Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below In response to Giertsen’s reply received April 24, 2015, on May 3, I submit the following:As Giertsen claims I owe them monies above and beyond my insurance coverage, I would appreciate receiving copies of Giertsen’s written notice(s) to me that Giertsen was getting close to and/or going over the limits of my policy, my written acknowledgement of such notice(s), as well as my written authorization to proceed beyond the limits of my insurance policy as outlined to me in writing by Giertsen Yes, as Giertsen has pointed out in paragraph of their reply, they have filed a construction lien “for work and materials provided above and beyond the insurance policy limits.” An overage that they, Giertsen, neglected to inform me of until after the fact An overage, that in actuality, after I demanded a review of all charges, turned out to be $50,less than the $78,they originally quoted the overage to be I also have volumes of e-mail communications While Giertsen invoices do indicate a date and time at the top, that does not mean I received these documents on that specific date or at that specific time In actuality, I did not receive the bulk of these invoices until they were handed to me at a meeting on September 13, at my insurance adjusters office.I do not agree with Giertsen’s comments in paragraph of their response, i.e., Giertsen has not “more than honored our contractual agreement to restore the home and personal property.” Please see the following paragraphs for explanation Also, I was not able to move into my home “as scheduled” I would like to state that I am not naive I do understand that I have suffered a huge loss, and that there are many, many items destroyed by the fire that I will never have or see again I get it I have accepted it and moved beyond that point.I have, however, not moved beyond the point of items that were deliberately taken and/or destroyed and/or lost due to the direct result of Giertsen employee handling These items were not destroyed as a direct result the fire, and as such, Giertsen should step up to the plate, admit the direct negligence and wrongdoing on the part of their employees handling of my property, and replace these items to the best of their ability (based on item availability as some items are not replaceable), not just offer a measly “settlement” amount, which is not even enough to replace the items deliberately destroyed and/or lost by the direct handling of Giertsen employees Example – West Bend slow cooker (lid, crock, base, cord) was packed and removed from my home by Giertsen employees The lid only was returned No crock, no base, no cord, just the lid As their employee was directly responsible for the loss of my slow cooker (NOT the fire), I feel Giertsen should buy me one to replace it Giertsen management has advised they feel I should report this loss to my insurance company as part of the fire loss To me, this advice provided by Giertsen management is indicative of insurance fraud, as this item was NOT destroyed in the fire – it was misplaced and/or destroyed by the direct handling and removal of a Giertsen employee Why should my insurance company pay for the damage and/or loss deliberately created by a Giertsen employee? I have repeatedly asked this question to Giertsen, only to repeatedly be told to report it to MY insurance company My insurance company did not hire, nor do they employee the Giertsen employee(s) My insurance company does not directly pay Giertsen employee wages Why should my insurance company be responsible for the deliberate actions of Giertsen employees? When I asked Giertsen for the name and contact information for their bonding company, they refused to provide that information and again told me to report my losses to my insurance company My feelings are the same with regard to all of the other items that Giertsen employees were directly responsible for the loss and/or damage of, e.gmy insurance company should not be responsible for the loss of those items Giertsen Company should be responsible, at full replacement value, not depreciated value I would still have these items, items that were not damaged due to the fire, if the Giertsen employees had not damaged, lost or destroyed themTwo lists of damaged and missing items, due to the direct negligence of Giertsen employee handling, totaling $14,had been submitted to Giertsen for their review and payment Giertsen offered me $2,in settlement Not acceptable I want Giertsen to go out to [redacted] , etcand purchase the items that are still available for replacement They lost and/or damaged them, they can replace them I also understand there are items that are irreplaceable, such as my wedding pictures Giertsen has not even offered an apology for the loss of these The comment Giertsen made to me regarding my wedding pictures was “oh well, st happens” [a direct quote from the Giertsen employee handling my case when he was informed of the missing albums] This would be an unacceptable response to anyone in this position, not just me Oh, by the way, for clarification, these wedding pictures were located in my wacloset in the master bedroom, together with my husband’s death book These were NOT directly involved in the fire, and there was no water damage in this closet, only smoke It is assumed that they were packed up together (as this is what I was lead to believe by Giertsen employees) and removed allegedly for ozone cleaning The death book was returned The wedding pictures were not.In response to Giertsen’s reply received April 24, 2015, I further reject the company’s response for the following reasons:In Giertsen’s response, they opine that my “written disclosure has many inaccuracies, has misunderstandings as to construction details, has falsehoods as to our performance, has pointed accusations of dishonesty and strongly infers insurance fraud was committed by Giertsen Labeling Giertsen employees as being personally unscrupulous seems ‘over the top’ at best.” [sic]I would appreciate Giertsen advising what they deem to be “many inaccuracies” Everything I have put down is true.I would appreciate Giertsen advising what they deem to be “misunderstandings as to constructions details” I am not a professional carpenter, nor have I ever inferred that I was As previously stated I