The punch list that was referred to in the complaint was emailed to me on April but could not be readI went to their house on April and picked it upHow could I respond to a punch list that was never given to me? You might want to verify the information in complaints before responding to
them. Design Concepts, Inc.*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowMy husband and I walked thru the house with Mr*** last month in regards to the punch list. He looked at all the places we had marked with masking tape stating what needed to be fixed and said he was going to turn it into his insurance company. A couple weeks later my husband tried to talk to him about some of the items that needed to be repaired and he said " I don't want to discuss it" and walked away
Regards,
*** ***
I reviewed the consumer response and find that the response is not completely accurate, but I will not elaborate on thatWith the exception of the T&G interior siding and the gaps in the flooring, all other items have been completed except one task which will be completed this coming weekendWe are also completing other tasks, which were not mentioned on any punch list, in writing or verballyA couple of those are rather large tasks, which could not be completed until the temperature got warm enough (above degrees F)Those tasks are scheduled to begin next week and should be completed within 1/weeks. To date Mr*** has not evidenced any desire to work together to get the problem with the interior siding and flooring focused in the right direction for a resolutionHe appears to be fixated on insisting that our Company did an inferior job and ,therefore, are totally responsible for correcting the situationWhen we initially completed the installation of the interior siding and flooring, he spoke very highly of how good it lookedThat was before the material dried out after installation. The material that was used was a log package with lumber purchased by the *** from *** Log Homes, not provided by our CompanyOur contract with the *** was to construct the house in accordance with *** drawings using material provided by *** in a contract between the *** and *** Log HomesIt is our position that *** Log Homes is responsibleSince he is unwilling to pursue this as a resolution, we are at an impasse. *** ***
As I have stated before, the problem with the flooring was generated by [redacted] Log Homes when they sent material to the site without making sure the material was dry. The moisture content should have been ay 8% or lower. Having been a builder for [redacted] since 2002, we had never had a moisture problem, so I did not deem it necessary to check the moisture content in the flooring. Had we checked it, I don't know what we could have done with no facility on site, or available to us to dry the material out. We did store the material in the house and protect it until the installation. The handbook that was referred to in the complaint, was a handbook sent to the Owner of the job we went to after the [redacted] job. Even though we have been [redacted] builders for some length of time, that was the first handbook we had ever received. After I read the section regarding installing the second level flooring only after "drying the house in", I called the vice president of design at [redacted] to review that requirement with him. At that time, he stated that he did not agree with that change to their manual, but had been unable to get it changed. He agreed with our approach to placing the flooring, because four major load points had to be supported by the flooring for the roof system. He agreed that there was no way to construct the roof system without putting the flooring down. The flooring did get rained on after it was installed, but we have done that many times in the past without any negative effect. It is our contention that if the material had been at a satisfactory moisture level, subsequent rain would not have opened up the cracks, because there not have been any place for the swelling of the material to go. It was installed tight and would not have affected by the rain to the extent that it was because it was placed while it was at a high moisture content. In the new [redacted] construction manual, they also make reference to using the roof sheathing, which is 7/16" thick, as a work surface until the roof system is put in place. If I was to bring that condition to the attention of OSHA, I believe that the project would be shut down. To me and out fellow workers, that is extremely unsafe. We have seen a log dropped on 3/4" subflooring and the result was an instant hole through the subflooring with the log ending up in the basement. I would not allow our workers to work with only roof sheathing as a walking surface. Contrary to what was stated, the material was not ever covered by snow or ice. In the "Observations" section, Several of the statements lead me to believe that whoever made the observations, did not know much about log home construction. There is never a subfloor placed under the 2nd floor flooring, because the under side of the flooring functions as the ceiling for the first floor. Additionally, there is no way the floor can be maintained completely level because of the nature of the log beams which function as joists. They move when any one walks across them and several always are twisted, which changes the height from the joist beside it. I proposed to Mr. [redacted] that our best effort at getting this situation cleared, was to collectively go after Southland, not each other. He had no interest in pursuing that approach, so here we are without a resolution . By the way, I checked the moisture content of the T&G interior siding on the house I am building now, and it was between 5&6 % moisture. This is where the [redacted] flooring should have been. Something negative has happened to [redacted] material. It is my belief that they are cost cutting at the expense of their customers.
