Fox Custom Homes Inc

Tacoma Mall BlvdSte.109TacomaWA OfficeFax FoxCustomHomes.com FOXCUCHMQFebruary 8, 2017RE: Complaint ID: ***This is in response to the most recent letter from the Claimant regarding the above referenced complaintAs our attorney stated in his 12/30/letter, it is regrettable that the Claimant sees fit to continue to waste the time and resources of both this company and the Revdex.com to rehash the same disputed claims, without showing any sign of willingness to resolve the matter in good faithThe documents and photos posted on 118/that accompany her comments are extremely misleading and defamatory and they are solely meant to confuse the public and further inflict damage to our reputation:The Gable End Photo:Contrary to her assertion, the gable end in question does not need to be sheathedAttached is the engineering on the truss used for the gable end; the calculations allow single wall construction with *** or similar fiber cement lap siding (attachment 1)This installation was duly inspected and approved by *** *** *** *** (attachment 2).L & I Non-Compliance:Again, we have answered this question repeatedlyThe electrical subcontractor we hired was licensed, insured and bonded while they did the work at the siteAll their work was inspected and approved by the Labor and Industries (attachment 3) prior to their license expiration of 6/22/2015, which was due to unforeseen financial circumstancesThis Non-Compliance report is dated 10/06/2015, long after the electrical rough in was completed and signed offThe only work remaining at that time was electrical trim (i.einstallation of fixtures, etc.) and we would have simply used another licensed electrician to complete the job.The Electrical Bid:The allegation here is that the secondary electrical work (i.ethe line from the transformer to the house) that we installed did not meet code or industry standard, which is completely falseAs you can see, the work was not only inspected and approved by the L & I (attachment 3), it also met the standards of *** ***, who subsequently brought the power to the houseAgain we were forced off the site in July of before we could backfill the trenches.We have contacted *** *** and confirmed that there has been no service interruption since the power was first turned on at the address, meaning that the secondary work we installed did not have to be corrected or replaced, which would have required temporary suspension of the service and a new inspectionAlso interesting to note is the fact that just a few weeks after the Claimant removed us from the site without paying her outstanding balance, she applied for two electrical permits in her husband's name: one for low voltage work and the other to complete the electrical trim (attachment 4)Apparently having successfully frozen us out of the job site, she decided to take over the project using the remainder of the loan proceeds, while maintaining the pretense of continuing to work with us to get the "siding issues" fixed.Snohomish County Correction Notice:As our attorney has already addressed, the foundation was installed per engineering submitted and approved by Snohomish CountyAll the pier pads as well as other foundation detail were inspected and approved prior to the pour and again at the underfloor inspection (attachment 2)If any pier pads were missed, an as-built letter can be obtained from the engineer and additional and/or alternative reinforcement installed as necessaryAgain, we have repeatedly made this point: had we been allowed to continue the work, we would have been able to address and correct the floor issue (as well as any punch work) prior to the final occupancy inspection.Instead we were forced to stop work in July of 2015, just as we had completed the drywall installation, which would be the perfect point to take over a building project from the general contractor, if you wanted to finish it yourself.With respect to her comments about the *** *** lien, we are afraid there is no substance to her conspiracy theoryNeither we nor our attorney contacted *** *** and discussed the lien prior to making the offer to remove it in the 12/16/letter (the lien was released on 12/28/2016).Nonetheless we are glad that it was removed promptly and at no cost to the ClaimantAnd the removal only supports the position we have maintained that *** *** had little proof that those material invoices actually belonged to Fox Custom Homes or the property.We believe that we have made every reasonable effort to engage the Claimant both through her former attorney and the Revdex.com in attempting to resolve the matterAs our attorney noted in the 12/14/letter, we have made several offers to settle the Claimant's outstanding balance, which is $57, plus interest and attorney's feesWhile we remain open to good faith discussions and settlement negotiations, we will not ignore any attempt to harm our reputation or interfere with our businessWe have already served one cease-and-desist letter against the Claimant's campaign of defamation and torturous interference, which her (former) attorney promptly acknowledged and promised to stopAs she once again makes casual threats to "take [her] experience to the media"in her latest response, we sincerely hope that she understands the liability she would face in doing so.In conclusion, we respectfully request that the Revdex.com make its final determination in our favor and close this matterThank you for your attention.Best Regards,FOX CUSTOM HOMES, INC.Attachments(pages)
*** Supporting Documentation Redacted by Revdex.com Staff ***

Please be advised this office represents Fox Custom Homes, Inc. It is unfortunate thatmy client's prior customer responsible for this complaint ("Claimant") continues to makeunsubstantiated and inaccurate allegations about my client. The simple fact of the matter is thatthe Claimant is unreasonable...

