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 The business owner has not addressed the concerns and even refers to an existing ridge vent which was never present I do not understand how he fails to acknowledge that cutting into the rafters by failing to set the circular saw deck height is the mistake of a poor amateur, let alone dismissing it as something that a professional roofer would do as if there is nothing wrong with it! It seems clear that he doesn't want to take responsibility for the shortcuts taken by his crew which have resulted in me paying a professional wage for an unprofessional job I will proceed with the scheduling of a structural engineer to inspect the damaged trusses and will follow up according to the results of the inspectors report Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
MrWhitford has not acknowledged the core problems of dishonesty and un-professional work He has not acknowledged that he did not do what he promised to do (replacing the damaged deck board) He has not acknowledged that a severe lapse of professionalism took place when his crewman failed to set the deck height of the circular saw to the depth of the deck board to be cut He has not acknowledged that his crew did not make any effort to measure to ensure that a proper gap was in place for proper ventilation through the ridge vent I can assure you that is was about 1/2" or less in most places along the ridge I also believe that the baffles he says were not necessary are actually called for in the manufacturer's instructions that he sent to me before the project start date The baffles are not part of the ridge, they are to be installed at the eaves of the roof in order to allow air flow from the eaves to the ridge.He told me that he would replace the damaged deck board He did not do what he promised to do He said in his response that the deckboard should be replaced from rafter to rafter This was not done, either In fact, I question whether a rafter to rafter replacement in even sufficient My amateur understanding of roof decking is that it gains its strength from being tied into multiple rafters, so a more suitable way to replace a damaged piece would be to remove & replace more than just the damaged area The crew was dishonest, discourteous, and untrustworthy.The cut into my rafters is damage to my property! It was not that way before his crewman carelessly cut into my roof I expect Whitford Contracting to pay for a structural engineer to inspect the roof and to pay for the recommended repairs I do not trust him or his crew to complete this work.I remain utterly disappointed in a friend whom I thought could be trusted to do the job right the first time It wasn't even done right the second time! I still think that a refund of all but the material costs would be a fair settlement of this dispute I do not know what that figure would be, but was guessing that it would be about $
Regards,
*** ***
To the complaint of service issues and request for a refund of $3200.00, Claim ID [redacted] The roof was completed on October 7, 2016 as it was contracted for, agreed upon and the signed contract on July 27, 2016. There were the three issues evident after the date of completion of the roof, August...
11, 2016. 1, the circular hole at the wall transition over the garage from a long time leak. 2, the spacing of the decking gap under the shingle over ridge vent, and 3, the leak in the living room at the wall to siding transition. These three items were determined/found and repaired on October 7, 2016 which completed the contract and repaired the small leak in the living room. Decking Issue: There was a hole in the decking under the wall to shingle transition over the garage from the improper flashing found from the original roof install. The hole was determined at the August install date to be small enough not to need a new piece of wood installed, basically due to the company opinion that day the wood was not needed at that spot since the structure was still solid around it and there would be a new proper flashing system above the spot. As per the homeowner request we decided to install the needed wood on the repair day to that spot. The day of the repairs the homeowner was at home. His reference to a 4’ x 8’ sheet of plywood was correct… the contract and my verbal comment of covering up to two sheets is what I said verbally was included in the contract. What the homeowner did recognize is that a complete 4’ x 8’ sheet is not always necessary for repairs to the decking and also not always possible. The correct way replace damaged decking is from a rafter to rafter for a solid wood support to secure the new piece of decking. This may equate to a 16” x 2’, or 9” x 18” section or of any other measurement up to the 4’ x 8’ sheet, the damage indicates the size of the new decking piece. With the location in question, a full 4’ x 8’ sheet of plywood was not necessary. Also at that spot the original decking goes all the way under the framing for the wood wall and under the siding wall at the transition of the corner where the wall connected to the roof. The piece that was put in was also secured underneath in the attic space since the underneath area was exposed previously as the homeowner cut out the drywall. There was 3 separate 2” x 4” piece of wood of different lengths put in place to support the under wall area where there is no rafter or stud to