Bloor West Construction Reviews (%countItem)
Bloor West Construction Rating
Address: 2555 Bloor St W, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M6S 1S1
Phone: |
Show more...
|
Web: |
bloorwestconstruction.com
|
E-mails: |
Sign in to see
|
Add contact information for Bloor West Construction
Add new contacts
On October 24, 2018, *** and his Architect were instructed to proceed with the submission drawings via email. We did not receive any written response from him or his Architect.
On November 12, 2018, after almost 3 weeks, we emailed him and his Architect regarding the above, to inquire about the status. *** responded by asking for more money and claiming that this is extra work.
On November 13, 2018, we reminded him that these drawings do not constitute extra work as they have to obviously be drawn for submission to the city as original work requested.
*** responded stating that, "I am to provide drawings and building permits as agreed."
On November 14, 2018 we emailed him and his Architect clearly highlighting his contractual agreement and reiterating for him to proceed as instructed, with a deadline as of November 20, 2018.
November 21, 2018, we received no written response from him, which is past the November 20, 2018 deadline.
*** have been paid two deposits totalling $11,300 in August and September 2018. *** have been given ample time but he failed to carry out your contractual obligation. As *** is always asking for more money even though no works have started at our house, we see ourselves as victims of ***.
*** is in full breach of your agreement. We demanded the return of our deposit of $11,300.00 within 7 days, which is November 27, 2018.
*** totally ignoring all our emails from November 13, 2018 onwards, which clearly confirms that he is a cheat and dishonest person.
Product_Or_Service: 30 August 2018
Account_Number:
Full refund of $11,300
hired Bloor west construction to provide drawings and permits to commence 3 deck enclosures and a front porch roof with a new concrete pad. Bloor west construction hired architect and engineering services to provide 3 sets of drawings and all city application fee's, review fee's, submission fee's, taxes fully paid the parties involved. The client had 1% lot coverage left and 1% GFA left which in turn the permits where declined by the city and the next step was to go to the committee of adjustments which extra fee's where required to be paid by the client. The client declined the unforeseen extra costs and then demands all his money back and tells us he will goto to committee him self and very obtain the permit with all the back end work commenced and inn his hand. Contractors beware and stay far away from this guy.
Sept 11: site visit and informing the client of the conditions of the house
and the fact that project will potential trigger CofA. We recommended to
apply for a zoning certificate rather than a full permit in order to save
them some money in case they had to go to CofA and they wanted to halt the
project there.
Sept 13: project details were finalized through email communications with
***, *** and ***
Sept 21: zoning set was issued for review
Sept 25: client reminded on two occasions that their application will most
likely require CofA and we are trying to minimize their risk of going to
CofA by changing the proposal to two roofs and that the risk of CofA is
still there
Sept 26: project submitted
Oct 15: zoning comments came back and due to the existing conditions of the
building setbacks and the way examiner has interpreted their setbacks for
the new added roofs they will have to go to committee of adjustment. Client
requested our fees for the adjustments if they had to go forward with them
and we informed them that our contract is with *** and he can contact you
directly with regards to that.
Oct24-29: *** sent out an impolite email trying to question our work.
Client requested that now that we have to go to CofA to change the proposal
and create and cover a main floor deck and create an enclosed front porch.
As per our contract:
Scope of Work: replacing second floor balconies and propose flat
roof. Garage concrete pad
***Following services are not part of the scope of this contract and
are available upon client
request/requirement: HVAC Design, Floor plans, 3D Modelling,
Renders, Committee of adjustment
planner/prep, shop drawing, tender drawing, Interior design***
***Following quote is subject to approval for zoning. ***
***Construction stage consultation, reviews and inspections outside
the scope outlined below are outside the
scope of this contract and will be quoted separately. ***
this required extra work which we quoted you for as following on Oct 29:
As per our conversation our fee for adding the extra work on the
drawings will be $750+HST. Also the fee for committee prep and submission is
$650+HST and if they want us to present it will be an additional $750+HST.
Please let me know if they want to move forward with this.
Also client requested the drawings and we informed them that we can either
try to drop them off on our way or he can pick them up during business
hours. He said there is no rush and we can drop them off at our convenience.
Nov 5: we did a follow up to see how things are coming along and you
informed us that you haven't heard back anything from the client yet.
Nov 12: you asked for the quote again and we forwarded the previous email
from Oct 29
Nov 13-21: Client got involved with you with regards to application
demanding that they had already instructed you to move forward. He also
tried to hold us guilty for not returning his drawings which is not our
responsibility by any means however we had one of our staff return them to
him by Nov 14
We are already aware of the GFA as we have the set of drawings from the previous owner. Hence, we made clear to *** to engage an architect to help us through the process when we met up with him the first time.