and made demands for completed work and/or punch list typework, but had failed to pay amounts already past due. In other words, the Claimant made it veryclear that they would not be paying the amounts due until unreasonable demands were met, thusmy client elected to stop work instead of incurring additional costs without payment.Since my client's work stoppage, even after multiple offers and efforts to resolve thedispute with the Claimant and their legal counsel, the Claimant continues to make unfoundedaccusations in every possible public forum in an effort to smear my client's good reputation. Asyou know, my client has an excellent rating with the Revdex.com. This does not happen if customersare not treated fairly. However, this Claimant's publication of half-truths and mischaracterizationsabout my client have caused my client to suffer damages, including lost customers andjobs. The Claimant made intentional contact with my client's potential customers and explainedonly the Claimant's version of events in order to gain some sort of leverage in this dispute. Thisis tortuous interference with a business expectancy and subjects the Claimant to payment of myclient's losses. This was met with a cease and desist letter concerning the defamation andoutlining the damages that would be pursued if not ceased.It appears that the Claimant now wishes to proceed with the smear campaign via theRevdex.com. As such, this matter boils down to the Claimant being unreasonable, inexperienced, andobsessive with items not authorized by the parties' contract. The Claimant also blames my clientfor work or consequences which were the result of actions taken by the Claimant.Lastly, the Claimant's refusal to make timely payments caused my client to cease workon the project. Indeed, my client has unpaid invoices and other costs associated with theClaimant's project in excess of $65,000.00. As such, Claimant's complaint is unwarranted andmerely a tactic to cause harm to my client's business reputation, thus the matter should be closed.If you have any questions and/or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.

At this point it should be clear to the Revdex.com that we have genuine defective construction claims. Some of these claims include governmental actions from [redacted] for the work done by Fox Custom Homes. It’s concerning that Fox Custom Homes is not directly responding to the governmental actions against them (County and State correction notices are attached). It’s alarming that they are not directly addressing the fact that they did not sheath a large gable end wall per the structural engineer’s drawings (picture is attached to show how large the gable end wall is). Isn’t it interesting that Fox has not offered their resolution procedures with the Revdex.com? I believe I understand why Fox is not addressing these specific issues and I believe the reason is because Fox understands that they don’t have to address these issues until we give notice that we are going to file suit. For a business to choose not to do what is morally right is a business that does not embody integrity and this behavior is what harms the reputation of the business. Perhaps the Revdex.com is unaware of the obstacles that a homeowner is faced with in order to claim construction defects. You see, Washington State Legislature passed a law requiring that a property owner give notice to a contractor before the owner can file a lawsuit against the contractor for construction defects. Therefore, before a construction defect lawsuit can be brought against a contractor, the owner must provide notice of the claim to the contractor at least 45 days before filing the lawsuit. The contractor is to respond within 21 days with (a) a proposal to inspect the residence and then offer a substantive response; (b) an offer to settle the claim by a payment of money; or (c) a dispute of the claim. If the contractor offers to inspect or settle the claim, the owner does not have to accept the offer but can reject it and then file the lawsuit. The purpose of these notice requirements is to get owners and contractors to discuss construction defects in the hope that disputes can be resolved before a lawsuit is filed. Our communication between Fox and our lawyer along with our Revdex.com complaint shows that we have attempted to resolve matters outside of the courtroom to avoid the expenses of court. It’s apparent to us that Fox is counting on these statutory frameworks/hurdles and hopes that we will tire and go away. Therefore, it’s Fox that has prolonged this situation by their underhanded responses that have taken place since July 10, 2015. I began to question why Fox was willing to “pay the (electric) lien” in their December 14, 2016 response. I was curious as to why they would be willing to pay $6,253.85 when they won’t even address the $7,228 in electrical corrections(electrical bid attached) required by [redacted]. It’s even more interesting that they are willing to pay the $6,253.85 electric lien instead of issuing a refund of $4,300 for items we paid for that we never received. I found my answer on December 21, 2016 when I contacted the credit manager at the electric supply company. The credit manager explained that they did not foreclose on my property and the lien was expired; they were more than happy to begin the paper work to release the lien with no charge to me(attached is the lien release). In my opinion, I think Fox’s legal counsel wanted the Revdex.com to place faith in Fox Custom Homes that the $6,253.85 lien was going to be paid for by Fox; when in fact the lien was expired and the company was more than willing to release the lien at no charge. It should be apparent that Fox’s legal counsel stated a little trickery to make us all believe they were acting in good faith. I trust it is now evident to the Revdex.com of what we have been dealing with. It’s worth mentioning again that our lender withheld $28,663.48 from the last invoice because of genuine construction concerns. Yet, Fox Custom Homes claims we owe them $475,751.30. Fox states they are “willing to further compromise and will accept payment of $18,500.00…” This compromise comes with a requirement; Fox wants us to “agree to release (Fox) from further liability…” It’s worthy to note that Fox’s own legal counsel assigns a monetary value of $457,251.30 to being accountable for damage to our home. To demonstrate I will combine the monetary amounts of Fox’s previous statements, it creates an equation that gives us an idea about how much value they place on wanting to be released from further liability of our home: $475,751.30(amount they claim we owe) - $18,500.00(amount they will accept for us to pay them) = $457,251.30(value of releasing them from further liability) This illustrates that we do have genuine construction concerns and it is a red flag that Fox wants to be released from further liability. As we have stated, we are moving forward. We may even take our experience to the media in the greater Seattle-Tacoma area as it may prevent someone else from experiencing the same problems.
