Construction Services by David Franco

·        Ms. [redacted] hired [redacted] Construction Services to do a partial rebuilt due to a fire. ·        As work had gotten started Ms. [redacted] requested some modification to the garage space, requesting HVAC duct access into...

such space, insulation and enclosing as habitable space. ·        Mr. [redacted] went to the City to obtain a change to permit that had been requested. ·        City then made additional requirement such as other access and further modification which would be outside of the scope that the insurance company had agreed to pay.  Ms. [redacted] then retracted the modification request to the garage space and request to proceed as planned originally with simply rebuilding garage back to it’s original structure. ·        Ms. [redacted] boyfriend, [redacted], who is also a handyman and appeared to be cohabitating with Ms. [redacted] in the home at the time, would be asking Construction Service’s employees and subs to make modification to the instructions given by Mr. [redacted]. ·        Knowledge of Ms. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted]’s relationship was and is unknown, the only thing Mr. [redacted] knows is that [redacted] was not on the Deed at the time of agreement and therefore not able to make request to changes according to company policy. ·        Employees and subs kindly would advise Mr. [redacted] to please speak with Mr. [redacted] on any changes he is requesting. ·        When Mr. [redacted]  went to talk with Mr. [redacted], and made his request, Mr. [redacted] informed him that such request was outside of the scope of the work and reminded Mr. [redacted]  that the agreement was with Ms. [redacted] not Mr. [redacted] , therefore, request had to come from her, not Mr. [redacted] . ·        It needs to be noted that Mr. [redacted] installed a “new” HVAC system (both external and internal).  Insurance was only paying to do a clean out of the internal unit. Mr. [redacted] did not felt that was the quality of work he likes to do and therefore went ahead and instead of cleaning out the unit installed a new unit which he personally paid. ·        Additionally, Mr. [redacted] gave Ms. [redacted] a shower, where the existing home had simply a tub. Again to make Ms. [redacted] happy. Plus he added insulation to the garage, again all this was outside the scope of what the insurance was paying. ·        Mr. [redacted] kept harassing the workers and again workers ask Mr. [redacted] to please speak with Mr. [redacted].  Mr. [redacted] once again went to Mr. [redacted] and requested contact information for the subs under the auspicious of in case of warranty request.  Mr. [redacted], replied that any issues they have with the work he (or his subs) have done to please contact him directly.  Mr. [redacted] was not happy with Mr. [redacted]’s reply, got upset, which was witnessed by Mr. [redacted]’s employees/subs. ·        Mr. [redacted], in a conversation with Mr. [redacted] reminded him that agreement was with Ms. [redacted] and that she had been satisfied to the work that was done. ·        The electrician [redacted], [redacted] was also one that Mr. [redacted] kept bothering.  Mr. [redacted] on numerous occasion told Mr. [redacted], that he only takes orders from Mr. [redacted].  As yet another testimony of [redacted] Construction Services going above and beyond, the electrical panel had not been burnt, therefore the insurance was not covering the replacement of the panel, yet to do the job right, and Mr. [redacted] had Mr. [redacted] replace the panel as well.  ·        Work was completed and Ms. [redacted] was asked if she was satisfied with the work and she replied she was very happy. ·        About two months later, Mr. [redacted] was contacted by Mr. [redacted] again requesting they wanted the HVAC trade to come out and check the unit because it was not working properly. ·        [redacted] ([redacted] was called by Mr. [redacted] to go see the problem.   [redacted] did add more freon to the unit and noted that alterations had been made to the garage, after [redacted] Construction Services had signed off and completed the work, which voids the warranty (among which the warranty of the unit that had been installed in their home).  It appeared that ducts had been altered and run into the garage area, causing the unit to overrun and not operate as designed. It was being over worked by accessing a room that was not built with the proper return system.  Without the proper return system what happens is that the room is creating condensation, won’t allow system to stop operating and will not cool to the thermostat temperature. ·        Mr. [redacted] was not happy with the outcome, later publicly made comments that he was going to make sure that [redacted] Construction Services would go out of business. Mr. [redacted] continued to harass Mr. [redacted] via Facebook, leaving numerous phone and email messages.  Ms. [redacted] even witness one of such allegation when Mr. [redacted] was on the phone with Ms. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted] very loud in the same room as where Ms. [redacted] was yelled it out – Mr. [redacted]’s response to Ms. [redacted] was will let him do what he wants to do. ·        As one would imagine it was disappointing to Mr. [redacted] to have received the notice of such complaint, he felt he had done everything possible to assist and go beyond the call.  To date, [redacted] has being doing business for over 25 yrs and has never had a compliant, for he aims to always over deliver in terms of service and quality.