Garland Sullivan Design Build Company

Inaccurate charges and debt/misleading quotes/destruction of property/unauthorized work/violation of code, contract and county policies/privacy issuesAt end of construction, I withhold final payment asking [redacted] (GS) to address various issues in keeping with the satisfaction clause included in contract. GS ignored satisfaction clause and threatened us to hand over the matter to his attorney. I paid under duress. GS promised to address issues after payment, but chose not to do so. After unsuccessful mediation by [redacted] this is the result: 1 Clerical errors/debt: $1,001.26 (miscalculation of cost of goods sold + invoice unrelated to the project). GS admitted errors, sent payment without previous notice and prior to end of conflict. Payment was returned as various issues remained to be addressed and I could not go to the post office to get it. After unsuccessful mediation, I asked GS to re-send the check, but GS chose not to do so 2 Additional clerical error: $60.09 + 22% overhead profit = $73.29. GS included an invoice from [redacted] The construction work finished in early July and the invoice is from August 1st 2013. The invoice is not related to my project 3 Misleading quotes, missing invoices: Quote for floor work was $1200, $8.82 per sq. ft .Final cost was $1732.53. Prior to mediation, GS claimed the difference was the result of some additional work. I proved him wrong. In mediation process, GS stated that the size of the floor space had changed and that affected the price. Still, I contacted GS to verify the accuracy of quote included in the agreement and the size of the floor space did not change after that. Furthermore, the actual/final size was 177 sq. ft. This means $9.78 per sq. ft., not $8.82. GS provided no explanation for difference noting that the work was done on a cost plus basis. A cost plus scenario is not incompatible with the need to honestly represent products and services and be transparent I am still waiting for an explanation, particularly given that the relevant invoices are missing. In mediation process, GS claimed to have given me access to them and refused to provide me with copies 4 Destruction of property ($155.23): GS broke our sink during installation. GS subtracted the amount from final bill, but failed to take into account the pedestal, which was bought separately and I could not use. In mediation GS claimed I should have returned the pedestal. GS failed to notice that he broke sink after return period. GS offered to reimburse me for pedestal 5 Unauthorized work ($587.13), violation of code and contract: Contract states that work related to pre-existing conditions outside the scope of the project needs to be approved by me. GS crew cut electric cable to shop citing pre-existing conditions without my authorization, thus violating contract. GS cited code requirements as well though GS work did not meet minimal clearance required by code (10 feet). For security purposes and to install gutters to protect the foundation, I had to modify GS work ($150). In mediation process GS claimed our modification was illegal - our property, our security which GS put in danger. GS permit did not include connection to shop, was done without my authorization or any request by city inspectors. Unless I am missing something, GS work was illegal 6 Breach of privacy: At end of work, GS contact twice the person who referred us to him, told him GS could 'do with us whatever he wanted', threaten me with lawyer. GS' invoices also include details about other customers (surnames, even an address) 7 Violation of county policy: GS failed to obtain permit for work in living-room, which qualifies as structural and called for a permit. As a result, work was not inspected by city 8 Broken promises: Before start of project and at end of project I requested GS to provide a letter from the electrician for our insurance company. GS promised to send the letter after final payment. In mediation process, GS stated that if he could 'assist in providing a good faith letter to meet the insurance company's need he will do so'. I am still waiting for itDesired Settlement1. Clerical errors -> Refund for clerical errors = $1,001.26 2. Additional clerical error: I would like GS to refund me for the additional clerical error, $73.293. Misleading quotes: As stated, a cost and plus scenario is not incompatible with the need to honestly represent products and services and be transparent. I would like to receive a real explanation for (i.) the difference in the price per sq. ft. and for (ii.) the fact that the floor size did not change after I contacted GS to verify the price. If GS is not able to provide a proper explanation, I would like him to reimburse me for the difference, $532.53.4. Destruction of property: In the mediation process, GS offered to reimburse me for pedestal ($155.23). I would like to verify that the offer is still valid.5. Unauthorized work -> I would like GS to pay for the unauthorized work ($587.13) and the additional costs necessary to bring the work up to code for security purposes ($150). It is worth noting that during the mediation process I included pictures providing evidence for GS code violation as well as the relevant quote from the National Electric Code (rule 225.18 "Clearance from Ground"). Alternatively, GS should provide evidence as to how exactly is he exempt from respecting both the agreement and National Code.6. Breach of privacy -> I would like GS to apologize for the breach of privacy and make a commitment to inform himself of appropriate privacy standards. This is particularly necessary because during the mediation process, GS stated that he knew 'no applicable professional standards concerning this aspect of the complaint'. Clearly, Revdex.com standards