Gem City Digital

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/10/12) */
Case # XXXXXXXX

Revdex.com of Northwest Indiana

In response to complaint # XXXXXXXX:

At the time of the estimate it was mentioned to the consumer that the existing skylight could possibly be a problem due to its age and the fact there was...

no proper flashing kit with the unit. It was decided that the skylight would not be replaced. All previous dates seem to be correct.
The roofing project was done and completed, new gutters were added to the project along with ceiling insulation.
We did receive a call of a drip around the skylight awhile after the project was completed and the thought that ice could have been the problem. some sealing was done and with snow season upon us we had to wait and see as was mentioned. We then go to Oct. 2015 complaint 1 year later of water above a doorway. Upon inspection a pile of leaves and twigs were piled in this area and with the low pitch of the roof it was thought this was preventing water from flowing freely to the gutters. The leaves and twigs were removed from the roof.
We returned to investigate the skylight situation in the spring of 2016 after another call asking if we would. It was agreed we would take the skylight apart to see where any water was coming in. It was also mentioned that on a heavy rain the water from the roof would in some places flow over the top of the gutter. It was noticed that when the house was built a slanted fascia was installed for architectural reasons. With the larger gutters being installed the bottom of the gutter followed the slant. I mentioned to the consumer there was a product called a gutter wedge that slips in behind the gutter and holds the gutter out from the fascia board but I would have to order them and I would come back install the gutter wedges and look more into the skylight at the same time and it was agreed.
As always this is springtime and we received a super amount of work as always and it was hard to get the visit scheduled. Then as we got caught up the summer heat wave came in and lasted 10-12 weeks or longer. With modern technology the sealant on the new shingles is virtually impossible to take apart in extreme heat and the shingles will just stick together and tear apart causing a bigger problem. So again it was hard to schedule a time.
Then we receive a phone call from the consumers boyfriend informing us of the consumers intentions to bring other contractor into the picture. I preceded to schedule the job for the following Thursday and was told to communicate with the consumer. I texted her of our intensions not knowing if she was working or not and she responded with no don't come to my house.
In the State of Indiana a consumer must give a contractor an opportunity to resolve an issue. There was no written notification via certified email informing us of the situation so we feel there should be no responsibility on our company for the consumer contacting another party.
Please inform us of your thoughts.


Sincerely,


[redacted]
Two Uncles Remodeling


Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2016/10/18) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The sky light was not the source of the leak. The leak was coming from around the sky light where there was no flashing put on and the shingles where not installed properly.
I be live that two years is enough time to give someone too come out and repair their mistake. Was I to wait for more damage to be done to the inside of my home because he couldn't fix his own work. He even admitted he was out and tried to fix the leak but didn't. So if he cant fix his own work that I signed a contract for that he would fix any problems I had with my new roof Then why shouldn't he be held responseable to pay for the repairs if he cant repair the roof his self, in two years he had time and did NOT! fix the problem.
There is nothing saying I have to write to him via certified mail to inform him of a leak in my home due to his poor roofing skills. If that was the case I would have been sending him a letter every week and that would have got costly for me.
Just like having to spend more of my money to fix his mistake he couldn't repair in two years time.
I feel as though he needs to pay for all repairs to fix the leak and the damange done to the inside of my home due to the leak.
Thank You!

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2015/10/15) */
As far as this case is concerned yes we were called to do a small roof on the garage of this building per the inspector when the house was being sold. We never certified the roof as this is a Townhouse with like 4 units attached. This garage...

roof was so bad and also attached to the neighbors house which was bad also. This garage roof was attached to a [redacted] roof which had another roof on top of the [redacted] which was also in not the best of shape. However I was told the inspector was not asking for a roof certification. The only other thing we inspected was some flashing on the back window which we did.
This was a $450.00 repair plus $50.00 for the permit. Now I don't know if there was a leak previously before I came or not. They are saying there wasn't but how would they know as they did not live there yet. This building could be leaking from a number of areas not to push the blame.
In our defense my supervisor has stopped by twice to find no one at home. We called the son Tim at another occasion and he was not at home at the time.
I will be happy to look at the situation again.
Another concern of mine is supposedly some damage to an interior wall. This garage roof at the top is at about floor level so how could there be a problem upstairs unless the old roof is leaking.
I will be happy to try and stop by again and look but for a $450.00 repair which everyone knows there is no guarantee on repairs.
Please advise me on how to deal with this situation.
Thank You
Garry [redacted]
Two Uncles Remodeling LLC.

Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2015/10/15) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The leak has been since we moved in, We called the business right away and the avoiding phone calls has been happening since we moved in. The owner himself stated the leak is due to the roof, it is quite obvious it is the roof. When a ''supervisor'' wants to stop by the professional way is to call the homeowners and notify them of his intent to stop by the property, not show up whenever he desires. If I was to walk into two uncles at 12 AM on a weekday I can also say ''no one was there''. We had agreed that the owner would stop by the next day (day I had spoke to the owner myself at his shop) as he had some work with another client on the same street, to which he never showed up nor called. As far as calling 'Tim' goes, I say again you cannot call 2-3 days later in the afternoon randomly saying 'Im stopping by' and expect the homeowners to be there. We have been told numerous times that 'We will look into the situation again' this reply is nothing new, the owners of two uncles simply do not show up, or if they supposedly do they want to stop by whenever they want to without even a 24 hour notice to the homeowners. Again I say my home insurance was denied due to this ''repaired'' roof. It has lifting on the sides which I have pictures of myself and through the Insurance. There is no problem 'upstairs' The problem is exactly underneath the roof where the outside and interior wall meet. It has always been the area of leakage the entire wall has water stains at this point. I am not asking for anything extraordinary that I am using any 'guarantees' . Two Uncles was paid to repair a roof, they did not even do that correctly. Two Uncles were paid for a service that they did not correctly provide. Also to the owners of Two Uncles, if you plan on ''stopping by'' whenever you feel like it, no one will be home. The professional and guaranteed way to make sure someone is home is call and make an appointment that you will stop by at X and X time and day, not whenever you feel like stopping by.