Sign in

Irwin Construction

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Irwin Construction? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Construction Services, General Contractor Irwin Construction

Irwin Construction Reviews (4)

Brad Irwin Construction response Re: Customer repair complaint *** *** *** *** *** To *** *** On December 14, 2017, the general contractor/owner of Irwin Construction and his representative inspected the structure of a metal building; one window at a timeTo demonstrate, case
in point, Irwin poured water onto the window in question, attempting to detect teaks on top and onto the sides of the windowLeaks were detected, specifically to the middle window on the south sideHowever, water is not coming from the areas of installation, but in fact, it is coming through the window frame itselfThe owner of Erwin Construction personally took photos at the job (see photos Attachment 3)The homeowner purchased the windows from *** *** ***, an entity that accepts donated items/materials, perhaps faulty or defectiveThe representative of Irwin Construction physically met with the manager of *** *** *** to investigate its terms of sate of goodsThe manager in turn, informed my representative that all inventory is donated and could be defective; items are sold as is with no guarantees (see Attachment 1)Caulk has been applied to all window frames along the top, bottom and sidesIn addition, metal adhesive has been applied at the bottom of the windowThe foam insulation has been removed; a leak is detected, but not from the areas of installationSeemingly, there appears to be a manufacture defect in the window itself in which caused the leakBeing so, the contractor performed a demonstration to attest to the water poured into the track of the window; the leaks came from under the window track, as was expectedThe contractor has explicitly clarified this issue with the homeownerThis job has been performed as the client wantedEven still, she rejects his claim that the leaks are caused by the actual windows and not by poor installationThe general contractor directly contacted the owner of *** *** the sub-contractor who erected the metal building, to explain the matter*** *** too, clarified that the windows have been installed correctly using the same method in which has been used consistently for over twenty yearsThe general contractor has suggested she go back to where she purchased the windows and doors to exchange them for new ones*** *** *** refused to accept her return of the used merchandise, as per their policy, all sales are finalShe states it had been communicated to her that the windows and doors were new when she purchased and took possession of themNow, to specifically address and counter the anecdotal record according to the "Customer's Statement of the Problem", the rest of this letter will clarify the facts about this case by the general contractor of Irwin ConstructionFrom the customer's perspective, this job is in need of imperative corrections, seemingly having the skills of that of an experienced general contractorThis job was bid out to the owner on July 19, to install a two-story Barndominium kit (within phases; this estimate only includes outer meta! frame for a total of $) on the cement slab already in place; this bid is for Labor Only with a one-year guarantee (see Attachment 1)The customer provided the windows and doors at her own expense, and the bid clearly denotes that "this does not include defects in material purchased by the home owner" (see Attachment 1)She wants the metal welded as opposed to using screws, to which is the intention of the Florida kit companfs instructionsIrwin Construction bid this job to the customer's specifications and limitations there of this projectIt is clear that this job should have been engineered; the barn was not engineered to have windowsThe customer presented the blueprints to the general contractor after the construction company had begun the jobIn fact, ** *** *** the first contracting company who started the job and performed the concrete work, has in fact, been fired prior to the completionThere appears to be somewhat of a patterned conduct; the general contractor learned the customer has pursued a lawsuit against JB Services Unlimited*** *** Construction merely attempted to assist after the fact1B Services Unlimited has since brought the metal kit back to the job, but there is pertinent materiats missing, such as tin and screwsThe customer pointed out that 1B Services Unlimited incorrectly performed the concrete work per the proficiency knowledge of which she projectsThe general contractor and owner of *** *** Construction would like this case to have an end-result that is satisfactory to both partiesHowever, should this case not result with an amicable closure, the general contractor would like the next step to provide transparent evidence in front of a judge and juryTo testify, *** *** Construction will subpoena his representatives, employees on-the-job, employees off-the-job, as well as but not limited to various informative witnessesRespectfully, *** *** Brad Irwin Construction Attachment and *** *** Construction Response to Revdex.com

