Jendusa Design & Engineering, Inc.

Hello Marcello,I will look into this first thing Monday morning and make sure we have your report completed and send to you on Monday if possible.I'm sorry for the delay, we have been extremely busy this summer.Please feel free to call me any time on my cell at ###-###-####.Thank youJim [redacted]...

[redacted], Jendusa Design & Engineering, Inc.

Review: Our experience with Jendusa Design & Engineering has been very disappointing.

On 10/7/2011, [redacted], an engineer at Jendusa Design & Engineering, Inc. wrote a Foundation Inspection Report for the property [redacted] stating “it is my opinion that no additional repairs are required and that the foundation is structurally sound at this time.” We purchased this property with confidence because our realtor overemphasized that Jendusa is “the best in the business.”

[redacted] inspected the same property on 8/19/2013 with different findings and we need over $60,000+ worth of repair work.

We are foreclosing on our first home as we do not want to live in a house with such extreme foundation problems. As a young couple, we’ve only been in the workforce for two years and with our student loans and car payments, we do not have a large savings to fall back on so not only has our credit suffered during this foreclosure process, but our one year old daughter will not be able to grow up with a swing set in her own yard but will be spending her childhood in an eight-plex as this is all we can afford. We strongly believe that if the first inspection report was more accurate in describing the potential for future foundation issues we would not have purchased this home.

We've contacted local news stations as well as The Milwaukee Journal who are interested in doing a segment this Spring. We want to warn first time homebuyers what to expect when purchasing a home with foundation issues and not to trust Jendusa engineering reports and explain how foreclosing on our first home a year and a half after moving-in will influence the next 2-7 years of our life.

We are the only ones feeling the hardship of this horrible purchase and we ask that Jendusa Design and Engineering take responsibility for their misleading reports.Desired Settlement: We would like 2 complete copies of the file from your office for [redacted] (one copy to give to the bank as they have to disclose the any information we give them to the next owner and another copy to give to the Village of Elm Grove so eventually they will have enough information to condemn this house).

We also ask that you pay for a new foundation engineer report in April (after the snow melts) for our property and we would like to hire [redacted] in New Berlin, WI.

Business

Response:

On October **, 2011 Jendusa Design & Engineering, Inc. performed a structural

inspection at the property located at [redacted].

This inspection was requested and paid for by the seller, [redacted]. We were

informed at the time of the inspection that previous repairs had been done to the

basement. Investigation of prior repair work found that the basement had been

repaired three times in the past for settlement of the foundations of this

residence. Attached are plans and work orders from the previous repairs.

The first repair occurred in 1989. Soil borings were done at the time of this repair

which found soft silt and peat under the foundation to a depth of approximately

15'. Three walls of the basement were underpinned at this time with concrete

piers according to the repair plan by [redacted] Contractors. In 2003 additional

underpinning repair work was done with helical and hydraulically driven piers

including; three walls of the basement, two walls of the breezeway, the basement

columns and basement floor. The contractor, The [redacted], LLC documented

that these piers were extended 21 to 30 feet below the basement and the

capacity of the piers met or exceeded the required working loads per code. The

repair plan was done by Jendusa Engineering Associates. In 2004, an addition

with a crawl space was added to the house. It was also found in 2010 or 2011

additional under-pinning work was done including the crawl space below the

2004 addition, garage and the front stoop.

The [redacted], LLC documented that these piers were installed 24 to 30 feet

deep and met code required loading. The repair plan used for these repairs was

done by [redacted] and showed optional piers to be installed along the front wall

where the previous piers had been. These optional piers were not installed.

At the time of inspection in October 2011 , a thorough review of past work was

done. It was our opinion that the prior underpinning had been designed based

on good engineering practices and the installation of the underpinning was

documented to meet the requirement of the underpinning designs. Based on the

documentation we were able to obtain, the underpinning should have functioned

adequately. At the time of inspection there was no visible sign of ongoing

movement at this residence. The previous owner may have applied finishes to

conceal cracking or other defects, however, it was impossible for us to determine

this during the foundation inspection. The lack of visual evidence indicating

ongoing movement and the fact that this entire house had been underpinned in

the past was the basis for our report indicating that no additional repair work was

needed at that time. We provide no guarantees in our inspection work for

conditions that can not be seen.