attach to as is in a normal flat area of decking. After the wood was replaced and secured there were new shingles install above the area flashed properly to the wall section. Living room leak: This leak was not present at the time or anytime early than the roof installation in August of 2016 as per the word of the homeowner. So we determined on the repair date of October 7, 2016 that we did make a mistake in one piece of flashing improperly was installed and we repaired the flashing and installed new shingles at that time. Ventilation issue: The ventilation was installed over the existing gap in the roof as left from the original build of the home; the exact gap measurement was unknown at that time. It was not cut to open the gap to be at 1 ¾” as installation instructions indicate as the maximum gap. The specs of the product indicate the gap can be from 1 1/4 “ to 1 ¾”. What the gap was from the original build, I’m not certain and am not certain if the homeowner knows this exact answer; was it at the minimum of 1 ¼”??? At some point I decided it was under the maximum of 1 ¾”, so we wanted to correct it to what the homeowner wanted after he read the specs I sent to him. On the day of the repairs we removed the entire new ridge and shingles from the August install on both the garage and the main roof areas. We cut the decking wood to the 1 ¾” gap opening and reinstalled new products for the ridge vent and shingles properly. Also to note there are no separate baffles to install for this product because they are actually part of the plastic design of the ridge vent. At one point of the repair of the decking cut in the garage roof… the homeowner says he witnessed the cut of the decking on the garage section from the attic space underneath to be more than needed to cut the decking depth and that we had cut into the existing rafters by a ½”. This cut or damage as indicated by the homeowner into the garage rafters only is what we have disagreed upon to this point in time. The company opinion to this is that if there was a cut or as much as a 1/2'” cut into a 3 ½ rafters that it is not damaged to the point of any repair. Based on our difference of opinion via email I had asked the homeowner to get an independent source, a home inspector to look at the rafters, if they indicated in writing that there was damage to the said rafters that the company would pay for the inspection and any repairs needed. I also said if the inspection did not indicate any repairs were needed that the company would not pay for the inspection. The next I heard from the homeowner was this complaint. Settlement: I understand the aggravation of the homeowner for these issues. I do not want there to ever be an unhappy customer and I apologize for any inconvenience. I do believe that we corrected the issues and solved the homeowner’s original complaints. I also believe that we have completed our agreement as per the contract and that it took two visits to do so. As for the desired settlement refund, I will not refund the requested 3200.00. I am not certain how this amount was determined; it is not realistic in my opinion? I will discuss the possible refund of a days wages for the homeowner, that amount to be determined, and the painting of the said spot only in the living room. As for the rafters disagreement/complaint on the repair date, I still stand by my opinion that if there was/is a unknown measurement of cut to them (on the garage area only) that the rafters are still in proper working order and were not damaged to the point of any repair. I also still would entertain that an independent inspector could look at the rafters. If the unbiased inspector indicates in writing that a repair is needed to the rafters; at that point the company would then pay for the inspection and the repair. If there is no damaged found in said inspection then the company would not pay for the inspection. Dennis Whitford, February 13, 2017
Here are that you had requested. The Ridge Vent Instructions clearly state that three things that were not done upon installation of our ridge vent. 1. proper intake ventilation must be installed in conjunction with the ridge vent (exhaust ventilation) 2. the ridge vent opening in the deck boards should be six inches from the inside wall of each end of the house (I'm pretty sure the opening ends 3-6 feet away from each end). 3. the deck height of the circular saw should be set to the thickness of the deck board to avoid cutting the raftersAgain, these are very basic things that a professional should know without even having to read the instructions. Let me know if you need any further input. Thanks, [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.
The business owner has not addressed the concerns and even refers to an existing ridge vent which was never present. I do not understand how he fails to acknowledge that cutting into the rafters by failing to set the circular saw deck height is the mistake of a poor amateur, let alone dismissing it as something that a professional roofer would do as if there is nothing wrong with it! It seems clear that he doesn't want to take responsibility for the shortcuts taken by his crew which have resulted in me paying a professional wage for an unprofessional job. I will proceed with the scheduling of a structural engineer to inspect the damaged trusses and will follow up according to the results of the inspectors report.