[redacted] Supporting Documentation Redacted by Revdex.com Staff [redacted]

It is unfortunate that Fox Custom Homes is accusing us with a “smear campaign via the Revdex.com”. Please recognize that Fox Custom Homes is Revdex.com accredited and displays the dynamic seal on their website. I trusted this Revdex.com seal and hired Fox Custom Homes because we believed that according to their A+ rating, Fox was a trusted source to do business with. Unfortunately, we have found out otherwise. On June 14, 2016 our attorney sent Fox a 63 page document that included: a letter addressing our issues, State Correction Report, County Correction Notice, photos, emails from Fox Custom Homes, email from Fox’s own engineer, and an 18 page Construction Defect Narrative. All this documentation provided to Fox is within the realm of our contract. Fox has not responded to this document and we have turned to the Revdex.com knowing that Fox Custom Homes is an accredited business. Additionally, we are further concerned as Fox’s response to the Revdex.com contradicted previous letters from their attorney. Fox had the opportunity to complete a beautiful showcase home, yet they stopped work when the project was approximately 60% complete. Imagine bringing forth substantial construction issues to the builder that YOU HIRED and when the builder is faced with documentation from a certified home inspector and governing authorities(County and State), the builder chooses to accuse you of blatant falsehoods. This NIGHTMARE is happening to us after we provided Fox with a letter from our attorney on 9/3/15. This letter included documentation of: a partial home inspection, a Snohomish County Correction Notice, and information of a $6K lien from the electric supply company on our property. In response, Fox stated throughout their 10/8/15 letter many accusations that left us in disbelief. For example, when Fox addressed our issues of an unpaid subcontractor, Fox’s attorney stated: “The workers of the first framing crew left half way through the job in large part due to constant interference and harassment”. We believe that statement to be untrue and we have documentation to show that. Furthermore, when we addressed that our financial institution removed Fox from our construction loan Fox’s attorney stated: “Yes, my client no longer does business with them in large part because my client chose to assert its contractual right to payment and fight the misinformation provided by (the homeowners). At this time, it is unclear how much my client has been damaged in this regard, but my client reserves all rights to proceed accordingly.” This statement left us with an impression that Fox will file suit against us because of the actions our lender took against Fox Custom Homes. This we believe is a terrifying threat to make towards us to summon fear. Our lender(a large financial corporation headquartered in Seattle) removed Fox from our loan and did so of their own choosing. Additionally, in their closing statement of their 10/8/15 letter, Fox’s attorney stated: “My clients were subjected to a hostile environment throughout construction (constant harassing of staff and subs, including homophobic remarks toward staff)”. That closing statement literally took our breath away. Fox had no idea that my sister is a lesbian and her significant-other is a woman and both these respectable women are the Godparents to our children. Furthermore, Fox has falsely accused us of “KICKING” them off site multiple times as stated in their letters: “Additionally, the foundation was not yet backfilled when my clients were KICKED OFF the site.” AND, “my client was KICKED OFF the lot in the middle of addressing punch work…” AND, “my client was in the middle of completing the siding punch work when it was told to GET OFF the site.” Please refer back to Fox’s Revdex.com statement, “thus, my client ELECTED to stop work instead of incurring additional costs without payment.” We believe these statements show the web of deceit this company has weaved. We also believe that Fox was deliberately falsely accusing us with the objective of achieving control through our fear and anxiety. We believe these tactics were used to try and achieve a few things: shifting the focus, and changing the subject. Instead of confronting what we believed to be blatant falsehoods and mischaracterizations, we chose to ignore and countered with a letter that simply stated, “The (homeowners) request merely that they be put in the position as promised in the contract for a home to be built by a “builder with unsurpassed experience and knowledge in all building phases” as Fox Custom Homes states on its website” and in closing we simply stated: “the (homeowners) have damage that exceeds the amounts owed to Fox, and they expect Fox Custom Homes to make a new offer in light of this information.” The simple fact of the matter is that we had a CONTRACTUAL RIGHT to inspect our home before funds were disbursed as stated in our contract: “Owner shall inspect the House upon receipt of each draw request from builder and prior to authorizing the release of such draw payment.” After all, the President stated to us that he would maintain quality in his work. What