RE: ID [redacted]/Contract DisputeDear Ms. [redacted]:As requested in your August 24, 2016 letter I would like to offer the following responses to the contract work for the above referenced incident.The statement made that the contract was $190,000 in value is not accurate. The original...
contract was written at $166,000 with an additional amount from client requests for additional work, change orders of $11,500 making the final contract amount end at $177,600.The delays associated with this contracted work can be attributed to the homeowner's failure to make material selections in a reasonable timeframe. Written meeting notes; correspondence and emails can provide evidence of our repeated attempts to finalize material choices.The homeowner’s statement that they are only withholding the amount of $1,500 is correct but only because we received a payment of $3,500 on the same date that we received the Revdex.com correspondence; up until that point the homeowner has retained a total of $5,000 because a minor piece of stair noising has not been installed, a value of work worth no more than $200 labor and materials.Final walkthrough: we have had two of them, January 29, 2016 and May 26 2016.Kitchen Ceiling: Wet saw damage, this did occur early on in the project and at the time the homeowner directed us to not proceed with a repair because she had additional work to be done in the kitchen and it could be addressed at that time. At no point was this subject ever proposed again.Revdex.com August 30, 2016 Page TwoTrash left: We can only assume that they are referring to the ramboard protection that was applied to the hardwood floors. On our last date at the home, May 26, 2016 we planned to pick up this material and were given specific instructions that they wanted it left in place.Hardwood flooring: The homeowner self-purchased the hardwood floor and all necessary trim pieces from a flooring supplier/installer (** * Flooring), a supplier and installer that we have no professional relationship with. The homeowner selected the flooring at one of our recommended vendors then took the quotation to ** * and ordered and paid for the flooring material themselves. We proceeded to subcontract this flooring installation to our regular flooring subcontractor, [redacted] flooring who was committed to the schedule that we had established, an installation date of January 11, 2016. On the morning of the scheduled installation the homeowner was not happy with their crew and within 15 minutes of their arrival she threw them out of the home. We subcontracted the same company (** * Flooring) at the demand of the homeowner; ** * Flooring was not able to put us on their installation schedule until the first of March 2016, adding an additional six weeks to the project schedule; a delay that was addressed and accepted by the homeowner.Stair nosing: At the completion of the installation by ** * flooring the homeowner did not like or accept one piece of stair nosing and requested that this be replaced with a piece that “matched” better. Since the homeowner was the purchaser of the hardwood material it was left as their responsibility to get this replacement piece. For the last five months neither the homeowner nor Prime 1 has been able to make any contact with ** * Flooring. At our last communications with the homeowner we requested the name of the contact that they had made with the manufacturer but had not received an answer. As of an email written by the homeowner to Prime 1 on July 5, 2016 we were informed that the homeowner planned to contract with another installation company to complete this piece, (copy of email attached).Closet doors: These doors were inadvertently switched around at re-installation; on our last walk through and punchlist meeting on May 26, 2016 these doors were returned to the original placement. At no point after that date have we ever been informed that there was still an issue.Hardwood damage: At no point since our last visit to the home on May 26, 2016 have we ever been informed of any damage done to the floor by a Prime 1 employee.We have made every effort to meet the needs of this home owner and their requests to the extent that they have damaged our relationships with a few of our regular vendors. The homeowners have demanded and manipulated our schedules and employees over the course of the last year causing us to delay other work for their benefit. We have made every compromise we could possibly make to satisfy this client, done everything that they have asked of us.Revdex.com August 30, 2016 Page ThreeAfter your review of this lengthy response please feel free to contact us for any supporting documentation that we have mentioned. We believe that we have operated in the most professional manor we could while faced with a client that seemed impossible to please.Thank you for your consideration in this matter.Sincerely,Daniel ** M[redacted]Owner, Prime 1 Builders, Inc.[redacted]
RE: ID [redacted]/Contract DisputeDear Ms. [redacted]:As requested in your August 24, 2016 letter I would like to offer the following responses to the contract work for the above referenced incident.The statement made that the contract was $190,000 in value is not accurate. The original...
contract was written at $166,000 with an additional amount from client requests for additional work, change orders of $11,500 making the final contract amount end at $177,600.The delays associated with this contracted work can be attributed to the homeowner's failure to make material selections in a reasonable timeframe. Written meeting notes; correspondence and emails can provide evidence of our repeated attempts to finalize material choices.The homeowner’s statement that they are only withholding the amount of $1,500 is correct but only because we received a payment of $3,500 on the same date that we received the Revdex.com correspondence; up until that point the homeowner has retained a total of $5,000 because a minor piece of stair noising has not been installed, a value of work worth no more than $200 labor and materials.Final walkthrough: we have had two of them, January 29, 2016 and May 26 2016.Kitchen Ceiling: Wet saw damage, this did occur early on in the project and at the time the homeowner directed us to not proceed with a repair because she had additional work to be done in the kitchen and it could be addressed at that time. At no point was this subject ever proposed again.Revdex.com August 30, 2016 Page TwoTrash left: We can only assume that they are referring to the ramboard protection that was applied to the hardwood floors. On our last date at the home, May 26, 2016 we planned to pick up this material and were given specific instructions that they wanted it left in place.Hardwood flooring: The homeowner self-purchased the hardwood floor and all necessary trim pieces from a flooring supplier/installer (** * Flooring), a supplier and installer that we have no professional relationship with. The homeowner selected the flooring at one of our recommended vendors then took the quotation to ** * and ordered and paid for the flooring material themselves. We proceeded to subcontract this flooring installation to our regular flooring subcontractor, [redacted] flooring who was committed to the schedule that we had established, an installation date of January 11, 2016. On the morning of the scheduled installation the homeowner was not happy with their crew and within 15 minutes of their arrival she threw them out of the home. We subcontracted the same company (** * Flooring) at the demand of the homeowner; ** * Flooring was not able to put us on their installation schedule until the first of March 2016, adding an additional six weeks to the project schedule; a delay that was addressed and accepted by the homeowner.Stair nosing: At the completion of the installation by ** * flooring the homeowner did not like or accept one piece of stair nosing and requested that this be replaced with a piece that “matched” better. Since the homeowner was the purchaser of the hardwood material it was left as their responsibility to get this replacement piece. For the last five months neither the homeowner nor Prime 1 has been able to make any contact with ** * Flooring. At our last communications with the homeowner we requested the name of the contact that they had made with the manufacturer but had not received an answer. As of an email written by the homeowner to Prime 1 on July 5, 2016 we were informed that the homeowner planned to contract with another installation company to complete this piece, (copy of email attached).Closet doors: These doors were inadvertently switched around at re-installation; on our last walk through and punchlist meeting on May 26, 2016 these doors were returned to the original placement. At no point after that date have we ever been informed that there was still an issue.Hardwood damage: At no point since our last visit to the home on May 26, 2016 have we ever been informed of any damage done to the floor by a Prime 1 employee.We have made every effort to meet the needs of this home owner and their requests to the extent that they have damaged our relationships with a few of our regular vendors. The homeowners have demanded and manipulated our schedules and employees over the course of the last year causing us to delay other work for their benefit. We have made every compromise we could possibly make to satisfy this client, done everything that they have asked of us.Revdex.com August 30, 2016 Page ThreeAfter your review of this lengthy response please feel free to contact us for any supporting documentation that we have mentioned. We believe that we have operated in the most professional manor we could while faced with a client that seemed impossible to please.Thank you for your consideration in this matter.Sincerely,Daniel ** M[redacted]Owner, Prime 1 Builders, Inc.[redacted]