will be helpful in this regard.7. Violation of county policy -> GS' decision not to obtain a permit means that the work was not inspected by the city, thus violating my rights and county policy. I would like GS to make a commitment to pay for any expenses resulting from his poor decisions, including any fine issued by the city or any change requested by the city.8. Broken promises: I would like GS to honor his promise and send the letter for my insurance company ASAP.Business Response Contact Name and Title: [redacted] AttorneContact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXXContact Email: [redacted]@mbb-law.comThe consumer previously filed a Complaint with the [redacted] of [redacted] in Nashville. The parties participated in the full process with no demands or call to action by the [redacted] of [redacted] The Complainants do not seem to understand the contract between them and the business in spite of clear communication from the business owner. The business provided detailed information to the [redacted] of [redacted] with exhibits which provide a full explanation of the history of the relationship between the parties. I would like to transmit the supporting documents to the Revdex.com but the directions request the exclusion of information that identifies the customer. Please allow me to send the information in PDF form.Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)GS states that I "do not seem to understand the contract between me and the business". However, a look my the complaint shows that the nature of the contract between me and GS has little to do with it. Specifically, only issue 3 (misleading quotes) out of 8 issues is related to the nature of the contract. Similarly, GS is using the unsuccessful mediation by [redacted] as an excuse to evade his responsibility. [redacted] stated they could not help solve the issue. There was no statement that GS had behaved appropriately (see attachment). In that process as well as via email, GS admitted his clerical errors: $1,001.26 (miscalculation of cost of goods sold + invoice unrelated to the project). To be explicit about it: GS himself acknowledged his unethical practices, particularly given that I am still waiting for the money. I did, incidentally, request GS to re-send the check prior to the decision made by [redacted] GS chose not to do so. GS' decision not to reimburse me for the clerical errors is, therefore, unrelated to that decision. Furthermore, GS has failed to provide an answer concerning additional issues not included in the mediation process by [redacted] namely, a.) demanding payment for invoices for materials bought on the first of August for a project finished in early July. (ii.) failure to obtain the permits for certain parts of the project, specifically, the work in the living-room, thus denying me the right to have the relevant work inspected by the city. Given GS disregard for electrical code and lack of ability to even install a sink, I fear the safety of my family might be at stake. That is particularly the case because in the course of the project GS chose certain constructions materials poorly. Specifically, GS used regular drywall in the bathroom, that is to say, a humid environment, where mold resistant drywall should be used. Clearly, the durability of the project might have been compromised by GS' poor choice if I had not found about it in time. Beyond that, during the early mediation process by [redacted] GS chose not to address certain issues properly and, as a consequence, I am still missing an explanation concerning various aspects of the complaint. Therefore, the mediation by Revdex.com is not only pertinent, but also necessary. E.g., GS stated that his unauthorized electrical work was up to code. Still, National Electric Code (rule 225.18 "Clearance from Ground") states that a 10 feet clearance from ground is necessary. GS work did not meet this requirement (see the evidence in the attachments below). How exactly was it up to code? Clearly, it is in GS' best interest to provide a clear explanation regarding this issue as well as well as his failure to obtain all the necessary permits.I attached various documents relevant to the complaint: (i.) the contract; (ii.) GS answer to [redacted] acknowledging his clerical errors (note that while GS reply to [redacted] states that my complaint was based on an error he made in an email, that is untrue. I based my complaint on official documentation provided by GS) ; (iii.) the decision made by [redacted] (iv.) evidence for what I consider to be GS' violation of electrical code pending an explanation regarding this issue; (v.) evidence for the work in the living room that was not included in the permit GS got - the picture shows that this work clearly qualifies as structural (which is why GS had to install a load-bearing beam and use temporary support beams when doing so) and that some electrical work was necessary; (vi.) the permits GS got, which clearly fail to include the unauthorized work and the work in the living-room.Final Business Response This claim has already been through the State of Tennessee [redacted] system. As a result of that process (absence a formal agreement), Mr. [redacted] agreed to pay Mr. [redacted] $1,001.26 for a clerical error about which Mr. [redacted] never complained until the [redacted] process. Mr. [redacted] issued a check on the agreement (See Part I of [redacted]'s 7/15/14 Response) that Mr. [redacted] would return a pedestal sink (See Part III of [redacted]'s 7/15/14 Response). I nor Mr. [redacted] have heard from the State of Tennessee since our second response to the State on September 10, 2014. Mr. [redacted] stands by all the information submitted to the State of Tennessee [redacted] division concerning Mr. [redacted] claim.