received a phone call at work from a Giertsen employee stating that my “north wall was leaning out by two (2) inches and that Giertsen needed immediate approval to fix this or I stand the chance of the north wall of my home collapsing into my back yard” Of course, under this type of pressure, I agreed to Giertsen “fixing” the problem I discovered this was not “fixed”, (as I had been told and lead to believe by Giertsen employees), when I installed some plant shelving next to one of the back patio doors There is a visible gap between the shelving and the wall My first assumption was that the shelving unit needed to be shimmed Image my shock when the level indicated the shelving was perfect, and that the entire wall was leaning outward by a full two (2) inches!!! When I brought this to the attention of Giertsen, I was informed by a manager level Giertsen employee that Giertsen only “reinforced” the wall, that they did not “replace” the wall After this meeting, I then took it upon myself to call the Carpenters Union and described the north wall and the related problems The Union official I spoke to advised that an experienced carpenter would have and should have pulled the wall back in, especially with the roof rafters being newly constructed and replaced This was not done Had this been done, the wall would NOT be leaning out As Giertsen charged my insurance company for “replace exterior wall” and Giertsen admitted that it did NOT replace the wall, what is the misunderstanding? By the way, the wall continues to move, as it is now leaning out two and one-half ( ½”) in areas along the north wall Can Giertsen advise when the movement of this wall will cease? Oh, and it is NOT settling due to being an “older” home (paragraph of Giertsen's reply), as this is allegedly “new” construction And yes, the basement wall remains plumb and level, while the wall that sits upon it that Giertsen built, or only reinforced (they apparently can’t make up their mind) does not.By the way, has anyone at the Revdex.com noticed that in Giertsen’s reply to my initial complaint, specifically paragraph 5, Giertsen has written “ Walls that had been tipping were straightened, .” There was only one “tipping” wall that I was made aware of, that being the north wall Again, did they do what they are claiming (straightened) and what they charged my insurance company for (replace) or not? The wall is still “tipping” What is the truth here?And regarding Giertsen’s paragraph 4, why are the door jambs that Giertsen removed, tore down the original drywall, hung new drywall and then re-hung the door jambs the only jambs that are shifting? The door jambs they did not remove are not shifting, just the ones they did remove and re-hang Would someone please explain this to me?I would appreciate Giertsen advising what they deem to be “falsehoods as to our performance” Prior to Giertsen starting any work on my home, I was reassured numerous times by several Giertsen employees that they [Giertsen] would rebuild everything the way it was prior to the fire, and that I was “in good hands” On numerous occasions over the next months, I met with Giertsen employees and their sub-contractors to go over reconstruction details We have had very lengthy discussions as to what was to be done and notes were taken by both Giertsen employees and their sub-contractors in my presence These discussions and resulting notes were not accurately adhered to Numerous items had to be re-done because Giertsen employees and/or their sub-contractors did not do the work the way it had been originally discussed The laundry chute in the pantry is one example The height of the chute opening and the shelves was discussed When the carpenter re-constructed the pantry, he raised the height of the chute from the height of approximately 15” to three (3) feet, with shelving behind the height of the chute His reasoning being that I was an “older” person and I would not have to bend over to put clothing down the chute It had to be re-done to lower the chute opening to the original height discussed Again, when asked if my insurance company was charged for this “re-do”, I was not given a reply Also, without my knowledge and without any prior discussion whatsoever, the carpenter also installed a slightly raised floor and placed a molding at the end of this floor piece in front of the chute but behind the pantry door, making it impossible to sweep in that area It was not designed this way prior to the fire, and I have no idea what the function of this structure is supposed to be (cover up for the door being cut too short??), but it has ruined the flow of the natural hard wood flooring that was installed and has created a very hard to clean area Also, that particular pantry not only had rough cedar interior walls, it had a bi-fold louvered door on it prior to the fire It was replaced with drywall and a hinged hollow core wood door without a discussion with me as to what I would like.As I mentioned in the initial complaint, the back exterior door was one example For approximately half an hour I discussed with the lead carpenter why the door needed to be hung a certain way so that my disabled son could gain access When I next came to my home, the door had been hung the opposite way of the way discussed When I called him and questioned why the door was not hung the way we discussed, I was told it looked better, even though my disabled son would not have been able to get in or out of the door Giertsen employees ended up removing the door and re-hanging it When I asked Giertsen if my insurance company was charged for this “re-do”, I never received an answerAs another example: Prior to the actual rebuild of my attached garage, I met with the lead carpenter and discussed number of windows, window height, number, location and type of storage closets, number of lights and placement, pull down access ladder, re-mounting of the steel beam for the pulley When doing the rebuild of my attached garage, Giertsen had taken it upon itself to raise the windows in my garage to the point I would have had to climb a ladder to look out of them This change was done without a further discussion with me and without my approval When I asked why the windows were raised, I was told that the carpenter doing the work “thought it would look better if the windows in the garage