Fernwood Apartments

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
 MY RESPONSES ARE IN RED: In reference to [redacted] complaint filed against Green Line Roofing: [redacted] used a referral service [redacted] to find me, for gutter replacement only (and spoke to him about siding repair once he arrived and gave me his paperwork that indicated he did siding). A price was given, the job completed and she wrote me a favorable review on [redacted]. (this is correct as the gutters were installed) On my initial visit [redacted] and I walked around the house looking at her gutters as she listed numerous projects she wanted done. After her continued persistence of things wrong with her property, (continued persistence?  His add stated roofing siding and gutters -  I showed him some wood siding I would like replaced)  I offered a name of a friend [Chris R[redacted]] that may be able to help her. (he offered Chris R[redacted] after I showed him the siding -  Chris he said was a UNION CARPENTER- worked for [redacted]  and could build us a shed that would look nice with our house) One of her many concerns was a lean-to shed (this was not a lean to - it was a piece of wood that was attached from one side of the fence corner to the other side of the fence corner -  not attached to the house) she wanted replaced (no not true I mentioned I needed to move the gate as the neighbor was building a privacy fence and would hinder our getting into that area and I would removed the piece of wood and privacy fence so he could get to the siding if needed ) and her garage ceiling. (again this project came about after he said Chris could do construction work . I offered a name to help her. A few days later I returned (Steve K[redacted] did NOT return with Chris R[redacted] -  I have emails to Chris stating I have not heard from Steve )with Chris R[redacted] to introduce [redacted] and Chris (again he did NOT come with Chris -  I haven't seen Steve since the gutters) so he could help her as I don't know how to price or build anything but roof, siding, and gutters. [redacted] and Chris were now in contact with each other. Chris stated to me they had agreed on a price (the price is on the contract from Green Line Roofing - ) to tear down and re-build her shed [ In the same spot] ( there  was no shed to tear down - just take down a piece of wood  AND it was not built on the same spot  - the new posts were closer to the property line as you can tell by the current fencing I have ) that had been there for many years and replace some ceiling tiles.(not replace ceiling tiles as I do not have a ceiling in the garage - they were to put up and insulated ceiling as stated on the contract)  That price was $3100.00 for the shed and $ 1100.00 for the ceiling. Total job $4200.00. Chris also stated [redacted] told him" it was to be in the EXACT spot as her current shed" (  EXACT SPOT IS CORRECT  -  BUT -- again - NOT in the same spot and it was not a shed that was there, it was  piece of wood that was attached in a triangle from one corner of the fence to the other CORNER OF THE FENCE  - NOT attached to the house) and same width as what she has had there for years. (incorrect as estimate was for 2 sizes - Chris stated the larger of the two was the same price as he would have to purchase the same amount of material, less waste - the larger size was agreed upon after this discussion ) Chris began work in the middle of May and collected a down payment of $ 2100.00 on 5-10-16. (correct - 1500.00 for the shed and 600.00 for the garage ceiling)  I Steve K[redacted] never assisted in construction of the shed. (that is correct - he did not assist with the build -  yet I have a statement from the insurance company that Steve told them he ASSISTED with the build) After completion,(this shed was never completed)  Mr. [redacted] called me and stated that his wife and neighbor don't get along and the neighbor had called the zoning board (this did not happen)  and they are in violation. (the violation notice was because of the documentation we received from the city -  We can not confirm the neighbor did this).   Chris R[redacted] had informed us the neighbor came and talked to HIM - asking him about a permit and Chris R[redacted] told us that he told her -  he did not need one as this building had no interior walls, floors or electricity -   I told Mr. [redacted] "can I call you back on a 3 way call with Chris R[redacted] ? ". He agreed. Moments later Myself, Chris and Mr. R[redacted] had a conference call as to which we all came to a solution. (there was only one solution -  the city wanted the shed torn down) Numerous conversations about us going to the city to appeal -We were to tear the shed down and haul away all waste at no charge (no price was mentioned)  and call it even. (call it even was not mentioned, we actually told them then that we wanted the 600.00 for the ceiling project and asked if the shed could be moved to the other side of the house which Chris R[redacted] said it could not -  then we asked the 1500.00 be returned   -  refund for the shed and the 600.00 for the garage ceiling project) All labor and materials for the shed were complete. (incorrect as the shed only had poles and a roof) He assumed that since the previous shed had been there for many years (again there was no shed - just a piece of  wood attached from one corner of the fence to the other - not attached to the house -  we have pictures from the city indicating there was never a structure there - so his comment is incorrect )  that it shouldn't have been any issue's and chalk the experience up to a lesson learned. (incorrect statement - this was never said by us) I believe the city had given them until June 10 th to have the new shed removed or the homeowners would be heavily fined. So as per Mr. [redacted] upon our verbal agreement I hired one laborer (we never said to hire a laborer - that was his choice -  just that the shed needed to come down because they did not check the building codes and again stated we wanted our  600.00 for the garage ceiling project - no supplies purchased and our 1500.00 for the shed returned since the project should not have begun had they checked with the building codes )  and Chris and myself spent the entire day demolishing and hauling away all material FREE of charge to the [redacted]. (the shed should have not  been put up.  