J & D Builders, Inc.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Aloha Revdex.com and Mahalo for your effort in resolving my complaint, but, I am declining J&D’s offer and do not want to withdraw my complaint with Revdex.com.
As I continue to work with Revdex.com, I will concurrently file a complaint to the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, Regulated Industries Complaints Office (RICO), which is primarily due to the responses received by J&D.
Although I appreciate J&D’s timely response, I do not accept their compromise/offer. The responses received from J&D further validates the trust that I lost with this company due to my concerns with their lack of work ethics and integrity. For me, alerting consumers on this companies thought process is more important than monetary restitution. Hopefully this dialogue will help consumers in their decision process. I also hope J&D re-evaluates their responsibilities to the consumer.
I just retired from the military after serving 32 years. Not only was I brought up in a family that instilled strong values of Aloha, it was further reinforced by the militaries values such as: Integrity First, Service before Self and Excellence in all we do. I’m sadden to see these basic core values are lacking with J&D, although, I believe they could get there in time. The last thing I expected in the first months of my retirement was to get hit with a $29,000.00 bill so soon after retiring. As a result, I am being forced to cash out one of my annuities to pay this unexpected cost which comes with an $8,000.00 surrender charge. This loss income equates to approximately 9 months of my planned budget. Yet, I am not asking for anything more than what I paid J&D. I’m asking for restitution for their negligence and breach of contract which in my opinion was further validated by their response. Below is my rebuttal to their response and why I’m declining their offer:
1. The absence of flashing on your deck roof:
a. I hired a General Contractor (J&D) and expected that the buck stops with that individual. I did not hire nor had any interaction with West Oahu Roofing, J&D hired them as they know their reputation, managed their work hours, oversaw materials used, etc, I totally entrusted this to J&D as a General Contractor which is why my communication was primarily with J&D. I expected J&D to advise me and keep me abreast of what the pro’s and con’s would be for this job. So, for J&D to say… ‘flashing falls under a roofer’s jurisdiction, so I would not have been the one to recommend or not recommend it’…, I don’t buy that and it’s this way of thinking that seriously concerns me as a consumer/customer. J&D is shirking their responsibility and not owning up to being a General Contractor. Isn’t the job of a General Contractor to be on top of everything while also being well versed in all parts of the job so as to recommend or not recommend different aspects of the job to their customers? Is this not what they allude they do in their website? I expect a high level of ‘attention to detail’ from a General Contractor and it’s clearly apparent J&D doesn’t view the role of a General Contractor as I do. Consumers need to know this as I’m now paying the price for it.
2. The absence of a slope of your deck:
a. J&D brings up a good point regarding the work on my posts which occurred around the Sep 2014 timeframe, I didn’t think of that. That being said, there are no (and never has been) posts by our downstairs bedroom which is the area where I initially found the wood rot fascia and then later was told about the level deck. Hopefully as I work with RICO we will get the answers to a lot of questions such as, 1) the area where the posts are, did these new posts cause the level deck? 2) how long would it take for pooling water (due to a level deck), to do all the wood rot damage that was found on my deck?, and 3) why is the wood rot on the rest of the fascia along the deck consistent with the wood rot on the fascia where there are no posts? I would venture to guess it’s due to a combination of flashing not installed (nor offered to me), and the deck being level. Another serious area of concern is that the railings were easily coming out of the wood rotted fascia which as you can imagine is a huge safety concern. I’m just thankful we didn’t have anyone lean on these railings and possibly fall off.
3. The wood rot on your deck roof:
a. Mahalo for J&D’s explanation as this is good to know. I do my best in maintaining my home as I hope to spend the rest of my life here. I can only imagine what would’ve happened if I didn’t accidentally wash off a piece of paint from the fascia and discover the wood rot. The extent of the wood rot found is an example of an ‘accident waiting to happen’. Who knows how much longer it would’ve been till something would’ve failed on my deck due to the wood rot. My concern with J&D’s response on this area is that it appears they are under the illusion they did good work because the damage that was occurring to my deck went undetected for 12 years and their acceptance of mistakes. The following is an excerpt from J&D’s response to me…’Good work on a deck can be expected to last between 10-20 years and would have to be replace an/or repaired irrespective if mistakes were made..’ My questions to this, is it normal in the 10-20 years to find wood rot so extensive that it requires a total teardown and rebuild? From J&D’s response, I can’t help but feel they are ok with mistakes as long as it goes undetected in the first 10 years. As an example, I trusted J&D and wonder how is one expected to find out a huge mistake such as their installation of ½ inch plywood vice what our contract called for, 5/8 inch plywood under the 10-20 year timeline? Same holds true for the flashing and level deck. I don’t believe I would be facing the extent of my replace/repairs if flashing was installed, if there was a slope on the deck, and if J&D used the 5/8 inch plywood per our contract. My opinion, J&D put my family in harm’s way and his response/thought process on this area is concerning, to say the least.
4. The use of ½ inch plywood instead of 5/8 inch plywood on your roof deck:
a. I have pieces of the plywood and pictures of the plywood that shows the ½ inch plywood. I also have [redacted] Construction and Painting to validate the ½ inch plywood along with every other findings in my complaint.
In closing, Mahalo Revdex.com for your help. I will seek out RICO and provide them with pieces of wood rot, numerous pictures of the wood rot, pooling water, and the ½ inch plywood. If required, the current contractors, [redacted] Construction and Painting, will provide statements upon request.
Aloha,
[redacted]. [redacted]
Sincerely,
[redacted]