were the same height as the bedroom windows on the opposite end of the house” My house is on a slightly higher plain than the garage, and it did not look better In fact, even my neighbors said it looked ridiculous This was another by Giertsen employees Again, when I had inquired of Giertsen employees if my insurance company was charged for the re-framing and lowering of the garage windows back to their original height, I did not receive a reply.Yet another example is the previously mentioned patio doors As previously stated, before the fire, they were flush to the sill in the opening During reconstruction, I explained that I needed the doors flush at the sill opening so my disabled son could get in and out When they installed the new doors, there was a 2-1/inch rise that my disabled son would have had to try and raise his foot above to get in and out of the house or trip attempting to do so As it was, non-handicapped adults were tripping over the sill Giertsen advised the doors could not be lowered and I fought with them to install mini ramps so my son could get in and out As a side note to this, I would like it noted that until the mini ramps were installed, there was NO support under the outside sill part The sill was just hanging there and would bend when an adult would step on it Not efficient or proper construction/installation.Also, as to the patio doors, Giertsen can confirm that they have been out repeatedly to re-set or re-align the patio doors during various times of the year, including in January of during the cold snap of -35° when the center hinge shifted and I could not close the door This continues to be a recurring problem In March of this year (2015) I contacted Anderson corporate headquarters regarding this on-going problem Corporate suggested I contact Weather Tech, a factory distributor of Anderson products, and have them come out and look at the doors On March 19, two installers from Weather Tech came to my home and inspected both back patio doors The installers did advise me that “occasionally”, (usually only once or maybe twice a year), the doors would need to be readjusted with the tool included with every door sold due to the hinge movement caused by repeated opening and closing of the door However, they also determined that the reason I will have to readjust my doors most likely every month is due to the fact that the doors were not straight (plumb) installations, thus causing frequent shifting of the hinges every time the doors are opened and closed They proceeded to show me how and where to adjust the doors They asked me where the adjustment tool was, and I replied that I was not given any tool by the contractor They advised me to call the contractor and request return of the tool so I can do the adjustments Have I called Giertsen yet? No Why not? Look at their past actions Would you call? My insurance company paid for the doors, which in essence means they paid for the adjustment tool that was included with the door, yet Giertsen employees took the tool(s) with them Theft? One would think that since Giertsen has been out numerous times to readjust these doors, they would have left at least one of the tools for me to use, yet they have not.Maybe this would be a good time to bring up the skylight issue My skylight in the office area DID NOT LEAK prior to the fire Giertsen employees removed the skylight, replaced roof rafters and roof decking and replaced my old skylight In January of 2013, I noticed that the skylight leaked Repeatedly We fought for months over not only this issue, but other damages as well In late October of Giertsen finally agreed that it was their responsibility to replace the skylight, along with numerous other repairs for damage directly caused by their employees.How about the three (3) times Giertsen has been out to re-hang the siding because it kept "popping" off? The last time taking down more than half way then re-hanging it? Quality workmanship? Or how about the plants that were acknowledged by the lead carpenter of Giertsen as being accidently destroyed by Giertsen employees during the rebuild (burning bush in the front and rhodenderon in the back at the end of the deck) and that I was told would be replaced? Asked lead carpenter several times, was told they would be replaced, and am still waiting.I would appreciate Giertsen describing exactly what they deem to be “pointed accusations of dishonesty” and “strongly infers insurance fraud was committed by Giertsen”Dishonesty and fraud Well, let’s further discuss some business practices of Giertsen, besides the ones discussed above.Giertsen has looked me in the face and told me that they had no idea as to the limits of my insurance coverage, that they are not “privy” to that information If Giertsen is speaking the truth, then how does Giertsen know how to budget a project? Is the sky the limit in their mind?Since this has happened, I have talked to a few contractors regarding rebuild practices, such as with my house fire I have been told by these contractors that insurance companies inform contractors up front as to the type/scope of coverage and limits of coverage prior to the start of any work It is called full disclosure I was also informed that a contractor is obligated by law to advise the property owner in writing when they are getting close to the limit, and that the contractor is to get written authorization acknowledging the over-limit notice and written authorization to proceed beyond the limit(s) Giertsen DID NOT inform me that I was close to my limit, nor did they inform me that I was going over my limit, nor did they get any type of written acknowledgement and authorization from me to proceed beyond my limit amount I first learned that I was “beyond” my insurance coverage limit in April of when my insurance adjuster called with the “good news/bad news” scenario, e.g“Good news – your home is finished and I have your keys; Bad news, you owe Giertsen $78,000+ out of your pocket.”I spoke to another [redacted] agent with a “hypothetical question” regarding my type of claim This agent did not initially know I was a current [redacted] customer I was told by this agent that it is [redacted] ***’s practice to inform the chosen contractor as to the type of coverage as well as the limits of coverage prior to any work being started so that