In 2013 Jendusa Design & Engineering, Inc was contacted to provide another

inspection by the buyer's real estate agent to due reports of movement of the

foundation. Jendusa Design & Engineering made a site visit on August 19th

2013 and the buyers, their real estate agent and the contractor who had installed

the underpinning piers were present. The foundation was again measured for

level and it was found that the measurements at this site visit were close to the

measurements taken in 2011, except for one area in the northeast corner. Some

minor discrepancy is to be expected, as the exact locations on prior

measurements are unknown. Some shifting of the foundation wall was found at

the north end of the east wall. There may be a cracked footing at this location

allowing for this settlement. Our report recommended installing one helical pier

in the northeast corner by the sump pump to remedy the problem. During the

inspection it was also found that the front stoop had also settled and the

contractor reported that there was not a full frost wall under the stoop. Because

of the lack of the frost wall, our engineer recommended that the stoop be

removed and replaced with a pressure treated wood stoop designed to span from

the house foundation wall out to a concrete beam poured between the two

existing foundation piers. A repair plan was developed showing these repairs.

The repair plan also included four optional piers that could be installed on the

front basement wall if the owner wanted a higher degree of confidence that this

area will not move in the future.

We were also asked to look at an area where the concrete driveway meets the

garage. The driveway has settled which, is a typical condition found in many

homes. The standard repair is to mud-jack the driveway to realign it with the

garage floor. Please note that this is a normal maintenance item and may need

to be done every few years. We provided an alternate design to dowel the

driveway into the garage slab to prevent future movement of the driveway. This

is an optional upgrade which would cost more initially - but would last longer.

We were also asked to look at exterior grading on the north side of the house.

There were no reports of water seepage. We recommended some re-grading to

improve the pitch away from the house, again a normal maintenance item.

We were asked to check the source of a leak on the ceiling of the first floor. The

roof was inspected from the top and from the attic. A source for the water could

not be found and we recommended removing some of the soffit panels to see if

the water was entering at the eave and running back into the house in the soffit.

This was not done at the time of the inspection and this leak is not related to the

foundation

We have had no contact with the property owner since sending them our second

report and repair recommendations. Their claim that they need $60,000.00 worth

of repair work is baffling - we certainly did not recommend $60,000.00 worth of

repair work. It is our opinion that the additional pier and stoop repair should be

covered under the contractor's warranty. The driveway and grading are normal

maintenance items and the leak in the ceiling is unrelated to the foundation. In

our opinion even if the contractor refuses to honor his warranty, the pier should

cost no more than $2,000.00 and the stoop no more than $1,500.00. We believe

that Jendusa Design & Engineering, Inc did this inspection according to industry

standards and that our conclusions have been based on sound engineering

principles.

Response to Desired Settlement:

Request for two complete copies of our reports: We do not normally give out

reports without permission from our clients, but in this case, we believe that the

Horn's already have copies of the reports, so we are not opposed to sending

them two additional copies. The Horn's should contact our offices and let us

know where we should send these reports to.

Request that Jendusa Design & Engineering Inc. should pay for another engineer

to inspect the property: We occasionally find that people will go engineer

shopping until they find an engineer that will say what they want to hear. The

Horn's are very welcome to hire other engineers, however, they will have to pay

for those services themselves. The Horn's are not our clients - nor have they

ever been. The first inspection was paid for by the seller and the second was

paid for by the realtor.

If you have any questions or would like to discuss this further, please contact me.

Sincerely,

Jendusa Design & Engineering, Inc

Review: My husband [redacted], had contacted [redacted] Engineering regarding looking at probable structural issues of our house, based on a suggestion from our attorney that we do so. My husband spoke with someone who answered the phone that said it would be no more than $400 base don the information he provided to get an estimate. My husband asked about looking at the roof as well. She said the people at that company do not do that but could bring someone along and that would make it no more than $600. When the person came to our house, they did not bring a roofing contractor and soent no more than 40 minutes in our house. I tried to write a check to the man that day before he left but he explained that we would receive the bill in the mail and could pay then as he still had to travel back and could not add in that time yet. Nothing was stated about doingt additional work at the office. I received a bill for $900, stating he did about six hours of work at the office in regards to our house. I have already explained to the company I am not paying this amount as this is not what was quoted. The woman named [redacted] that I e-mailed at the company did not make any adjustments to the bill based on my request. She also advised me they are going to assess late fees and interest, which is not able to bge done as I never signed any contract with them and would ahve had to been advised of interest and late fees. I also got another e-mail from [redacted] stating we need to pay the travel time and preparation time for a deposition relating to the deposition that the defendant;'s attorney requested in a case we had open in regards to our house. We have since reached a settlement instead of going to court. However, our attorney filed a Motion of Protection stating the defendant needed to pay the deposition fee and that was granted by the court. The deposition fee has been paid to them but not the time they are saying they should also get reimbursed for travel or preparation. Neither I nor my attorney requested their services and I feel that anything related to the deposition that was requeted by another party is payable by them. Furthermore, in once of my mailing from them, I was inadvertently sent another client's bill where it lists the same service as my bill, but they were assessed $75/hour instead of the $100/$150 we were assessed. You cannot quote someone a maximum limit of $400 but than go over double that, especially without saying something and having an agreement. That would be like me going to a car repair place and them telling me it will cost no more than $75 to look at my car and will take no more than two hours so my bill will be no larger than $150 and then I get there to get my car back and they have charged $700 and they explain they did follow-up work or research on my car.Desired Settlement: The bill needs to be set at no more than $400.00, as was what was quoted by phone as being know higher than that.