we believe is unreasonable and unfair is how Fox chose to respond when our concerns of the construction of our home were brought forth from our LENDER and OURSELVES. Fox responded by stating to our lender that they were stopping work; Fox could not attend a meeting with our lender; Fox filed a lien on our home. Construction concerns had been brought to Fox’s attention THROUGHOUT the construction process and were documented through photos emailed to Fox. In an attempt to show the seriousness of our situation, we will provide what we emailed to the Vice President in June 2015: “As you are aware, the siding crew has done a terrible job in their attempt to side our house you are building for my family and me. (The President) has stated we are to trust him that these many errors and mistakes will be taken care of. In your message to me you assured me we would not move on to the next stage until things were satisfied and corrected. I understand that we could move on to the next stage inside as work goes on outside, but at this point I am very leery of proceeding and making a draw with the siding left in its present condition. I feel that some of these issues are blatant and should be addressed immediately. (The President) has given the siders ample opportunity to fix their blunders and instead of making things better, their attempts at repairing issues only made things worse. By agreeing to this draw when things are so messed up, I feel uncomfortable. I also know that monies need to be dispersed so you can move forward with our project. If you can assure us that the siding, soffit and trim issues are going to be fully repaired, I feel I need something in writing from you stating that you will fulfill what (the President) is telling us. I know you understand our situation with all that has occurred.” Instead of addressing our specific concerns in writing, the Vice President emailed our lender and VOLUNTARILY WITHDREW THE JUNE DRAW REQUEST in its entirety. Please refer back to Fox’s recent response to the Revdex.com: “the Claimant’s refusal to make timely payments caused my client to cease work on the project.” Fox issued a draw request on July 1st; Fox STOPPED work on July 10th; Fox sent a NEW REVISED/UPDATED draw request on July 20th (replacing the July 1st draw request); Fox’s check with the undisputed monies was sent four days later on July 24th. According to Fox’s own contract, Fox ceased work BEFORE our account was past due: “The net amount is due on the tenth of the month or upon inspection by the Lender. The account is considered past due if the net amount is not received by the fifteenth of the month.” We believe this statement shows that Fox breached their own contract on July 10, 2015. On July 10, 2015 we brought forth construction issues that we wanted Fox to address. Again, rather than addressing our concerns, they stated they were stopping work. What we had discovered was that prior issues had NOT been corrected and NEW construction issues were discovered. Our issues: lack of soffit venting, non-compliant shingle product, exterior & interior painting was incomplete and of poor workmanship, misaligned siding, siding that was installed contrary to manufacturer requirements and the repair attempts made it worse(explanation: Fox hired a second subcontractor to repair siding that was bulging from incorrect installation. This new subcontractor used a circular saw in a misguided attempt to repair the entire south side of the house. The circular saw overcut and damaged the piece above and below, as well as cut the slip-sheet, thereby destroying the ability of the siding and underlayment to keep water out of the wall. Further, the butted joints in the siding are not placed over studs and not fitted over flashing strips as required. The south wall is most critical as it is two floors high and gets the most weather exposure. Not to mention, it looks embarrassingly bad on a brand new CUSTOM home. Fox then expressly painted the exterior. In our opinion it was painted without advanced notice as an attempt to conceal the major defects). It appears that Fox refers to these significant construction issues as, “punch list type work” and “minor cosmetic items” and we disagree. We believe that these are substantial issues and therefore, we believe we had every right to withhold a portion of the July draw request. Please refer to Fox’s statement to the Revdex.com: “As such, this matter boils down to the Claimant being unreasonable, inexperienced, and obsessive with items not authorized by the parties’ contract.” This is an insulting statement. Therefore, we will provide further information in regards to items that were authorized by our contract. FOOTINGS AND FOUNDATION(PAID IN FULL): it was discovered Fox had failed to properly execute its work in accordance with the engineered blueprints on file with Snohomish County. In other words, Fox used an incorrect foundation blueprint when pouring the concrete piers. This foundation blueprint did not reflect our re-engineered floor plan and our floor was sinking because our load bearing walls were missing the large concrete pads for point loading. This compromised the structural integrity of our home. The