there is a clear knowledge and understanding as to limitations Again, full disclosure.Yet Giertsen continues to insist to me that they had no knowledge as to the limits of my policy, and that I owe them money Initially the amount Giertsen claimed I owed them was over $78, When I demanded copies of every invoice, credit slip, timesheet, sub-contractor invoices, etcfor my review, Giertsen informed me that they would perform the review Every month I sent at least one, if not several e-mails to both Giertsen and my insurance adjuster for a status update as to Giertsen’s review Five (5) months later, Giertsen advised they had completed their “review” At a meeting held at my insurance adjuster’s office, I was handed a stack of invoices from Giertsen.It should be noted here that until this meeting in September of 2013, the last estimate I approved was in the amount of $115,(presented to me by Craig, clipped to a board and signed at my house after he told me about the leaning north wall) and the last estimated invoice I had received from Giertsen was in the amount of $140, This is the estimate I assumed that Giertsen was working from I had not received copies of the other ten (10) invoices until handed to me at this meeting.During this meeting, Giertsen claimed that upon their review of all these invoices, they “discovered” over $50, of “accounting errors” and had adjusted the invoices accordingly, coming up with a “total due Giertsen in the amount of $28,465.30” A far cry from the initial +$78,they claimed I owed them.Just imagine, had I not insisted upon a review of all invoices, credit slips, timesheets, etcGiertsen could have theoretically obtained $50,worth of fraudulent charges.I have repeatedly asked both Giertsen and my insurance company whose responsibility it was to notify me that this rebuild was getting close to and/or going over my limit To this day, no one has answered that question.Eric S [redacted] , senior level management of Giertsen Company, a friend of mine and myself met at a public location to discuss several outstanding issues, one of the issues being that the structure and contents are to be treated as two separate matters During that meeting, MrS [redacted] verbally agreed to the separation of these two items In a summary e-mail sent to me on October 19, by MrS [redacted] , Giertsen had indicated that if I had the outstanding structural amount of $17,released to them, “The structural policy overage consisting of labor, unpaid B2B invoices and materials would be nullified for an amount of $28,with lien waivers being given to yourself.”Once the structural repairs open at that time were completed, I contacted [redacted] regarding release of the structural funds balance in the amount of $17, On December 24, at approximately 9:a.m., this check was endorsed by me and handed to Eric S [redacted] in person I asked MrS [redacted] for the lien release MrS [redacted] advised me that with the hectic time of the holiday season, he forgot to bring the release, but would mail it to me next week When I did not receive the lien release in the mail, I called MrS [redacted] , who conveniently “could not recall that conversation” I had yet again blindly trusted Giertsen And yet again, another look-me-right-in-the-face-and-lie- from a Giertsen employee Had I known he was going to pull this, I would not have handed over the check to MrS [redacted] at that time; I would have held onto it until he handed me the lien release Although, in hind sight I guess one could reasonably say I should have known better after all the other things that had gone on.On January 7, 2015, despite their written assurance they would provide me a lien release if I had my insurance company release the $17,structural payment (which I had done), Giertsen Company proceeded to file a Prime Contractor Claim for Lien on my property Yet again, an example of Giertsen Company saying one thing and doing the complete opposite.Within the last days I, and other people visiting my home, have noticed that the floor that Giertsen had built in the family room is starting to shift and buckle Really? After two years? Although, the floor is attached to the north wall that is shifting, so I guess one could construe that the floor is also shifting and that would cause the buckling of the floor But, again, I am not a carpenter, so this is only a common sense deduction on my part Just like the wood wall in the family room (also built by Giertsen employees) starting to come loose at the top Maybe could be from the wall shifting? Visitors have informed me that they have noticed the back (north) wall appears to have shifting 2x4’s pushing out the siding, as well as the family room window appears to be coming out in the upper right hand corner These were friends of my son; neither my son nor I ever mentioned anything to these visitors prior to their comments on what they saw I find it amazing that someone without prior knowledge can notice things like this.I am not the only client of Giertsen that Giertsen has pulled these types of actions on I have been in contact with another client of theirs who is also missing items removed and never returned In fact, the very first box that I opened during my unpack was one of her boxes!! One of the major differences between my fire pack out and hers is that I had to work and was not able to be there at most of the pack out This client of Giertsen did not work and actually assisted in the pack out of her items She has advised me that items she specifically indicated to Giertsen as items that were to be discarded were actually retained, “cleaned” and returned to her, while several items that she marked as to be cleaned and returned never were She also informed me that Giertsen had called her and asked her specific permission to use one of her Japanese antique sets as a display during the Giertsen open house She granted permission and even attended the open house, seeing her antique items on display The particular set displayed by Giertsen was never returned to her, despite her repeated phone calls to Giertsen It too, has been “misplaced” by Giertsen employees There is so much more to this, but I have taken up quite a bit of your time already I truly hope you will let the public know they need to be cautious and on top of any dealings with