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 The business owner has not addressed the concerns and even refers to an existing ridge vent which was never present I do not understand how he fails to acknowledge that cutting into the rafters by failing to set the circular saw deck height is the mistake of a poor amateur, let alone dismissing it as something that a professional roofer would do as if there is nothing wrong with it! It seems clear that he doesn't want to take responsibility for the shortcuts taken by his crew which have resulted in me paying a professional wage for an unprofessional job I will proceed with the scheduling of a structural engineer to inspect the damaged trusses and will follow up according to the results of the inspectors report Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
MrWhitford has not acknowledged the core problems of dishonesty and un-professional work He has not acknowledged that he did not do what he promised to do (replacing the damaged deck board) He has not acknowledged that a severe lapse of professionalism took place when his crewman failed to set the deck height of the circular saw to the depth of the deck board to be cut He has not acknowledged that his crew did not make any effort to measure to ensure that a proper gap was in place for proper ventilation through the ridge vent I can assure you that is was about 1/2" or less in most places along the ridge I also believe that the baffles he says were not necessary are actually called for in the manufacturer's instructions that he sent to me before the project start date The baffles are not part of the ridge, they are to be installed at the eaves of the roof in order to allow air flow from the eaves to the ridge.He told me that he would replace the damaged deck board He did not do what he promised to do He said in his response that the deckboard should be replaced from rafter to rafter This was not done, either In fact, I question whether a rafter to rafter replacement in even sufficient My amateur understanding of roof decking is that it gains its strength from being tied into multiple rafters, so a more suitable way to replace a damaged piece would be to remove & replace more than just the damaged area The crew was dishonest, discourteous, and untrustworthy.The cut into my rafters is damage to my property! It was not that way before his crewman carelessly cut into my roof I expect Whitford Contracting to pay for a structural engineer to inspect the roof and to pay for the recommended repairs I do not trust him or his crew to complete this work.I remain utterly disappointed in a friend whom I thought could be trusted to do the job right the first time It wasn't even done right the second time! I still think that a refund of all but the material costs would be a fair settlement of this dispute I do not know what that figure would be, but was guessing that it would be about $
Regards,
*** ***
To the complaint of service issues and request for a refund of $3200.00, Claim ID [redacted] The roof was completed on October 7, 2016 as it was contracted for, agreed upon and the signed contract on July 27, 2016. There were the three issues evident after the date of completion of the roof, August...
11, 2016. 1, the circular hole at the wall transition over the garage from a long time leak. 2, the spacing of the decking gap under the shingle over ridge vent, and 3, the leak in the living room at the wall to siding transition. These three items were determined/found and repaired on October 7, 2016 which completed the contract and repaired the small leak in the living room. Decking Issue: There was a hole in the decking under the wall to shingle transition over the garage from the improper flashing found from the original roof install. The hole was determined at the August install date to be small enough not to need a new piece of wood installed, basically due to the company opinion that day the wood was not needed at that spot since the structure was still solid around it and there would be a new proper flashing system above the spot. As per the homeowner request we decided to install the needed wood on the repair day to that spot. The day of the repairs the homeowner was at home. His reference to a 4’ x 8’ sheet of plywood was correct… the contract and my verbal comment of covering up to two sheets is what I said verbally was included in the contract. What the homeowner did recognize is that a complete 4’ x 8’ sheet is not always necessary for repairs to the decking and also not always possible. The correct way replace damaged decking is from a rafter to rafter for a solid wood support to secure the new piece of decking. This may equate to a 16” x 2’, or 9” x 18” section or of any other measurement up to the 4’ x 8’ sheet, the damage indicates the size of the new decking piece. With the location in question, a full 4’ x 8’ sheet of plywood was not necessary. Also at that spot the original decking goes all the way under the framing for the wood wall and under the siding wall at the transition of the corner where the wall connected to the roof. The piece that was put in was also secured underneath in the attic space since the underneath area was exposed previously as the homeowner cut out the drywall. There was 3 separate 2” x 4” piece of wood of different lengths put in place to support the under wall area where there is no rafter or stud to attach to as is in a normal flat area of decking. After the wood was replaced and secured there were new shingles install above the area flashed properly to the wall section. Living room leak: This leak was not present at the time or anytime early than the roof installation in August of 2016 as per the word of the homeowner. So we determined on the repair date of October 7, 2016 that we did make a mistake in one piece of flashing improperly was installed and we repaired the flashing and installed new shingles at that time. Ventilation issue: The ventilation was installed over the existing gap in the roof as left from the original build of the home; the exact gap measurement was unknown at that time. It was not cut to open the gap to be at 1 ¾” as installation instructions indicate as the maximum gap. The specs of the product indicate the gap can be from 1 1/4 “ to 1 ¾”. What the gap was from the original build, I’m not certain and am not certain if the homeowner knows this exact answer; was it at the minimum of 1 ¼”??? At some point I decided it was under the maximum of 1 ¾”, so we wanted to correct it to what the homeowner wanted after he read the specs I sent to him. On the day of the repairs we removed the entire new ridge and shingles from the August install on both the garage and the main roof areas. We cut the decking wood to the 1 ¾” gap opening and reinstalled new products for the ridge vent and shingles properly. Also to note there are no separate baffles to install for this product because they are actually part of the plastic design of the ridge vent. At one point of the repair of the decking cut in the garage roof… the homeowner says he witnessed the cut of the decking on the garage section from the attic space underneath to be more than needed to cut the decking depth and that we had cut into the existing rafters by a ½”. This cut or damage as indicated by the homeowner into the garage rafters only is what we have disagreed upon to this point in time. The company opinion to this is that if there was a cut or as much as a 1/2'” cut into a 3 ½ rafters that it is not damaged to the point of any repair. Based on our difference of opinion via email I had asked the homeowner to get an independent source, a home inspector to look at the rafters, if they indicated in writing that there was damage to the said rafters that the company would pay for the inspection and any repairs needed. I also said if the inspection did not indicate any repairs were needed that the company would not pay for the inspection. The next I heard from the homeowner was this complaint. Settlement: I understand the aggravation of the homeowner for these issues. I do not want there to ever be an unhappy customer and I apologize for any inconvenience. I do believe that we corrected the issues and solved the homeowner’s original complaints. I also believe that we have completed our agreement as per the contract and that it took two visits to do so. As for the desired settlement refund, I will not refund the requested 3200.00. I am not certain how this amount was determined; it is not realistic in my opinion? I will discuss the possible refund of a days wages for the homeowner, that amount to be determined, and the painting of the said spot only in the living room. As for the rafters disagreement/complaint on the repair date, I still stand by my opinion that if there was/is a unknown measurement of cut to them (on the garage area only) that the rafters are still in proper working order and were not damaged to the point of any repair. I also still would entertain that an independent inspector could look at the rafters. If the unbiased inspector indicates in writing that a repair is needed to the rafters; at that point the company would then pay for the inspection and the repair. If there is no damaged found in said inspection then the company would not pay for the inspection. Dennis Whitford, February 13, 2017
Here are that you had requested. The Ridge Vent Instructions clearly state that three things that were not done upon installation of our ridge vent. 1. proper intake ventilation must be installed in conjunction with the ridge vent (exhaust ventilation) 2. the ridge vent opening in the deck boards should be six inches from the inside wall of each end of the house (I'm pretty sure the opening ends 3-6 feet away from each end). 3. the deck height of the circular saw should be set to the thickness of the deck board to avoid cutting the raftersAgain, these are very basic things that a professional should know without even having to read the instructions. Let me know if you need any further input. Thanks, [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.
The business owner has not addressed the concerns and even refers to an existing ridge vent which was never present. I do not understand how he fails to acknowledge that cutting into the rafters by failing to set the circular saw deck height is the mistake of a poor amateur, let alone dismissing it as something that a professional roofer would do as if there is nothing wrong with it! It seems clear that he doesn't want to take responsibility for the shortcuts taken by his crew which have resulted in me paying a professional wage for an unprofessional job. I will proceed with the scheduling of a structural engineer to inspect the damaged trusses and will follow up according to the results of the inspectors report.
Regards,
[redacted]