Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2015/12/05) */
Frontier Roofing Systems was contracted to perform the work on Mr [redacted]'s house. We upgraded Mr. [redacted]'s shingle to a [redacted] Woodgate shingle that would carry a full replacement warranty for 30 years. This was done at no charge to Mr....
[redacted].
Mr [redacted] singed an Insurance allowance agreement that allows FRS to negotiate and communicate directly with the insurance company. The insurance allowance agreement authorizes FRS to complete all the insurance work caused by the storm. The amount of the claim and money to be paid to FRS is all based on the insurance final claim. A fixed price is not given to the homeowner for the work since the negotiated price for the work is completed directly to the insurance company.
The shingles were ordered from our supplier to be delivered. We had a confirmed date from them for the delivery. We instructed Mr. [redacted] that he did not have to be at his house for delivery. This was relayed to Mr. [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] notified us that the shingles where not deliver. During Mr. [redacted]'s phone call the PM wondered if they went to the incorrect house as there are many different lanes, avenues, drives and such. The PM called the next morning to the supplier and they said that they could not get it on the truck for that days delivery due to staffing issues on their end. The shingles were delivered the following day.
The permit was applied for in the morning of the start. Broomfield requires a mid roof inspection. When mid roof inspections are required the city wants to have a minimum of 25 percent of the but not more than 75 percent of shingles installed. We can't call for the midroof inspection the day prior to the start of the roof due to this requirement. The inspector could show up prior to having the minimum amount of shingles installed and could fail the midroof and require another inspection.
MR [redacted] wanted a solar attic fan installed. He sent my project manager the specifications of the fan that he found at [redacted] The fan that Mr. [redacted] looked at was not available from [redacted] We searched the web to find the same exact fan but it was not available. We located a fan that matched the specifications of Mr. [redacted] and the PM talked to Mr [redacted] about the situation. When the project manager brought the fan to the house Mr. [redacted] did not like the fan even though it met all of his specifications. Mr. [redacted] agreed to accept the fan if we installed it for free. During the install the fan was installed over the hole in the plywood and was adjusted in height to match the shingle install. This caused the fan to be not quite over the hole. The discrepancy was minor and when Mr. [redacted] noticed it we corrected it.
During the roofing process we lay tarps around the house to catch misc debris and prevent damage to landscaping and other items. We did place a tarp over the outside compressor unit to protect it. This is a normal process and we have never had issues with the tarp causing damage to the compressor due to heat. The tarp is loosely laid over a large area and is not tightly wrapped over the compressor unit. Mr. [redacted] expressed concern that the compressor unit was damaged and we had and HVAC company look at it and determined that no damage was done.
There was a two foot headwall metal that needed to be replaced that was not anticipated. The crew used a piece from stock. The metal is brown where the other metal was painted white. Part of the work to be completed at Mr. [redacted]'s house as part of the claim is painting. This metal will be painted as part of the insurance claim and this will be completed by others.
The edge metal was custom fabricated and installed.
The fascia board that was damaged was related to the headwall metal that needed to be replaced. The board needed to be loosened to install the headwall metal. There are three nail pops that were going to be repaired with paintable caulk and then painted. Once the repair was complete the board would look normal and would perform normally. Mr [redacted] insisted that we replace the board instead of repairing the nail pops. We have agreed to do this for Mr. [redacted].
When Mr [redacted] said that he found damage to the house and shingles he is talking about the fascia board nail pops and some foot traffic marks that are on the shingles. We agreed to remove the shingles that had foot damage and repair the fascia board. We sent a crew to complete this work. Mr [redacted] was there and started questioning the workers as to what they were going to do. Our intention was to remove the individually damaged shingles and install new shingles. We have never had a problem with the color of the shingles not matching. There is a slight chance that this could occur but is not the norm. Mr [redacted] told my repairmen that he wanted the entire roof section replaced and they stated that they did not have enough shingles to do so. At that point Mr. [redacted] instructed them to leave.