I have attached our response letter regarding complaint #[redacted]March 8, 2017 Mr....

[redacted] 
[redacted] Mr. [redacted], This letter is written pursuant to Rule 408 of the Hawaii Rules of Evidence as a compromise to resolve the disputed claim. I received your complaint from the Revdex.com on February 27, 2017. From what I understand from your letter, you would like the following issues addressed: 1) The absence of flashing on your deck roof. 2) The absence of a slope on your deck roof. 3) The wood rot on your deck roof. 4) The use of 1/2” plywood instead of 5/8” plywood on your deck roof. To compensate for these issues, you wish to be refunded the cost of a new deck roof, being done by [redacted] Construction for the amount of $22,031.09. I hope I have understood your concerns and your intentions of your complaint to the Revdex.com. First of all, I would like to say that I am sorry that you are having a difficult and costly experience with your deck roof. I would like to take this opportunity to address your concerns and hopefully come to an agreement about how to move forward. 1) The absence of flashing on your deck roof: I do remember doing work with you back in 2005 and remember the deck you are referring to. We did refer you to West Oahu Roofing because they are good and experienced roofers. We rely on our subcontractors to make the best recommendations because they are the experts in their fields. We still do work with West Oahu Roofing, but due to scheduling conflicts, we have also formed a relationship with [redacted] Roofing. They are another very good and experienced roofing company that we trust. The use of flashing falls under a roofer’s jurisdiction, so I would not have been the one to recommend or not recommend it. Flashing can benefit a roof’s ability to protect against water damage but is not a requirement per code or waterproofing manufacturer’s installation specifications. 2) The absence of a slope on your deck roof: Because the original roof is no longer there to be inspected, we cannot confirm nor deny this. If there was work done to the posts below your deck roof, it may be possible that when the contractors shored up, or lifted your deck to accommodate the new posts, the slope may have been altered. Since we weren’t the contractors that rebuilt your posts, we can neither confirm nor deny this as well. 3) The wood rot on your deck roof: Legally, the time limit to file a complaint is two years after the cause of action accrued and in no event later than 10 years after completion. Unfortunately, it has been approximately 12 years since completion, so the time to file an action has expired. Good work on a deck can be expected to last between 10-20 years and would have to be replaced and/or repaired irrespective if mistakes were made. Your deck was completed in 2005, and you found wood rot in 2017, so your roof has been in useable condition for 12 years. 4) The use of 1/2” plywood instead of 5/8” plywood on your roof deck: Because the original deck is no longer able to be inspected, we can neither confirm nor deny this. We are a small company and have served the local people of Hawaii for over 30 years and fully understand the way business in our state works. If we do not have the faith of its people, we are not going to be a successful business for long. We take each success and each failure seriously and try our best to reasonably satisfy all our customers. We understand that each costumer trusts our staff and expertise to make their home, office, or property safe and enjoyable for many years. It is a personal loss when we aren’t able to keep a customer’s trust and respect. So it is very saddening that you are finding our work so dissatisfying. Although we are not legally obligated to take action, we would still like to offer a settlement under Rule 408 of the Hawaii Rules of Evidence which is to offer a compromise to a disputed claim. Because good work to a deck roof is expected to last 10-20 years, and giving you the benefit of the doubt that you would have gotten 15 years of use, we will take responsibility of 3 out of the 15 years since you got 12 years of use. So, if you sign a full release, prepared by our attorney, which would include the removal/withdrawal of your Revdex.com complaint, we will pay for 3/15 of the amount you paid us or 20% of $21,150.00 which is $4,230.00. The payment will be made through our attorney’s office after he received receipt of the signed settlement and confirmation of the withdrawal of the Revdex.com complaint. This offer will expire at 4:00pm on March 13, 2017. Thank you for this opportunity to compromise. We will be waiting for your reply to dictate what happens next. Respectfully Submitted, J&D Builders, Inc. Daryl ** N[redacted] Vice President / RME

We have received the Revdex.com of Hawaii complaint from Mr. [redacted] and are currently working with our attorney to offer a compromise to this claim. We do dispute the claim and will submit our offer as soon as possible.