If they had checked with the building codes this would have been discovered)  I NEVER ASSISTED IN THE BUILDING OF THE SHED. (again I have a document from his insurance company where he stated he assisted with the build and teardown of the shed)  A few days days later [redacted] contacted me stating she wanted a full refund. (this refund has always been requested -  600.00 for the garage ceiling and 1500.00 for the shed as it should never have been built) She knew we had talked to her husband and made this agreement. (no agreement had been made between my husband and  Steve K[redacted]) She even called Chris the day of tear down to see how it was going. (yes I did do this as I was concerned with the time frame and being fined by the city_)  She deceived us (this is not true - there was no deceit)  by letting us pay for removal and haul away so she wouldn't be fined. All the while knowing she was going to come after me for a completed job. (there was no completed job to "go after" as the shed had not been completed and the ceiling garage was cancelled and material not purchased for this)  I had spoken to the zoning commission and city to see who was responsible for permits.  It's my understanding that the homeowner is responsible, especially since we put it where it had been for years.[ same footprint] (not the same footprints -  pictures will be provided and no shed was there before)  Knowing that I tore it down anyway at my expense but it was not satisfactory to [redacted]. She still owed for the completion of the shed $1000.00. (the shed was not completed -  his contract called for 50% after completion of the job upon customers approval ) Which I never invoiced her for. I am a new business and have acquired dozens of outstanding reviews and pride myself in honest, quality work. [redacted] has gone above and beyond to tarnish my good name.( I have not done anything to tarnish his good name -  I filed a claim with his insurance company for the repair to my home after the tear down under his General Liabiltiy policy -  that is not tarnishing his reputation)  I also gave him numerous attempts to return our money and even informed him I will be filing a claim  After numerous attempts to appease her financially - (this is untrue as he never offered to return the money upon my request)  [ against the advice of legal consultants] just to make this go away she called my agent at [redacted]. He stated that only Mr. K[redacted] can open a claim on his policy, it does not cover quality of work. She then called the national office (claimants are allowed to file claims)  and embellished her side of the facts profusely. (there was no embellishment – I am still stating the same as before  -  I filed a claim  - I provided copies of contracts - pictures from the city proving there was no shed there previously) [redacted] sent an adjuster to her property (the adjuster saw the damage done to my home due to the take down of the shed that would not have been there had the shed not been built.  Had the contractor checked with the city building coded)  and has since offered to pay her $ 2050.00. I am told by [redacted] she refused (I did not refuse, I asked if there could be  a revision on the document) to accept unless there is a special provision taken out of the agreement that says she CAN continue to pursue me financially - (yes I did ask them to take out the provision that I cannot pursue him financially  as my concern was to retrieve the 2100.00 deposit given to Chris R[redacted] for the 1500.00 for the shed and the 600.00 for the garage ceiling project)  and talk negatively about me and Green Line Roofing. (this last statement is untrue - I did not say talk negatively about him and Green line Roofing - what insurance company would do that? This statement is not even in the acceptance agreement)   Mrs. [redacted] has refused any monetary settlement in this matter from me (Steve K[redacted] has not made offer)  or my insurance company. (this is not true – as you will see below)  (I am working with his insurance company on the general liability ) I have documented text that prove my continued relations with her to solve this matter. (no offer made by Steve K[redacted])  Her inability to accept liability (I'm confused as to what liability he is referring as he is the contractor) and blatant disregard for a reasonable solution (he has made no offer for a solution)  is staggering to myself and my insurance company. She now wants $ 4200.00 from my insurance company for work not even performed. (now he mentions work not even performed and earlier he talks about completed work -   As far as being bonded. Yes, I am now bonded so I can perform work in [redacted], HE WAS NOT BONDED AT THE TIME OF MY PROJECT or who ever he did work for BEFORE being bonded   (The documentation I provided you advertised  he is bonded, only to find out he was not until I pursued his bond policy)   HE BECAME BONDED IN AUGUST 2016 AFTER MY CONCERN OF HIS FALSE ADVERTISING ON HIS CONTRACT.  