Mr [redacted] states that FRS sent the invoice to the insurance company and did not present it to him. Mr. [redacted] has a copy of the insurance estimate that we are being paid from. The invoice that was sent to the insurance company was for the same exact items that are in his insurance paperwork but are for only the work that we completed. Mr [redacted] says that he never did a walk through with our project manager but there was a walk through with our project manager. From that walk through we have been trying to complete the work for Mr. [redacted]. The crew that did the install did come and make some repairs. They were not to Mr [redacted]'s satisfaction so we scheduled a repair crew to complete the work that Mr [redacted] did not allow to do any work. After Mr [redacted] refused our repair crew we scheduled the city inspection as we knew the roof would pass the inspection without the repairs that Mr [redacted] wants. The city inspector did pass the roof with the small foot marks on the shingles.
The [redacted] rep did look at the install and found no manufacturer issues with the install. The Tamko rep did tell Mr [redacted] that there was a slight chance that the shingles may not match exactly. Slight. To make Mr. [redacted] happy we have agreed to replace the roof section in the front of the house with new shingles. Mr [redacted] asked how long that would take to complete the work and my PM said that he should figure one and a half days as this would be a two man repair crew. He said that was fine and later his wife emailed and said that if we can't do the work in one day not to bother coming out.
Mr [redacted] states that no repair work has been completed from the original install. This is not correct in that the original install crew did complete some repairs but not enough. We have been negotiating with Mr. [redacted] through this time. We want to make sure that the work that we agree to will make Mr [redacted] happy and complete this transaction. We stand behind our work but we need to be allowed the chance to make corrections based on being roofing experts. Mr [redacted] has refused to have us complete work to the point that we are having to sign an agreement with Mr. [redacted] for completing the work. This process is happening now and again the [redacted]'s are presenting road blocks with mandating the work be completed in one day and not one and a half days. If the goal is quality let us do our job and not stipulate one day versus one and a half days.
The last thing that Mr [redacted] states is he is concerned about the cosmetic issues causing structural damage. The city would not have passed the roof if this was the case.
The attached pictures are of the area that Mr. [redacted] has concerns over and the damage that he is talking about.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2015/12/05) */
Frontier Roofing Systems was contracted to perform the work on Mr [redacted]'s house. We upgraded Mr. [redacted]'s shingle to a [redacted] Woodgate shingle that would carry a full replacement warranty for 30 years. This was done at no charge to Mr....
[redacted].
Mr [redacted] singed an Insurance allowance agreement that allows FRS to negotiate and communicate directly with the insurance company. The insurance allowance agreement authorizes FRS to complete all the insurance work caused by the storm. The amount of the claim and money to be paid to FRS is all based on the insurance final claim. A fixed price is not given to the homeowner for the work since the negotiated price for the work is completed directly to the insurance company.
The shingles were ordered from our supplier to be delivered. We had a confirmed date from them for the delivery. We instructed Mr. [redacted] that he did not have to be at his house for delivery. This was relayed to Mr. [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] notified us that the shingles where not deliver. During Mr. [redacted]'s phone call the PM wondered if they went to the incorrect house as there are many different lanes, avenues, drives and such. The PM called the next morning to the supplier and they said that they could not get it on the truck for that days delivery due to staffing issues on their end. The shingles were delivered the following day.
The permit was applied for in the morning of the start. Broomfield requires a mid roof inspection. When mid roof inspections are required the city wants to have a minimum of 25 percent of the but not more than 75 percent of shingles installed. We can't call for the midroof inspection the day prior to the start of the roof due to this requirement. The inspector could show up prior to having the minimum amount of shingles installed and could fail the midroof and require another inspection.
MR [redacted] wanted a solar attic fan installed. He sent my project manager the specifications of the fan that he found at [redacted] The fan that Mr. [redacted] looked at was not available from [redacted] We searched the web to find the same exact fan but it was not available. We located a fan that matched the specifications of Mr. [redacted] and the PM talked to Mr [redacted] about the situation. When the project manager brought the fan to the house Mr. [redacted] did not like the fan even though it met all of his specifications. Mr. [redacted] agreed to accept the fan if we installed it for free. During the install the fan was installed over the hole in the plywood and was adjusted in height to match the shingle install. This caused the fan to be not quite over the hole. The discrepancy was minor and when Mr. [redacted] noticed it we corrected it.
