Convenient Home Inspection Services LLC

This letter is in response to the Customer Complaint Letter dated June 16, The inspection was performed on March 25, and the roof was covered with snowIt is true that I return several days later after the snow had mostly melted and looked at the roofHowever due to the height if the
roof and what appeared to be some ice remaining on the roof, it was not mountedThe inspection was done from the ground with binoculars At the time of the inspection there was no evidence of leaking past or presentWe are not required to give life expectancies on roofs, and we don’tThe areas of the roof that could be seen from inside the house were worn, but again there was no evidence of leaking or deterioration that could be seen that was of concern The report states that the condition is “marginal” and the report further stated the following: Observed from the ground with binoculars• Roof was visually inspected from accessible points on the interior and/or exteriorIf a roof is too high, is too steep, is wet, or is composed of materials which can be damaged if walked upon, the roof is not mountedMaterials: Asphalt shingles noted The inspection was a good faith inspection well within the state requirementsThe client knew the roof had to be replaced and was hoping to get by for a couple yearsThe inspector never reported the life span of the roof or that “it’s fine”However as stated there was no evidence of leaking or significant deterioration that would have caused any concern As far as ignoring requests for help, I received an email from the client at 7:am on May 28th and I responded at 9:12am just over an hour after that emailThe client has not requested any other help from me beyond that email Further, whether or not the roof is in need of replacement at this point is somewhat subjectiveIn all likelihood it could have its life extended by a couple years, but the investment in repairing leaks probably exceeds the value of the roof when prorated for its remaining life expectancyIn summary, this complaint is inappropriate at the very least for the following reasons: 1. The roof had visibility and accessibility issues as clearly noted in the report2. No such verbal representations were made indicating anything was "fine", and regardless of what may have been perceived as such whilst the client was in the middle of the purchase transaction, we have no obligations outside of our written report3. There was no negligence and all services were performed at or above all state standards4. There were no customer service issues and all communications were promptly returned, which can be absolutely demonstrated as such That being said, despite the inaccurate, extortionate, and libelous nature of the fraudulent complaint that has been made here, we run an incredible home inspection company and as you can see in your records we do not have a history of complaints. While any business can be a victim of a meritless complaint, it's often better to simply settle the issue, so we offer the following; In exchange for the client removing the fraudulent complaint completely and the Revdex.com removing the complaint from its system, we will refund in its entirety the inspection fee paid by the client Sincerely,

Revdex.com: It’s interesting to hear a Home Inspector say that the client knew that a roof was in need of replacing, when in reality that’s the very reason that a client hires a home inspector.  To call this claim fraudulent is almost as inaccurate as the idea that Bill Schultz responded to both my inquiries, as well as those of the real-estate agency.  On June 6th, Nancy Gerrard’s assistant Natasha, sent the following email (#1) addressed to me and copied to Rick Staff (Legal Counsel of Gerrard Hoeschler the Real-estate firm representing my family as the buyers) indicating that Bill would be stopping by on June 7th to take a look at the roof. Email #1 from: to: J > date: Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:38 PM subject: Re: 2204 Cass Street Nearly Laughable signed-by: ghrealtors-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com encryption: Standard (TLS) Learn more : Important mainly because of your interaction with messages in the conversation.   Hey Josh,    It's Natasha again. Bill is planning on stopping out at your house tomorrow to take a look at the roof and see what he can do! We'll keep you updated!   Thanks - Natasha -    Rick Staff then sent an email (#2) on June 7th where we were saddened to hear that Bill’s sister was rushed into ICU and that he would need to delay his return visit to our home to look at the roof.  Email #2 from: Rick Staff <[email protected]> to: Joshua Miller <[email protected]> cc: Nancy Gerrard <[email protected]>, Natasha Everson <[email protected]> date: Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:39 AM subject: Re: 2204 Cass Street Nearly Laughable signed-by: ghrealtors-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com encryption: Standard (TLS) Learn more : Important mainly because it was sent directly to you.   Bill's sister is in ICU, he will get to the property as soon as he can but he had to be with his family today   I then sent an email (#3) with 23 pictures on June 10th of the aged and extremely deteriorated roof to Nancy Gerrard, Rick Staff, and Bill Schultz. Email #3 from: Joshua Miller <[email protected]> to: Nancy Gerrard <[email protected]>, Rick Staff <[email protected]>, William Schultz <[email protected]> date: Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:21 AM subject: Fwd: Roof Pics mailed-by: gmail.com   Good Friday Morning... I hope that everyone is staying hydrated and looking forward to our first true summer weather this weekend.     