Project cost + GST : $72,263.50
1st deposit: $5650 dated 30 Aug. 2018
2nd deposit: : $5650 dated 5 Sept. 2018
***
After the 2nd deposit, *** assured us that we would not pay any more until we get all permits approved and before the commencement of the physical work.
Architect's advice at meeting.
- Architect was informed of GFA by us from our set of drawings from the previous owner of our house.
- Architect advised that if we were to submit all 4 areas, it would definitely exceed the GFA which would involve going through the Committee of Adjustment (CofA) and the process would take a much longer time.
- Architect and *** were informed by us that we had experience representing ourselves at the CofA for our garage conversion previously and would do so again if needed. However, all submission drawings are to be done by them.
. Architect advised that it is best to submit a preliminary zoning submission for only 2 flat roofs without enclosure on the upper decks that would not affect our GFA. The roofs for the main level deck and porch would be omitted at this preliminary stage.
Architect stated that the zoning submission for 2 flat roofs would be speedier and would cost much less. *** could also proceed with building the roofs immediately once approved
. Architect stated that submission for the other 2 areas could be done later, where GFA would be affected, and would involve CofA. We mentioned again that we would represent ourselves for CofA.
We agreed because we would like the roofs over the upper decks to be completed before winter so that we would not have to shovel the snow for health reasons.***
Upon the zoning submission for the 2 roofs, we requested *** over the phone for the cost of the 2 roofs which would now be without enclosure based on the architect's advice. ***. He said he would give it at a later date.
Result of the Zoning submission:
- There was a Zoning deficiency as our frontage is more than 12m. Later, we found out that this was actually stated clearly in the City Zoning By-Law that the maximum frontage is 12m. We pointed out this issue to ***'s Architect.
***
- Due to this deficiency, CofA was also required for these 2 roofs.
- We asked the architect as to whether there was an oversight as it was stated clearly online.
- Architect replied that it was up to the examiner to interpret.
- We asked the architect the cost for the preliminary zoning submission. He told us to ask ***.
.In view of this, CofA would also be required even for these 2 roofs on the upper decks which was planned to be avoided to speed up the project before the start of winter.
. Hence we are back to where we started.
. All 4 areas would require CofA anyway
. Due to the above, we instructed *** and his architect to proceed with submission drawings as originally planned for all 4 areas to be submitted for approval.
. *** already had $11,300 of the deposit money to proceed which is a substantial amount.
.*** and his architect did not respond.
.After 3 weeks, we questioned them.
.*** replied demanding for more money, which was not as agreed.
.We informed *** to use the deposit money to proceed. We also reiterated to him that he promised not to ask for more money until the start of physical work.
.*** claimed that this was 'extra work' and refused to use the deposit given.
.He also refused to inform us the cost of the preliminary zoning submission and instead, gave us the architect's quote if we wanted to proceed.
. We again told him to proceed as instructed and to make use of the deposit money.
. *** did not respond.
. As he was in breach of the contract, we demanded that he returned our money.
.Our contract is with *** and he engaged his architect. The architect do not take instructions from us but from ***.
. *** took all our money and refused to make use of our deposit to pay his architect to proceed.
. ***.***.
Our point.
- If only a zoning submission was done, it would not cost $11,300, as according to the architect, it did not cost much.
- *** had his own agreement with his architect. Our contract is with ***, and it clearly shows from the architect's communication with us, that the architect is not aware of the contents of our contract with ***.
- *** refused to tell us the actual cost for the zoning submission. Later, *** gave the architect's quote to us for CofA to demand more money from us. He refused to use our money of $11,300 already given to him which was substantial to proceed.
*** made it look like it was us who refused to pay the architect for CofA when *** has our money to utilize.
Our conclusion:
. It is clear that *** paid his Architect for the zoning submission only and pocketed the rest of our deposit money instead of utilising the remaining amount to make the payments required to proceed.
. Submission drawings for the 4 areas to be drawn by the Architect as per the original contract with *** was never carried out based on the initial plan.
.*** and his Architect were instructed to carry out this set of drawings when there was a zoning deficiency However, they refused to do it.
. In view of this, *** is in breach of his contract, and we have the right to request the return of our deposit.
. There is no way $11,300 could be fully utilized for drawings of only 2 flat roofs for Zoning submission, which costs much less.
. Without Prejudice and to close this matter, we have decided that *** must return to us a sum of $10 000.00 within 14 days from the date of this notice.
. We are reasonable, as this figure is derived from the quotation (from his architect) which *** emailed to us for submission drawings to CofA. ***
. As stated by his Architect, the preliminary zoning submission cost much less than CofA.
***
Sincerely