During the roofing process we lay tarps around the house to catch misc debris and prevent damage to landscaping and other items. We did place a tarp over the outside compressor unit to protect it. This is a normal process and we have never had issues with the tarp causing damage to the compressor due to heat. The tarp is loosely laid over a large area and is not tightly wrapped over the compressor unit. Mr. [redacted] expressed concern that the compressor unit was damaged and we had and HVAC company look at it and determined that no damage was done.
There was a two foot headwall metal that needed to be replaced that was not anticipated. The crew used a piece from stock. The metal is brown where the other metal was painted white. Part of the work to be completed at Mr. [redacted]'s house as part of the claim is painting. This metal will be painted as part of the insurance claim and this will be completed by others.
The edge metal was custom fabricated and installed.
The fascia board that was damaged was related to the headwall metal that needed to be replaced. The board needed to be loosened to install the headwall metal. There are three nail pops that were going to be repaired with paintable caulk and then painted. Once the repair was complete the board would look normal and would perform normally. Mr [redacted] insisted that we replace the board instead of repairing the nail pops. We have agreed to do this for Mr. [redacted].
When Mr [redacted] said that he found damage to the house and shingles he is talking about the fascia board nail pops and some foot traffic marks that are on the shingles. We agreed to remove the shingles that had foot damage and repair the fascia board. We sent a crew to complete this work. Mr [redacted] was there and started questioning the workers as to what they were going to do. Our intention was to remove the individually damaged shingles and install new shingles. We have never had a problem with the color of the shingles not matching. There is a slight chance that this could occur but is not the norm. Mr [redacted] told my repairmen that he wanted the entire roof section replaced and they stated that they did not have enough shingles to do so. At that point Mr. [redacted] instructed them to leave.
Mr [redacted] states that FRS sent the invoice to the insurance company and did not present it to him. Mr. [redacted] has a copy of the insurance estimate that we are being paid from. The invoice that was sent to the insurance company was for the same exact items that are in his insurance paperwork but are for only the work that we completed. Mr [redacted] says that he never did a walk through with our project manager but there was a walk through with our project manager. From that walk through we have been trying to complete the work for Mr. [redacted]. The crew that did the install did come and make some repairs. They were not to Mr [redacted]'s satisfaction so we scheduled a repair crew to complete the work that Mr [redacted] did not allow to do any work. After Mr [redacted] refused our repair crew we scheduled the city inspection as we knew the roof would pass the inspection without the repairs that Mr [redacted] wants. The city inspector did pass the roof with the small foot marks on the shingles.
The [redacted] rep did look at the install and found no manufacturer issues with the install. The Tamko rep did tell Mr [redacted] that there was a slight chance that the shingles may not match exactly. Slight. To make Mr. [redacted] happy we have agreed to replace the roof section in the front of the house with new shingles. Mr [redacted] asked how long that would take to complete the work and my PM said that he should figure one and a half days as this would be a two man repair crew. He said that was fine and later his wife emailed and said that if we can't do the work in one day not to bother coming out.
Mr [redacted] states that no repair work has been completed from the original install. This is not correct in that the original install crew did complete some repairs but not enough. We have been negotiating with Mr. [redacted] through this time. We want to make sure that the work that we agree to will make Mr [redacted] happy and complete this transaction. We stand behind our work but we need to be allowed the chance to make corrections based on being roofing experts. Mr [redacted] has refused to have us complete work to the point that we are having to sign an agreement with Mr. [redacted] for completing the work. This process is happening now and again the [redacted]'s are presenting road blocks with mandating the work be completed in one day and not one and a half days. If the goal is quality let us do our job and not stipulate one day versus one and a half days.
The last thing that Mr [redacted] states is he is concerned about the cosmetic issues causing structural damage. The city would not have passed the roof if this was the case.
The attached pictures are of the area that Mr. [redacted] has concerns over and the damage that he is talking about.