The punch list that was referred to in the complaint was emailed to me on April but could not be readI went to their house on April and picked it upHow could I respond to a punch list that was never given to me? You might want to verify the information in complaints before responding to
them. Design Concepts, Inc.*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowMy husband and I walked thru the house with Mr*** last month in regards to the punch list. He looked at all the places we had marked with masking tape stating what needed to be fixed and said he was going to turn it into his insurance company. A couple weeks later my husband tried to talk to him about some of the items that needed to be repaired and he said " I don't want to discuss it" and walked away
Regards,
*** ***
I reviewed the consumer response and find that the response is not completely accurate, but I will not elaborate on thatWith the exception of the T&G interior siding and the gaps in the flooring, all other items have been completed except one task which will be completed this coming weekendWe are also completing other tasks, which were not mentioned on any punch list, in writing or verballyA couple of those are rather large tasks, which could not be completed until the temperature got warm enough (above degrees F)Those tasks are scheduled to begin next week and should be completed within 1/weeks. To date Mr*** has not evidenced any desire to work together to get the problem with the interior siding and flooring focused in the right direction for a resolutionHe appears to be fixated on insisting that our Company did an inferior job and ,therefore, are totally responsible for correcting the situationWhen we initially completed the installation of the interior siding and flooring, he spoke very highly of how good it lookedThat was before the material dried out after installation. The material that was used was a log package with lumber purchased by the *** from *** Log Homes, not provided by our CompanyOur contract with the *** was to construct the house in accordance with *** drawings using material provided by *** in a contract between the *** and *** Log HomesIt is our position that *** Log Homes is responsibleSince he is unwilling to pursue this as a resolution, we are at an impasse. *** ***
As I have stated before, the problem with the flooring was generated by [redacted] Log Homes when they sent material to the site without making sure the material was dry. The moisture content should have been ay 8% or lower. Having been a builder for [redacted] since 2002, we had never had a moisture problem, so I did not deem it necessary to check the moisture content in the flooring. Had we checked it, I don't know what we could have done with no facility on site, or available to us to dry the material out. We did store the material in the house and protect it until the installation. The handbook that was referred to in the complaint, was a handbook sent to the Owner of the job we went to after the [redacted] job. Even though we have been [redacted] builders for some length of time, that was the first handbook we had ever received. After I read the section regarding installing the second level flooring only after "drying the house in", I called the vice president of design at [redacted] to review that requirement with him. At that time, he stated that he did not agree with that change to their manual, but had been unable to get it changed. He agreed with our approach to placing the flooring, because four major load points had to be supported by the flooring for the roof system. He agreed that there was no way to construct the roof system without putting the flooring down. The flooring did get rained on after it was installed, but we have done that many times in the past without any negative effect. It is our contention that if the material had been at a satisfactory moisture level, subsequent rain would not have opened up the cracks, because there not have been any place for the swelling of the material to go. It was installed tight and would not have affected by the rain to the extent that it was because it was placed while it was at a high moisture content. In the new [redacted] construction manual, they also make reference to using the roof sheathing, which is 7/16" thick, as a work surface until the roof system is put in place. If I was to bring that condition to the attention of OSHA, I believe that the project would be shut down. To me and out fellow workers, that is extremely unsafe. We have seen a log dropped on 3/4" subflooring and the result was an instant hole through the subflooring with the log ending up in the basement. I would not allow our workers to work with only roof sheathing as a walking surface. Contrary to what was stated, the material was not ever covered by snow or ice. In the "Observations" section, Several of the statements lead me to believe that whoever made the observations, did not know much about log home construction. There is never a subfloor placed under the 2nd floor flooring, because the under side of the flooring functions as the ceiling for the first floor. Additionally, there is no way the floor can be maintained completely level because of the nature of the log beams which function as joists. They move when any one walks across them and several always are twisted, which changes the height from the joist beside it. I proposed to Mr. [redacted] that our best effort at getting this situation cleared, was to collectively go after Southland, not each other. He had no interest in pursuing that approach, so here we are without a resolution . By the way, I checked the moisture content of the T&G interior siding on the house I am building now, and it was between 5&6 % moisture. This is where the [redacted] flooring should have been. Something negative has happened to [redacted] material. It is my belief that they are cost cutting at the expense of their customers.