engineer stated, “These pads are required for point loading from above.” Snohomish County issued a correction notice after an inspection was made. It was also discovered that the concrete surrounding the foundation hold down at the SE corner was cracked and it is now recommended that a structural engineer review the condition and determine a scope of repair as necessary. FRAMING MATERIAL AND FRAMING LABOR(PAID IN FULL): It was discovered that Fox had not replaced the Fascia and barge boards that were touching the roofing in many areas around the perimeter of the home caused by incorrect installation/repair methods by their subcontractor and employee(This can cause rot and impede water flow, as well as complicate roofing repair/replacement). Furthermore, it was discovered that Fox failed to follow the structural engineer’s specifications and “Sheath all Gable ends”. FOX DID NOT sheath a very large gable end wall approximately 55 feet in length. This wall is required to have plywood or OSB sheathing per the structural engineer’s drawing. SECONDARY ELECTRICAL(PAID IN FULL): It was discovered that Fox’s non-licensed electrical contractor made alterations that now need to be corrected. The Washington Department of Labor & Industries issued an electrical inspection correction notice as well as a non-compliance notice. Fox has failed to respond to the corrections that are required per the governing authority of Washington State Labor and Industries. We have an estimate of $7,228 to correct this electrical issue. ROUGH ELECTRICAL(PAID IN FULL): It was discovered that Fox’s electrical contractor installed under capacity electrical wiring for the heat pump. Despite Fox being paid in full for secondary and rough electrical we still received a lien on our property from the Electrical Supply Company in the amount of $6,253.85. We PAID IN FULL for: EROSION CONTROL, TEMPORARY POWER, FOOTING DRAINS. In regards to the temporary power, Fox was able to utilize the power that existed on site. In regards to the erosion control, erosion control was not required by Snohomish County. In regards to the Footing Drains, we were instructed by the President to install the footing drains and tight lines. In response, Fox’s attorney stated: “My client issued the credit even though they were not technically required to.” We have not received a refund in the amount of $4,300. WINDOWS AND SCREENS(PAID IN FULL): Fox has not released the window screens to us. FLOORING ADDENDUM(FOX TO PROVIDE): Fox stated, “we did have a discrepancy between the proposal and the contract. Thank you for letting me know that you found an issue. I am so sorry it was not more clearly laid out in your contract. I have put together an addendum to your contract that clearly spells out that we will be providing the carpet and vinyl.” CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS(PAID IN FULL): Fox has not returned our Blueprints and engineering report, LDA Drainage Report, Site Plan, Grading Plan and TESC Plan, Building Permits, LDA Permits, and Inspection Documents. In regards to Fox’s statement: “The claimant also blames my client for work or consequences which were the result of actions taken by the Claimant.” What Fox is referring to here is the discovery of mold throughout our entire crawlspace on March 25, 2015. This was discovered by Fox’s plumbing subcontractor and brought to the attention of Fox’s construction coordinator as he was on site that day. This situation boils down to the fact that Fox installed a vapor barrier in the crawl space on January 27, 2015. Because framers had quit, our home sat without a complete roof until mid-April. As a result, a large amount of rain water accumulated and pooled on top of the vapor barrier, the water had no place to go. Therefore, it created an environment for mold to grow. We asked Fox to remedy the mold situation. Instead, they placed blame on us despite the fact that Snohomish County had stamped a notice onto our blueprints that read: “Provision shall be made to prevent water from collecting in crawl spaces and from leaking onto basement floors.” Fox Custom Homes is responsible for poor workmanship, non-compliant installations with Code, industry standards and work not meeting generally accepted practices. Our complaint is not unwarranted or unfounded. Unfounded means: not based on facts or proof. Our positions are backed by a Construction Dispute/Defect Company, ASHI Certified home inspector, Snohomish County Correction Notice, and a Department of Labor and Industries Electrical Inspection Correction Report, a Department of Labor and Industries Electrical non-compliance notice to contractor, and a certified mold remediation company. We believe there must be reasons behind Fox’s false accusations and threats to file suit. And we believe it is to invoke fear and anxiety in order to deter us from addressing our genuine issues. We believe we have done nothing wrong and Fox’s actions and business practices speak for themselves. In conclusion, Fox needs to address our issues and they need to release the $28,663.48 lien that is on our property as well as taking care of the $6,253.85 electric supply company’s lien that is on our property as well.