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: All of the windows and doors are installed incorrectly. Not just the one in question.   [redacted] from Irwin construction sent a video of correct installation of metal building windows.  The link to this is [redacted] .The windows were installed before the tin walls, therefore the metal on the sides of the windows are not attached to anything except 5 of the most incompetent caulking jobs I have ever seen.   The building should have been framed and then tin installed and then the framing for the windows done with all the outer edges of the windows on the flats of the tin.   Then the windows placed on the outside of the tin and metal screw through the window then tin and then metal frame.  the tin on the sides of the windows is bowing and is not attached anything. The pictures of the five gallon water test in no way show water coming in from the window itself. I was on site during this test. I requested [redacted] poor the water on the inside of the window.  The picture of the water in frame of Irwin's attachment 3 is a water channel. My photo's will show how the channel works and the drains that are engineered into this type of window.  The brand "Builder's windows" are top quality.  I never tried to take the windows back to [redacted] there is nothing wrong with the windows.  They were only about five dollars less than they are at the retail stores. The windows and doors were all new with all tags still on them.   The manager said they COULD BE DEFETIVE??? MEANING ALSO NOT DEFECTIVE.  [redacted] and lawyer/friend my redirect this as many times as they please.  They may also threaten me with court.  The letter sent in response is not worth the paper wrote on. They may also inadvertently call me a stupid woman as much as they please, there opinion of me is not in question.  The only pattern here is that I have chosen two contractors that have poor workmanship qualities.   Also there is no "Attachment 1" from the Irwin response. Also there was another expense for the metal frame of the windows. That cost was an additional 750.00 dollars, I have a check receipt for that also. The building was engineered to be bolted.  the contractor usually welded.  I did request that both be done.  It was no problem at the time and was added into the cost.  I requested this for more strength. Due to technical difficulties, I will be sending the needed pictures and proof of my complaint by mail. I will also send in a copy of the contract.  It is one page and has no attachment 1 that Irwin was unable to provide. Thank you for you time and commitment to the facts and details pertaining only to my complaint. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:first [redacted] construction was paid in full. I will not be bullied into dropping this complaint.  So the choice is up to you Mr. [redacted].  You may either have a bad hit on the Revdex.com.  Or you may pay the cost of reinstalling these windows and doors properly.  If this is not resolved all of your correspondence  will be shown on the Revdex.com web site.  It will show how you have walked around attacking my character and my professionalism, as I am also a business owner and a capable person. As a norm usually it is women who look at the Revdex.com, these women will see how you have treated me also as a client. I have one bid as of now at  3,500.00 to 4,000.00 dollars. The second floor will have to have a rented lift also. Mr. [redacted] repeatedly told me he was a good christian and I could trust him.  It is your responsibility to make sure the jobs you are hired for are done correctly even when contracted out.  I never claimed to be a contractor.   I hired [redacted] to be my contractor.  You can put windows and doors in any building. I did not tell [redacted] crew how to put the windows in.  I only told them where to put them in. your comments about the plans are not all true. [redacted] crew did not use them anyways.  [redacted] told me several time he would never hire [redacted] again.  Mr [redacted] would call me to see If [redacted] crew even showed up for work on several occasions. If windows and doors could not be put in this building, [redacted] and [redacted] should never have taken this job. . attachment 1 , 2  putting windows in first instead of last. These next pictures are of [redacted]'s professional caulking jobs.  Yes there were five trips. Three different types caulk on three  different occasions , One trip to caulk under lip of bottom of tin lip.  The fifth trip was going to caulk with metal caulking substance but then did the water test.  They could still not determine where the water was coming from.  I later asked [redacted] if he was going to take them out and reinstall them and he said "NO"  Attachment 3, 4,   5, 6,  Professional caulking The windows are not damaged.  [redacted] Never told you they were damaged.  They said they have received damaged goods.  This means nothing. Windows were new with tags on them as were the doors also.  In the next pictures will show how the windows are engineered and work. I asked Drew Tate  to put colored water in the window sills to prove that water was going outside of the windows, they would not do this.  I then asked them to leave. Attachment  7, 8   . Windows working they way they were engineered to.The next photos will show how the tin on the sides of windows are not under the actual window frame nor are they screwed in.  the only thing holding the tin to the side of the windows and doors is there professional caulking, that is cracked and open for water to enter in. Also one picture of window installed on a peak of the tin with nothing for the tin to be screwed into from under the peak, just more bad caulking.  One more of after five times to caulk manage to not caulk at all , and one with just lose tin.Attachments 9, 10,   I think this will only take 10 attachments.  Good for you.  Regards,
[redacted]