Giertsen Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below In response to Giertsen’s reply received April 24, 2015, on May 3, I submit the following:As Giertsen claims I owe them monies above and beyond my insurance coverage, I would appreciate receiving copies of Giertsen’s written notice(s) to me that Giertsen was getting close to and/or going over the limits of my policy, my written acknowledgement of such notice(s), as well as my written authorization to proceed beyond the limits of my insurance policy as outlined to me in writing by Giertsen Yes, as Giertsen has pointed out in paragraph of their reply, they have filed a construction lien “for work and materials provided above and beyond the insurance policy limits.” An overage that they, Giertsen, neglected to inform me of until after the fact An overage, that in actuality, after I demanded a review of all charges, turned out to be $50,less than the $78,they originally quoted the overage to be I also have volumes of e-mail communications While Giertsen invoices do indicate a date and time at the top, that does not mean I received these documents on that specific date or at that specific time In actuality, I did not receive the bulk of these invoices until they were handed to me at a meeting on September 13, at my insurance adjusters office.I do not agree with Giertsen’s comments in paragraph of their response, i.e., Giertsen has not “more than honored our contractual agreement to restore the home and personal property.” Please see the following paragraphs for explanation Also, I was not able to move into my home “as scheduled” I would like to state that I am not naive I do understand that I have suffered a huge loss, and that there are many, many items destroyed by the fire that I will never have or see again I get it I have accepted it and moved beyond that point.I have, however, not moved beyond the point of items that were deliberately taken and/or destroyed and/or lost due to the direct result of Giertsen employee handling These items were not destroyed as a direct result the fire, and as such, Giertsen should step up to the plate, admit the direct negligence and wrongdoing on the part of their employees handling of my property, and replace these items to the best of their ability (based on item availability as some items are not replaceable), not just offer a measly “settlement” amount, which is not even enough to replace the items deliberately destroyed and/or lost by the direct handling of Giertsen employees Example – West Bend slow cooker (lid, crock, base, cord) was packed and removed from my home by Giertsen employees The lid only was returned No crock, no base, no cord, just the lid As their employee was directly responsible for the loss of my slow cooker (NOT the fire), I feel Giertsen should buy me one to replace it Giertsen management has advised they feel I should report this loss to my insurance company as part of the fire loss To me, this advice provided by Giertsen management is indicative of insurance fraud, as this item was NOT destroyed in the fire – it was misplaced and/or destroyed by the direct handling and removal of a Giertsen employee Why should my insurance company pay for the damage and/or loss deliberately created by a Giertsen employee? I have repeatedly asked this question to Giertsen, only to repeatedly be told to report it to MY insurance company My insurance company did not hire, nor do they employee the Giertsen employee(s) My insurance company does not directly pay Giertsen employee wages Why should my insurance company be responsible for the deliberate actions of Giertsen employees? When I asked Giertsen for the name and contact information for their bonding company, they refused to provide that information and again told me to report my losses to my insurance company My feelings are the same with regard to all of the other items that Giertsen employees were directly responsible for the loss and/or damage of, e.gmy insurance company should not be responsible for the loss of those items Giertsen Company should be responsible, at full replacement value, not depreciated value I would still have these items, items that were not damaged due to the fire, if the Giertsen employees had not damaged, lost or destroyed themTwo lists of damaged and missing items, due to the direct negligence of Giertsen employee handling, totaling $14,had been submitted to Giertsen for their review and payment Giertsen offered me $2,in settlement Not acceptable I want Giertsen to go out to [redacted] , etcand purchase the items that are still available for replacement They lost and/or damaged them, they can replace them I also understand there are items that are irreplaceable, such as my wedding pictures Giertsen has not even offered an apology for the loss of these The comment Giertsen made to me regarding my wedding pictures was “oh well, s
t happens” [a direct quote from the Giertsen employee handling my case when he was informed of the missing albums] This would be an unacceptable response to anyone in this position, not just me Oh, by the way, for clarification, these wedding pictures were located in my wacloset in the master bedroom, together with my husband’s death book These were NOT directly involved in the fire, and there was no water damage in this closet, only smoke It is assumed that they were packed up together (as this is what I was lead to believe by Giertsen employees) and removed allegedly for ozone cleaning The death book was returned The wedding pictures were not.In response to Giertsen’s reply received April 24, 2015, I further reject the company’s response for the following reasons:In Giertsen’s response, they opine that my “written disclosure has many inaccuracies, has misunderstandings as to construction details, has falsehoods as to our performance, has pointed accusations of dishonesty and strongly infers insurance fraud was committed by Giertsen Labeling Giertsen employees as being personally unscrupulous seems ‘over the top’ at best.” [sic]I would appreciate Giertsen advising what they deem to be “many inaccuracies” Everything I have put down is true.I would appreciate Giertsen advising what they deem to be “misunderstandings as to constructions details” I am not a professional carpenter, nor have I ever inferred that I was As previously stated I received a phone