Business

Response:

Background:

Firstly, let me inform you that when a client calls in for inspection services, we have a script that we follow which goes like this;

Inspection script

“Foundation inspections cost $ 150 per hour PLUS the travel time. An average inspection takes around 2 hours and the average cost is between $ 300 and $ 450 depending on how far the property is and the work need to be performed. However, if there any additional calculations or plans that need to be done at the office, there will be an additional charge, and the price range can be anything from $ 450 - $ 800+ depending on the project. If the property is more than an hour away, the inspection costs range in price from $ 400 - $ 600 depending on the time and distance.”

Expert Witness script:

For a typewritten report, photos on a CD, calculations and plans – the cost could go as high as $ 1000.00 again depending on the time spent on the project. We have a standard rate schedule sheet for the court costs, which I have attached. Court appearances are billed out at $ 200 per hour, and the deposition is also billed out at $ 200 per hour. The preparation and travel time for the deposition is billed separately to the client, as the attorneys’ do not pay for that, it is the client’s responsibility.

At the time of scheduling the appointment, the information received from Mr. [redacted] was that there was a bedroom that was converted from an attic and he needed to know if it was safe for habitation. He was quoted $ 150 per hour plus the travel time and was told that this inspection could go as high as $ 600 + depending on what needed to be done for the attorney.

This client was aware of the fees up front and is now choosing to remember what she wants to remember. It is possible that her husband was quoted the regular costs – until we asked more questions and found out that it was an expert witness service they were requesting. At that time, they were given the costs. Also her attorney refers a lot of their clients to us – and they are well aware of our fees and would have given the [redacted]s’ a ball park figure. I will assume that at the time, the [redacted]s’ were desperate to find a resolution to their problem and were thinking that they would win their case and the opposing party would be paying the bills. I am not sure how that turned out, and it is none of our business as to the outcome of their court case. We were hired to supply the expert witness services they needed to go ahead with their case.

Generally, we do not take any contractors on our inspections and if a roofing contractor was needed, we would’ve told them that they need to get a roofing contractor in. Even though, according to [redacted], our engineer spent “no more than 40 minutes” at the inspection – there are pages of calculations that were done back at the office, which contributed to the bill of $ 900. Concerning the wanting to the pay the bill at the time of inspection – there was no way the engineer would have known how much time he needed to spend on the calculations and the repair plans, along with the report for the attorney.

Adjustments were not made by me with regards to this bill as it was billed out correctly and legitimately. When I started calling for payment, her husband kept on telling me that he would give his wife the message, and I never heard from her. The only telephone number I have on file is for [redacted] and then I have [redacted]’s email address that was either written down by herself or her husband on paperwork that the engineer had. I have notes of collection calls from January 23, 2013, with their stories each time we called. On the 1/31/13, her attorney’s secretary said she would write the [redacted]’s a letter suggesting they pay the bill. On 2/12/13, [redacted] called [redacted] again and was told that he thought his wife had taken care of the bill and that he would ask her to give us a call to take care of it. So I beg to ask – if she had a problem with this bill back then, why did she not call and speak to us? She has never called this office, until after I sent a second letter to her work email, the only contact information I have on her. On 3/19/13 [redacted] called [redacted] and was told again that he thought his wife had paid this account and gave us a number to call after hours. I only work until 1-2pm and [redacted] works until the same time – so it is very unreasonable to ask us to call after hours for payment on an outstanding bill. Numerous voicemails were left for [redacted] by [redacted], none of which were ever returned.

On April 11th, the [redacted]s’ were sent a final notice for payment of the outstanding balance, informing them of the interest charges that would be added if the account is not paid. Well the account is still not paid and in the mean-time our engineer was summonsed to give a deposition. Unfortunately – even though [redacted] says she nor her attorney requested this deposition – we have to go when we are served a summons. The opposing attorney did pay for the deposition, however the [redacted]s are responsible for the preparation and travel time for this deposition, of which she is again refusing to pay. You are welcome to check this with any attorney. The client is responsible for the preparation and traveling time.