This letter is a brief retort to counter the complainant's reply to Irwin Construction's first response. To address the complainant's concerns once again, there is no need to reiterate and debate her rhetoric. Therefore, a bulleted form of a response is all that is deemed necessary to acknowledge and address the complainant's concerns:        First, and foremost, the complainant is not a general contractor, nor does she have the expertise to make claims with no merit; it is just more of her nonsense rhetoric.        The windows and doors were installed per her instruction and to her specifications. The caulking job was performed with the utmost professional quality; the complainant would know this had she been truthful in her knowledge and how many caulking jobs she has observed.        Bottom line, this structure was never meant to have windows. The sequence of steps were done in accordance to what actually became a detrimental makeshift concocted by the complainant.                 The five-gatlon water test was poured and concisely demonstrated how water channels. Her statement regarding this experiment portrays an individual who has no understanding of this.        The [redacted] confirmed they receive multiple items that are irregular and possibly defective, which therefore concludes that the five dollars she saved and gambled serves this probability.     Once again, Irwin Construction bid this Job to the customer's specifications and limitations. The complainant should have had the aptitude to have this job engineered. The barn was not engineered, nor did it include a manufacturer warranty for windows to be installed.        Furthermore, the complainant sequentially confused the process by submitting blueprints to the general contractor after the job had begun.        Lastly, this complainant is blatantly wasting the time of this very busy general contractor. Her comments hold no merit, and are biased in nature of how she perceives and claims to have knowledge, of which she obviously does not. Nor does she have the know-how or skills of which she claims.        This person has no business making random statements and claiming empirical evidence of which she is plagiarizing herself with the intent to falsely cause harm to Brad trwin Construction's reputation.        Her assumptions of legal representation is up for interpretation, which she clearly has her own agenda.        Irwin Construction has in no way "threatened" this individual or publicly opinionated her to be a "stupid woman" as she claims. Her statements are disturbing, and portray a person with an inferiority complex. Irwin Construction has in no way been condescending to the complainant, but her stability and credibility continues to be questionable.        Irwin Construction takes her verbiage very seriously. They would rather not communicate with her, nor are they interested in viewing her faux paperwork, in fact, it is jumbled, contradictive, and difficult to decipher to say the very least. Please refer any correspondence to his attorney.        [redacted] Construction has completed hundreds of projects—including dozens of homes in 2017-- with a satisfied customer rating of 95% or higher. It's even been noted he is over qualified in his professional capabilities as well as a respected businessperson in his community. [redacted] has gone over, above and beyond to satisfy the complainant. He will not accept any more disputing of this case in this manner. His attorney will have the complainant subpoenaed to court and allow a judge and jury to view the transparent evidence in a court of law. [redacted] Construction is confident that the truth will prevail. He expects to be paid in full for work completed, attorney fees, filing fees, etc. Respectfully, [redacted] Construction

Check fields!

Write a review of Irwin Construction

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Irwin Construction Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Address: 1686 Fm 935, Lott, Texas, United States, 76656-3891

Phone:

Show more...

Add contact information for Irwin Construction

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated