of material, even if we were able to get the exact product there would still be a substantial color difference due to the ten (10) years of weather exposure of the existing shingles Secondly, Mr [redacted] never requested any extra shingles be ordered to leave with him Arnett Construction placed a 10-year workmanship warranty on it's work and did not manufacture the shingles, we just installed them The difference in the appearance will blend in after the new shingles weatherWe feel that we have honored Mr [redacted] 's ten (10) year warranty to the fullest

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2017/06/28) */
Mr. [redacted] signed a contract for the exact scope of work his insurance approved. The gable corner returns were not on the insurance estimate and were not included in the scope of work. The estimate software both Arnett and the Insurance...

company use allows for that exact item to be included but was not included by the Insurance Company, therefore it was not preformed. As for Mr. [redacted]'s leak, I sent a representative out to address his complaint immediately and was noted that it could have been prior damage to our roof installation. At that point nothing was said or done and large amounts of time would come and go until Mr. [redacted] would contact us again. finally it was brought to my attention that Mr. [redacted] was unhappy and I immediately made an appointment with Mrs. [redacted] for Tuesday, June 13 at 11:00 EST, at which time I had showed up and she was completely surprised to see me. I then continued to document the inside of the home, during the time of documenting the room there was similar damage throughout other portions of the room making it clear that these issues had occurred prior to any work preformed by Arnett Construction. After the site visit on the 13th of June approximately a week later Mr. [redacted] contacted me directly and verbally threatened me over the phone, I indicated to him that I would not be communicating any further due to the threat. We are 100% sure that we fulfilled our contract and we do not wish to preform any further work for Mr. [redacted]. In conclusion, we made an effort verbally to complete repairs on the inside even though we were uncertain it was directly related to any work preformed by Arnett Construction. Mr. [redacted] refused to allow us to preform any repairs. Our estimate from our interior repair crew to preform the interior word was [redacted] and we are willing to send that amount for the repairs.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2017/06/28) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I have uploaded a copy of the contract which I signed. As you will notice in paragraph B. it says I agreed to have Arnett to purse my best interest. This means Arnett Construction had a fiduciary responsibility to do what was in my best interest. My best interest was to have all the old shingles removed and replaced including the cornices, especially since we decided to change the color at the time. I asked Mr. Arnett several times whose responsibility it was to add the cornices if they were not on the original estimate, he would only answer similar to what he does here. I asked my insurance company whose responsibility it was and was told it rested upon Arnett Construction. My insurance company said, all that was needed was for Arnett to submit the additional work and it would most likely have been approved. I find it odd that they would run a ridge of new shingles down the cornice that was most visible from the ground and do nothing to the remainder as well and not mentioning the color would be different because the insurance company did not include the cornices in the original estimate. My Insurance has told me they will now only pay actual cash value not replacement cost because it is past the two-year time. So, Arnett, due to not fulfilling their responsibility to act in my best interest has cost me addition money here as well. In addition, in their response to this complaint, he admits that both software programs allowed for them to be included yet he didn't hold up to his fiduciary responsibility to act in my best interest and bring that to the attention of the insurance company or myself. This alone is enough to warrant his corporation in completing them.
As for my leak. There is no other similar damage! This is completely false! In the area that was damaged due to the work of Arnett Construction, there had been a leak that effected that area a few years before but it had been repaired with no leaks since. It was completely different and separate from the flawed work of Arnett. This does not relieve Arnett of their responsibility since they clearly admit their work was flawed and caused a leak that damaged that area. The day his employee came to collect the check, "after the work by Arnett Construction," it had rained and I showed a picture to his employee of water running in and, as stated he went to my home immediately and stopped the leak and it has not leaked since. He told me something was left that should have been removed. At that time, September of 2014, he promise they would repair the damage but it would be a while because they were busy. I agreed and gave them plenty of time to follow up.
I contacted this representative multiple times over the course of the last 2 3/4 years. Each time I was promised the damage would be fixed. It was looked at no less than 3 times and I was always promised it would be fixed. I finally sent a message via Facebook on May 20th 2017 that included pictures. I had to continue to contact Mr. Arnett to get him to come to my home. After much debate, I finally asked him what I could count on him to do. I was told he would fix my damage and get an estimate to my insurance company for the cornice work, neither have been done to date. Had I not stayed after him I doubt he would have made it to my home on June 13th. Although I feel it is due to the failure of Arnett to work in my best interest that the cornice are not complete. I was willing to work with them and my insurance company to get it done.
Once I noticed the cornices I was told they should never have been left that way and they would be fixed right away. His employee said he would come and do it himself. He never followed through.
As far as a "verbal threat". I did not threaten any physical harm to Mr. Arnett. I made him a promise that I would do what I needed to in order to get this corrected which included this report to the Revdex.com as well as legal action if necessary. I also told him I didn't want to have to go that direction but I would if need be. Clearly that is the direction I have to go; therefore, it can no longer be seen as a "threat" but fulfillment of my promise.
After Mr. Arnett visited my home to review the damage on June 13th, due to the tendency to not follow through unless I was continually calling him, I waited 1 week to allow Mr. Arnett to contact me concerning the plans to repair the damage. I then left him a message every day asking him to return my call so we could discuss the next steps. He finally called me back after I left a message telling him I was taking the next steps upon hanging up.
My wife being surprised to see him has nothing to do with this dispute, that is simply nonsense. The day Mr. Arnett showed up to my house he was left alone to do what he needed. They left without giving my wife any indication of what needed to be done or when they would be back in touch. When I finally received a call back from him I was told that I can't expect for them to be ready at my every beck and call. In September, it will be three years. I think I have given them more than enough time to reconcile this.
I DID NOT refuse to allow them to do the repairs, this too is completely false. As far as their verbal commitments...it's been nearly 3 years with no follow through, you be the judge. I was simply told he did not have a cost or date to do the repairs. This is the first I have heard from Arnett concerning the estimate for repairs.
Mr. Arnett told me that he would turn this over to his lawyer (so, is that a threat?) due to my promise to take the steps necessary to settle this, I told him that was probably the best option and then I was told I didn't deserve to have the repairs done. My last words to him were "we'll see, won't we".
As I stated in my complaint, I am in the process of getting estimates to complete the work. I will accept full reimbursement only. The ceiling requires repainting as does my wall (you can't just paint the area without seeing the difference),and my cornices need to be finished. I have an idea that his offer is much too small to cover all costs.
I have attached pictures of the one cornice that they did the ridge only. as well as the damage to the ceiling.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 24, 2017/07/26) */
We have reviewed the estimates which were submitted by Mr. [redacted]. While the estimates greatly exceed the amount our subcontractor is willing to accept to make the repairs, as a sign of good will, and due to the fact that we believe that some of the water damage was pre-existing, Arnett Construction is willing to offer the sum of [redacted] to completely resolve this matter. If the [redacted] is not acceptable, the parties will simply have to resolve this matter in the court system.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 26, 2017/07/27) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Without revisiting the entire complaint, in my opinion, Arnett Construction once again is showing their lack of concern for me as their customer as well as their tendency to get by with the least possible. After three years of broken promises to finish the cornices as well as repair the damage, they offered an amount to repair the damage [redacted] as if I my concern was over a negligible issue. Once they received a true estimate, completed by a national professional organization, they offer half of the estimated costs.