The other clients’ bill that she said she received for $ 75 per hour is very explainable. We have Engineers in training and we charge $ 75 per hour for their services. Also it could have been for a letter of supervision, which at the time, was also billed out at $75. So yes, we have clients that are billed $ 75 per hour as an engineer in training has done the work and checked by the licensed engineer.

We have no choice but to hand her over to our attorney.

[redacted], do I need to post this on Revdex.com as a reply to her allegations or will you be doing that?

Many thanks for the notice.

Kind regards

[redacted] Design & Engineering, Inc.

Tel: [redacted]

Consumer

Response:

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.

[redacted], an admin for [redacted] Engineering, stated there is a script. However, that does not mean the script is what was followed. Is there a recording of the calls with my husband? I am going to assume no. If there was, it would have captured that this script wasd not rehearsed to him. If he was told anything above what he told me, he would have made sure to state it. The lawsuit was based on a faulty roof, not the layout of the house. While our attorney was going through the documents for the house, he sw the MLS listing and paperwork in the FHA appraisal that showed the house had been rehabbed. He looked in the system for the City of Milwaukee to see if permits had been pulled for construction/remodel, and they had not. That is when he suggested we call [redacted] Engineering as that may be another possible issue with the house, but was not the primary issue. He stated it should cost us about a few hundred dollars. He did not say anything compared to what [redacted] put in her response as prices. If my husband had been told something above the $450 we would have contacted other companies as we would know we could not afford it. Also, the employee wrote up his report stating our house is not structurally sound, yet when an inspector ([redacted]) from the city of Milwaukee called him, he stated it was structurally sound, which makes me also question if because if they knew this was part of a lawsuit if they just made up a report to try to get money from work that possibly could have been performed that was not needed, and if that is also why they increased the price of the services for providing an estimate. I am extremely busy during the day and have tried calling when I get off and have been told [redacted] is not available. I cannot help that someone at the company is not there past 1 or 2pm to assist me. I work until 3:30 or 4:30pm each day. I have spoke with [redacted] on November 1, 2013, and she was not aware at all of this ongoing issue and the e-mails sent by [redacted]. I question the companies credibility for a few reasons. 1) Why is a contract not signed before someone arrives to do an estimate stating what the expected costs can be? 2) If no contract was signed, how can someone enforce interest and finance fees, as if one wa ssigned? 3) Why does [redacted] send e-mails from an e-mail address that belongs to [redacted]? 4) Why do I keep also receiving bills that belong to other customers with my statements? I received yet another bill where the customer was charged only $50.00 for some of the services that are labeled the same as mine, and then there were some charges at the higher cost. 5) I have spoke with [redacted] on November 1st, who obviously has a relationship somehow with the owner of the company since they share the same last name. When I asked for Mr. [redacted], she asked why I was calling. I explained the entire situation, with which she acted as if she was completeley unfamiliar with it. She said she would ahve Mr. [redacted] contact me. I have yet to hear from him. I understand that he is busy, but with this now being at the level it is at, I would think he would respond. 6) Why is an admin responding to the Revdex.com report and not the owner of the company. 7) Why do I have a report that states my house is structurally not sound, but the City of Milwaukee was advised otherwise by the same employee of [redacted] Engineering. 8) Again, how can a company assess charges to a person who did not request services (re: deposition travel time and preparation). That still should go to the other party that actually paid the hourtly rate for the deposition time and requested the services. And again, this is the only company/contractor that was depositioned, that is asking for these fees. Every other person did not charge anything at all for being depositioned. I would like for Mr. [redacted] to personally handle this account. I am willing to take time off of work to sit down with him, if need be as I have a number of questions and concerns. I do not believe in taking advantage of people and being deceptive in business practices or otherwise, and that is exactly what is occurring here. I do not owe any other contractor money, as I paid each of them. Again, if we would have been told more than the $450 at most ($600 if roofing contractor was brought along, which one was not), we would not have had [redacted] Engineering come do an estimate, as the room that was looked at was not the primary point of the case.

Regards,

Business

Response:

With regards to the attached complaint - this has been going on for over a year now, and it is very clear to us that no matter what we say, [redacted] is going to come back with more excuses as to why she is not paying this bill. We just cannot waste any more of our time on this. I have forwarded this complaint in it's entirety to our attorneys who are going to be handling this case. Please accept this as our response to her last letter. Our attorney will be touch with her.