In due to a hail storm. The licensed and bonded argument was never brought up until after the fact. Never a " selling point as she claims"  (I signed a contract that said he was bonded and licensed-  I did check to verify he did have General Liability insurance but did not the bonding ).  [redacted] HAS finally accepted $ 2050.00 from [redacted]. She has never assumed any responsibility as her husband has. (again this is so not true -  husband has not had this conversation with Steve K[redacted]) What responsibility?  We hired a contractor who states he was licensed, bonded and insured at the time of our signing his contract  -  I checked that he did have GL insurance -  we signed a contract on his paperwork from a person who also signed it whom I assumed was his employee - but now discovered was not – Steve stated earlier he was a friend) My intent was NOT to hire a friend -  I believed hired a bonded, licensed and insured contractor as his documentation stated – [redacted] has exhausted every angle possible for me, Chris and my insurance company, financially and emotionally.(what does this mean exhausted every angle possible for me, Chris and my insurance company, financially and emotionally?) There was a clause on his GL Policy which describes "Work of others" -  He was asked to provide proof to his insurance company IF Chris R[redacted] was an employee of his -   Chris R[redacted] is not an employee of his - but who signed the contract -   Steve stated he assisted with the build and tear down of the shed to his insurance company which then they denied the second claim of the 2100.00 and I would have to try to collect it elsewhere.   TO RECAP a little  2100.00 should not be the issue -  he should have returned my 600.00 for the garage ceiling – so this should be about 1500.00 – yet is not because he did not return the 600.00 He falsely advertised on his contract he was  bonded, licensed and insured AT THE TIME of signing -          BUT WAS NOTHas been working without a license from the beginning until August 2016.Hired a contractor (Friend) who signed Green Line Roofing contract but did not check building codes -  Contractors are supposed to know to do that.   Makes many statements that are incorrect both to myself, insurance company and Revdex.comDid not present us with a settlement agreement as he states he has States shed was built using footprint – not correct as the posts still up are not in line with previous privacy fence I did not want to hire a friend – I hired a contractor to get the job done correctly – 4200.00 for the 2 projects -  50% collection is 2100.00  for both projects -  50% of 3100.00 is not 2100.00 – so this statement is proof 600.00 WAS included in the downpayment belonging to the garage ceiling which he is not returning -  nothing is being said about the 600.00 deposit I gave him for the garage ceiling   I have done nothing to tarnish his good name -  but in this writing he is tarnishing mine by saying I embellish (lie) to the insurance company which is a crime– was deceitful  - accused me of having blatant disregard – accused me of lying -  all of which I have not done.  AT  THIS TIME I WILL NOW ALLOW THIS -  SLANDER -  TO GO UN-ADDRESSED I hold an insurance agent license and being accused of “embellishing’ or lying to an insurance agency is slander.                                    ...⇄ Customer Service Doc » PNC's Payment Center » Geckoboard Dashboard » Updated: 10/12/2016 10A
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
The money I  received from the insurance company was towards the general liability claim I filed for the damage to my home to repair it to the state before the shed project began.  This has nothing to do with the deposit of the 1500.00 for the shed and the 600.00 for the garage ceiling work that was not completed. Again - this should only be for the 1500.00 towards the shed as the 600.00 should have been returned to me. Since it is not I am asking to retrieve the 2100.00 deposit I made to him.  This was denied as a second claim toward the insured as he stated he assisted with the tear down of the shed.  I was advised to see reimbursement elsewhere. I am not arguing his gutter business was not good -  It was this instance where he hired a contractor to do work for him - contract signed on his paperwork and he was not insured as stated on the contract at the time of my project and others before he became insured in August 2016.  He has not returned the 600.00 deposit for the cancelled garage ceiling project or the 1500.00 for the work not completed because he as an owner did not check with the building codes to verify the shed (which he recommended) was in line with the  building codes.   
Regards,
[redacted]

Again, I completely disagree with the response from Mrs. [redacted]. My text, phone calls, workers and insurance company state otherwise. This is the ONLY complaint we have ever received and this isolated incident is not indicative of Green Line Roofing LLC. My reviews and outstanding relationships with my customers speaks for itself. Please see [redacted] and Google. Mrs. [redacted] has received $ 2050.00. Green Line considers this matter more than solved. Any further contact will be responded to by the [redacted] Insurance legal team.