call at work from a Giertsen employee stating that my “north wall was leaning out by two (2) inches and that Giertsen needed immediate approval to fix this or I stand the chance of the north wall of my home collapsing into my back yard” Of course, under this type of pressure, I agreed to Giertsen “fixing” the problem I discovered this was not “fixed”, (as I had been told and lead to believe by Giertsen employees), when I installed some plant shelving next to one of the back patio doors There is a visible gap between the shelving and the wall My first assumption was that the shelving unit needed to be shimmed Image my shock when the level indicated the shelving was perfect, and that the entire wall was leaning outward by a full two (2) inches!!! When I brought this to the attention of Giertsen, I was informed by a manager level Giertsen employee that Giertsen only “reinforced” the wall, that they did not “replace” the wall After this meeting, I then took it upon myself to call the Carpenters Union and described the north wall and the related problems The Union official I spoke to advised that an experienced carpenter would have and should have pulled the wall back in, especially with the roof rafters being newly constructed and replaced This was not done Had this been done, the wall would NOT be leaning out As Giertsen charged my insurance company for “replace exterior wall” and Giertsen admitted that it did NOT replace the wall, what is the misunderstanding? By the way, the wall continues to move, as it is now leaning out two and one-half ( ½”) in areas along the north wall Can Giertsen advise when the movement of this wall will cease? Oh, and it is NOT settling due to being an “older” home (paragraph of Giertsen's reply), as this is allegedly “new” construction And yes, the basement wall remains plumb and level, while the wall that sits upon it that Giertsen built, or only reinforced (they apparently can’t make up their mind) does not.By the way, has anyone at the Revdex.com noticed that in Giertsen’s reply to my initial complaint, specifically paragraph 5, Giertsen has written “ Walls that had been tipping were straightened, .” There was only one “tipping” wall that I was made aware of, that being the north wall Again, did they do what they are claiming (straightened) and what they charged my insurance company for (replace) or not? The wall is still “tipping” What is the truth here?And regarding Giertsen’s paragraph 4, why are the door jambs that Giertsen removed, tore down the original drywall, hung new drywall and then re-hung the door jambs the only jambs that are shifting? The door jambs they did not remove are not shifting, just the ones they did remove and re-hang Would someone please explain this to me?I would appreciate Giertsen advising what they deem to be “falsehoods as to our performance” Prior to Giertsen starting any work on my home, I was reassured numerous times by several Giertsen employees that they [Giertsen] would rebuild everything the way it was prior to the fire, and that I was “in good hands” On numerous occasions over the next months, I met with Giertsen employees and their sub-contractors to go over reconstruction details We have had very lengthy discussions as to what was to be done and notes were taken by both Giertsen employees and their sub-contractors in my presence These discussions and resulting notes were not accurately adhered to Numerous items had to be re-done because Giertsen employees and/or their sub-contractors did not do the work the way it had been originally discussed The laundry chute in the pantry is one example The height of the chute opening and the shelves was discussed When the carpenter re-constructed the pantry, he raised the height of the chute from the height of approximately 15” to three (3) feet, with shelving behind the height of the chute His reasoning being that I was an “older” person and I would not have to bend over to put clothing down the chute It had to be re-done to lower the chute opening to the original height discussed Again, when asked if my insurance company was charged for this “re-do”, I was not given a reply Also, without my knowledge and without any prior discussion whatsoever, the carpenter also installed a slightly raised floor and placed a molding at the end of this floor piece in front of the chute but behind the pantry door, making it impossible to sweep in that area It was not designed this way prior to the fire, and I have no idea what the function of this structure is supposed to be (cover up for the door being cut too short??), but it has ruined the flow of the natural hard wood flooring that was installed and has created a very hard to clean area Also, that particular pantry not only had rough cedar interior walls, it had a bi-fold louvered door on it prior to the fire It was replaced with drywall and a hinged hollow core wood door without a discussion with me as to what I would like.As I mentioned in the initial complaint, the back exterior door was one example For approximately half an hour I discussed with the lead carpenter why the door needed to be hung a certain way so that my disabled son could gain access When I next came to my home, the door had been hung the opposite way of the way discussed When I called him and questioned why the door was not hung the way we discussed, I was told it looked better, even though my disabled son would not have been able to get in or out of the door Giertsen employees ended up removing the door and re-hanging it When I asked Giertsen if my insurance company was charged for this “re-do”, I never received an answerAs another example: Prior to the actual rebuild of my attached garage, I met with the lead carpenter and discussed number of windows, window height, number, location and type of storage closets, number of lights and placement, pull down access ladder, re-mounting of the steel beam for the pulley When doing the rebuild of my attached garage, Giertsen had taken it upon itself to raise the windows in my garage to the point I would have had to climb a ladder to look out of them This change was done without a further discussion with me and without my approval When I asked why the windows were raised, I was told that the carpenter doing the work “thought it would look better if the windows in the garage were the