We've had three (3) roofers out to investigate our leaking roof, with one (1) more coming out today.  So far, everyone has concluded that the roof can't be repaired, but must be replaced.  These roofing experts include: First American Roofing, All About Exteriors, Coulee Region Roofing (today), and a general contractor (Bernard Construction).   From the attached pictures you can see several patches and quick fixes for the main house (the garage roof was noted on the home inspection, but it also leaks from multiple locations and is not up to code with wider than 1/2 inch gaps in the decking).  This, too, can't be repaired and must be replaced.   The roof has hail damage, extreme deterioration, and as I said, multiple patches.  Further, you can see the light shining in around one bathroom vent with water stains running down into the attic.  I would expect to replace a roof within the next 5 to 10 years, but had no idea that we would be needing to make such an investment within two to three weeks of moving.  The roofing sealant, which can be seen in some of the pictures, is the same sealant that's in the basement.  Surely, the previous owners knew of the extent of the damage / failing roof.  Had we been made aware, we would have negotiated some type of repair.   I can image that the old saying buyer beware applies, but between the obvious and on-going leaks and the home inspection, there must be some type of recourse to make this matter a bit more favorable / make us whole.  We are not in a financial position to replace the roof, but of course, if we don't find a way, we will eventually be dealing with more substantial issues.   I am submitting all required documentation to the Leak Protection Policy associated with the home inspection, which results in a maximum benefit of $2500, but is only a quarter of the cost.  Further, I don't get the feeling that they will be an easy-to-work-with partner.   If anyone can help or offer advice, please let us know.  We're trying to liquidate some retirement funds and will be asking our friends and church for loans.  Timing is critical, as while we had funds set aside for the expected / unexpected repairs (HVAC, plumbing, kitchen appliances, mold, flooring, electrical) we have no additional income to support the expense of replacing the roof until the fall semester begins.   My best to you all.... Josh   Bill knew of the ongoing roofing issues, and we waited for him to return to simply view the extensive deterioration and damage to the roof.  I was aware that the roof was not new, and expected it to be “marginal” as indicated in the written report, which should have indicated “poor” (simply look at any of the 23 pictures).  Yes, I needed to get years out of the roof and not simply a few weeks and Bill Schultz verbally indicated that directly to me.  Bill Schultz looked out onto the rear roof on the day of the initial inspection and said, “it’s fine” and that we had “years remaining”. Further, the “leak guard” warranty was verbally oversold as a curative for all of our worries.  And as Bill should recall, there was little to no snow on that rear section on March 25th and absolutely no moisture on the roof that following Monday 28th with the following temperatures / conditions: Saturday 52 degrees, Sunday 48 degrees, Monday 59 degrees (thus no lingering ice).  I also wonder whatever happened to the “new drone” than Bill mentioned he could use on the roof?   As for the customer service aspect, Bill knew of the massive $9,000.00 issue that my wife and I faced and never once, called, stopped by, or responded to my emails.  I’m a fairly simple person, and having the inspector stop by and offer his commiserations would have changed the world for us.  We had no idea that the roof was destroyed and would need immediate replacing, which was the obvious, simple, and instantaneous response of multiple contractors / roofers.  Look at the pictures, look at the roof, and look me in the eye and tell me that your conscious is clear about the “roof inspection” being legitimately “marginal”. As hard as it is to forgive Bill Schultz for financially decimating my family, I do.  And he may cast contempt at me all day long (“inaccurate, extortionate, and libelous”), but simply look at those pictures (the ones he received via email on June 10th at 9:21AM) and know that he missed a huge opportunity to do the right thing.  We all make mistakes, Bill Schultz should have simply visited our home and owned up to his and it would have been over.  Again, simply look at those pictures and tell me that the roof was honestly “marginal” as opposed to “poor”.  Would it not have been more prudent to list: Have roof followed up by a licensed / certified professional, as he did for the leaking bathroom and garage door?   I’ll accept the offer for a refund, as the inspector failed to meet expectations concerning the roof; however, I’ll ask that he clarify his position that I never reached out for help and ask that he acknowledge that the legal counsel / staff of Gerrard Hoeschler did so on my behalf (June 6th / 7th )as well as my email dated June 10th which contained over 20 pictures of our deteriorated roof).  Additionally, after everyone looks over these pictures, please explain how my complaint could be fraudulent in nature.  Clearly, Bill offered to visit and verify the roof for himself, but failed to do so.   Kind Regards, Dr. Joshua Miller