When you sign a contract for work, you have a right to expect complete and quality work. If your home is damaged by that contractor, the customer rightly should expect a complete and quality repair.
For those who read this complaint, here are the important repair estimate details. You be the judge. Is the new offer of [redacted] fair and equitable? Will it allow me to have a complete and quality repair for the dollars offered?
The estimate to repair the dry wall is [redacted] for 3-4 hours work at [redacted] per hour. Based on the offer by Arnett Construction, this leaves me with [redacted] to cover the cost of painting. The following is a quote from the estimate concerning the painting. "The work will cause the need to paint the ceiling and the two (2) walls. The ceiling itself will require us to use a scaffold to access the higher area and that requires that I use 2 men for about a day. The second man is charged out at a discounted rate of [redacted] making the day rate for two men [redacted] In addition, according to the estimate, this does not include the cost of paint or other materials.
As you can see, the offer of [redacted] doesn't even cover the estimate to re-paint the walls and ceiling or the paint itself. So, even though Arnett's subcontractor is not willing to accept this amount to make repairs, it is not surprising and it doesn't' matter since they will not be allowed into my home to make repairs. Clearly, based on their first and follow up offers, they intend to do as little as possible to rectify this complaint.
Arnett was made aware that the area had been damaged due to a prior roof leak in that general area from the very beginning. However, as I stated it was repaired several years prior. This in no way releases Arnett from their responsibility to fix their mistake. If your car is damaged in an accident and three years after being fully repaired it is hit in the same general area once again, you still expect the cost to repair that area to be fully covered by the one at fault. The previous damage has no bearing on the second incident. That is how I view the responsibility of Arnett Construction as it relates to the damage they caused to my ceiling.
In order to assist Arnett Construction in understanding my intent...I am not naive. I understand an estimate is just that, it is not a solid figure, it could be more or less, depending the actual time and materials used. I also understand what it means to have a fiduciary responsibility which is the role your contract places you in. I am a reasonable person, this is why I took you at your word for 2 1/2 years before taking additional action. As a sign of goodwill, I will consider any reasonable offer, clearly you have not made one to date. If you wish to settle this in the court system, then so be it. I have spent much time during my working hours filling your role as a fiduciary. I have communicated with my insurance company attempting to resolve the issue of the half-completed cornices, getting a quality roofing company to give me an estimate to finish your work and getting a professional estimate to fix my ceiling. Filing a claim in small claims court will add additional costs and time to my rightful position of resolving this issue. I will seek to be compensated for all court costs and my time as well.
Your offer of [redacted] is hereby rejected.

In response to Mr. [redacted]'s complaint we offer the following:  The roofing contract with Mr. [redacted] came with a ten (10) year workmanship warranty. Mr. [redacted] had an issue with his roof in 2017 and it was addressed and completed to his satisfaction.  Arnett Construction has no control...

when a manufacture changes a product in their line of material, even if we were able to get the exact product there would still be a substantial color difference due to the ten (10) years of weather exposure of the existing shingles.  Secondly, Mr. [redacted] never requested any extra shingles be ordered to leave with him.  Arnett Construction placed a 10-year workmanship warranty on it's work and did not manufacture the shingles, we just installed them.  The difference in the appearance will blend in after the new shingles weather. We feel that we have honored Mr. [redacted]'s ten (10) year warranty to the fullest.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/12/13) */
We have met with the homeowner today and addressed the issues. The homeowner was present and stated to us that they are satisfied with the issues being corrected.

Revdex.com:Arnett Construction contacted me direct the very next day after this complaint was filed.   They came out first thing in the morning the 2nd day and corrected the job.  The shingles all match and the roof looks complete.  Very pleased that the roof looks now as it should.  
Thank you.