same height as the bedroom windows on the opposite end of the house” My house is on a slightly higher plain than the garage, and it did not look better In fact, even my neighbors said it looked ridiculous This was another by Giertsen employees Again, when I had inquired of Giertsen employees if my insurance company was charged for the re-framing and lowering of the garage windows back to their original height, I did not receive a reply.Yet another example is the previously mentioned patio doors As previously stated, before the fire, they were flush to the sill in the opening During reconstruction, I explained that I needed the doors flush at the sill opening so my disabled son could get in and out When they installed the new doors, there was a 2-1/inch rise that my disabled son would have had to try and raise his foot above to get in and out of the house or trip attempting to do so As it was, non-handicapped adults were tripping over the sill Giertsen advised the doors could not be lowered and I fought with them to install mini ramps so my son could get in and out As a side note to this, I would like it noted that until the mini ramps were installed, there was NO support under the outside sill part The sill was just hanging there and would bend when an adult would step on it Not efficient or proper construction/installation.Also, as to the patio doors, Giertsen can confirm that they have been out repeatedly to re-set or re-align the patio doors during various times of the year, including in January of during the cold snap of -35° when the center hinge shifted and I could not close the door This continues to be a recurring problem In March of this year (2015) I contacted Anderson corporate headquarters regarding this on-going problem Corporate suggested I contact Weather Tech, a factory distributor of Anderson products, and have them come out and look at the doors On March 19, two installers from Weather Tech came to my home and inspected both back patio doors The installers did advise me that “occasionally”, (usually only once or maybe twice a year), the doors would need to be readjusted with the tool included with every door sold due to the hinge movement caused by repeated opening and closing of the door However, they also determined that the reason I will have to readjust my doors most likely every month is due to the fact that the doors were not straight (plumb) installations, thus causing frequent shifting of the hinges every time the doors are opened and closed They proceeded to show me how and where to adjust the doors They asked me where the adjustment tool was, and I replied that I was not given any tool by the contractor They advised me to call the contractor and request return of the tool so I can do the adjustments Have I called Giertsen yet? No Why not? Look at their past actions Would you call? My insurance company paid for the doors, which in essence means they paid for the adjustment tool that was included with the door, yet Giertsen employees took the tool(s) with them Theft? One would think that since Giertsen has been out numerous times to readjust these doors, they would have left at least one of the tools for me to use, yet they have not.Maybe this would be a good time to bring up the skylight issue My skylight in the office area DID NOT LEAK prior to the fire Giertsen employees removed the skylight, replaced roof rafters and roof decking and replaced my old skylight In January of 2013, I noticed that the skylight leaked Repeatedly We fought for months over not only this issue, but other damages as well In late October of Giertsen finally agreed that it was their responsibility to replace the skylight, along with numerous other repairs for damage directly caused by their employees.How about the three (3) times Giertsen has been out to re-hang the siding because it kept "popping" off? The last time taking down more than half way then re-hanging it? Quality workmanship? Or how about the plants that were acknowledged by the lead carpenter of Giertsen as being accidently destroyed by Giertsen employees during the rebuild (burning bush in the front and rhodenderon in the back at the end of the deck) and that I was told would be replaced? Asked lead carpenter several times, was told they would be replaced, and am still waiting.I would appreciate Giertsen describing exactly what they deem to be “pointed accusations of dishonesty” and “strongly infers insurance fraud was committed by Giertsen”Dishonesty and fraud Well, let’s further discuss some business practices of Giertsen, besides the ones discussed above.Giertsen has looked me in the face and told me that they had no idea as to the limits of my insurance coverage, that they are not “privy” to that information If Giertsen is speaking the truth, then how does Giertsen know how to budget a project? Is the sky the limit in their mind?Since this has happened, I have talked to a few contractors regarding rebuild practices, such as with my house fire I have been told by these contractors that insurance companies inform contractors up front as to the type/scope of coverage and limits of coverage prior to the start of any work It is called full disclosure I was also informed that a contractor is obligated by law to advise the property owner in writing when they are getting close to the limit, and that the contractor is to get written authorization acknowledging the over-limit notice and written authorization to proceed beyond the limit(s) Giertsen DID NOT inform me that I was close to my limit, nor did they inform me that I was going over my limit, nor did they get any type of written acknowledgement and authorization from me to proceed beyond my limit amount I first learned that I was “beyond” my insurance coverage limit in April of when my insurance adjuster called with the “good news/bad news” scenario, e.g“Good news – your home is finished and I have your keys; Bad news, you owe Giertsen $78,000+ out of your pocket.”I spoke to another [redacted] agent with a “hypothetical question” regarding my type of claim This agent did not initially know I was a current [redacted] customer I was told by this agent that it is [redacted] ***’s practice to inform the chosen contractor as to the type of coverage as well as the limits of coverage prior to any work being started so that there is a clear knowledge and understanding as to limitations Again, full disclosure.Yet Giertsen continues to insist to me that they had no knowledge as to the limits of my policy, and that I owe them money Initially the amount Giertsen claimed I owed them was over $78, When I demanded copies of every invoice, credit slip, timesheet, sub-contractor invoices, etcfor my review, Giertsen informed me that they would perform the review Every month I sent at least one, if not several e-mails to both Giertsen and my insurance adjuster for a status update as to Giertsen’s review Five (5) months later, Giertsen advised they had completed their “review” At a meeting held at my insurance adjuster’s office, I was handed a stack of invoices from Giertsen.It should be noted here that until this meeting in September of 2013, the last estimate I approved was in the amount of $115,(presented to me by Craig, clipped to a board and signed at my house after he told me about the leaning north wall) and the last estimated invoice I had received from Giertsen was in the amount of $140, This is the estimate I assumed that Giertsen was working from I had not received copies of the other ten (10) invoices until handed to me at this meeting.During this meeting, Giertsen claimed that upon their review of all these invoices, they “discovered” over $50, of “accounting errors” and had adjusted the invoices accordingly, coming up with a “total due Giertsen in the amount of $28,465.30” A far cry from the initial +$78,they claimed I owed them.Just imagine, had I not insisted upon a review of all invoices, credit slips, timesheets, etcGiertsen could have theoretically obtained $50,worth of fraudulent charges.I have repeatedly asked both Giertsen and my insurance company whose responsibility it was to notify me that this rebuild was getting close to and/or going over my limit To this day, no one has answered that question.Eric S [redacted] , senior level management of Giertsen Company, a friend of mine and myself met at a public location to discuss several outstanding issues, one of the issues being that the structure and contents are to be treated as two separate matters During that meeting, MrS [redacted] verbally agreed to the separation of these two items In a summary e-mail sent to me on October 19, by MrS [redacted] , Giertsen had indicated that if I had the outstanding structural amount of $17,released to them, “The structural policy overage consisting of labor, unpaid B2B invoices and materials would be nullified for an amount of $28,with lien waivers being given to yourself.”Once the structural repairs open at that time were completed, I contacted [redacted] regarding release of the structural funds balance in the amount of $17, On December 24, at approximately 9:a.m., this check was endorsed by me and handed to Eric S [redacted] in person I asked MrS [redacted] for the lien release MrS [redacted] advised me that with the hectic time of the holiday season, he forgot to bring the release, but would mail it to me next week When I did not receive the lien release in the mail, I called MrS [redacted] , who conveniently “could not recall that conversation” I had yet again blindly trusted Giertsen And yet again, another look-me-right-in-the-face-and-lie- from a Giertsen employee Had I known he was going to pull this, I would not have handed over the check to MrS [redacted] at that time; I would have held onto it until he handed me the lien release Although, in hind sight I guess one could reasonably say I should have known better after all the other things that had gone on.On January 7, 2015, despite their written assurance they would provide me a lien release if I had my insurance company release the $17,structural payment (which I had done), Giertsen Company proceeded to file a Prime Contractor Claim for Lien on my property Yet again, an example of Giertsen Company saying one thing and doing the complete opposite.Within the last days I, and other people visiting my home, have noticed that the floor that Giertsen had built in the family room is starting to shift and buckle Really? After two years? Although, the floor is attached to the north wall that is shifting, so I guess one could construe that the floor is also shifting and that would cause the buckling of the floor But, again, I am not a carpenter, so this is only a common sense deduction on my part Just like the wood wall in the family room (also built by Giertsen employees) starting to come loose at the top Maybe could be from the wall shifting? Visitors have informed me that they have noticed the back (north) wall appears to have shifting 2x4’s pushing out the siding, as well as the family room window appears to be coming out in the upper right hand corner These were friends of my son; neither my son nor I ever mentioned anything to these visitors prior to their comments on what they saw I find it amazing that someone without prior knowledge can notice things like this.I am not the only client of Giertsen that Giertsen has pulled these types of actions on I have been in contact with another client of theirs who is also missing items removed and never returned In fact, the very first box that I opened during my unpack was one of her boxes!! One of the major differences between my fire pack out and hers is that I had to work and was not able to be there at most of the pack out This client of Giertsen did not work and actually assisted in the pack out of her items She has advised me that items she specifically indicated to Giertsen as items that were to be discarded were actually retained, “cleaned” and returned to her, while several items that she marked as to be cleaned and returned never were She also informed me that Giertsen had called her and asked her specific permission to use one of her Japanese antique sets as a display during the Giertsen open house She granted permission and even attended the open house, seeing her antique items on display The particular set displayed by Giertsen was never returned to her, despite her repeated phone calls to Giertsen It too, has been “misplaced” by Giertsen employees There is so much more to this, but I have taken up quite a bit of your time already I truly hope you will let the public know they need to be cautious and on top of any dealings with Giertsen Regards, [redacted] ***