In original contract/bid proposal signed and dated by [redacted] , NAP was contracted to install 2" thick asphalt and roll & compact (see attachments emailed 9/16/2015), the sub-grade was not included? Went back and repaired the areas we paved? The problem was in the sub-grade not the paving? In conversation with [redacted] he came up with the idea to portland stabilize the areas, submitted bid including portland stabilizing (see attachments emailed 9/30/2015)? As stated in previous response NAP met the terms of the original contract/bid proposal and warranty regarding the paving? The problem was in the sub-grade not the paving
Attached please find documentation resolving complaint ID#? Job completed October 7, and paid October 19, ? [redacted] contacted us again March 7, regarding repairs and scheduled to meet w/David? Bid Proposal/contract submitted March 20, 2013, showing NAP discount of $1,500.00, (see attached)? The discount was for the paving? The bid proposal/contract was not dated or signed? Please note the job was done October, and contact for repairs was March, ? North American Paving, IncWarranty for workmanship and materials is year
As we found during the construction process, and, again, during the repair process, North American Paving (NAP) has an excuse for everything that has not gone well. The most recent comments from NAP are just one more song and dance as to why the less than acceptable paving of our parking area remains incomplete and basically a crappy job. NAP has not, and likely will continue not to, accept responsibility to perform their work in a businesslike manner. The workmanship is inferior. The final product is inferior. The company is inferior.The comment in the latest rebuttal by NAP, "NAP was contracted to install 2" think asphalt and roll & compact. The sub-grade was not included." Our question is simple - what was compacted? The sub-grade certainly was not. NAP simple smoothed over ruts in our gravel parking area - apparently using sand and/or other on-site materials - and applied asphalt over those areas. The first time that a delivery truck was driven on the parking lot, the asphalt failed. NAP's response was to offer to "fix" the problem at a significant cost. It is our contention that Mr [redacted] of NAP did not fully explain the process that would be employed on the project, proceeded to perform the work, and then claimed "that wasn't part of the contract" when asked to correct the problem.It is companies that do business like this that have made lawyers a lot of money. NAP should not be allowed to continue operating in this manner of bilking clients with the claim of "that wasn't part of the contract". NAP should put on their big boy pants, admit that they did a less than adequate job, and correct the failures of their work [redacted]
As we found during the construction process, and, again, during the repair process, North American Paving (NAP) has an excuse for everything that has not gone well The most recent comments from NAP are just one more song and dance as to why the less than acceptable paving of our parking area remains incomplete and basically a crappy job NAP has not, and likely will continue not to, accept responsibility to perform their work in a businesslike manner The workmanship is inferior The final product is inferior The company is inferior.The comment in the latest rebuttal by NAP, "NAP was contracted to install 2" think asphalt and roll & compact The sub-grade was not included." Our question is simple - what was compacted? The sub-grade certainly was not NAP simple smoothed over ruts in our gravel parking area - apparently using sand and/or other on-site materials - and applied asphalt over those areas The first time that a delivery truck was driven on the parking lot, the asphalt failed NAP's response was to offer to "fix" the problem at a significant cost It is our contention that Mr [redacted] of NAP did not fully explain the process that would be employed on the project, proceeded to perform the work, and then claimed "that wasn't part of the contract" when asked to correct the problem.It is companies that do business like this that have made lawyers a lot of money NAP should not be allowed to continue operating in this manner of bilking clients with the claim of "that wasn't part of the contract" NAP should put on their big boy pants, admit that they did a less than adequate job, and correct the failures of their work [redacted]
In original contract/bid proposal signed and dated by [redacted] , NAP was contracted to install 2" thick asphalt and roll & compact (see attachments emailed 9/16/2015), the sub-grade was not included? Went back and repaired the areas we paved? The problem was in the sub-grade not the paving? In conversation with [redacted] he came up with the idea to portland stabilize the areas, submitted bid including portland stabilizing (see attachments emailed 9/30/2015)? As stated in previous response NAP met the terms of the original contract/bid proposal and warranty regarding the paving? The problem was in the sub-grade not the paving
Attached please find documentation resolving complaint ID#? Job completed October 7, and paid October 19, ? [redacted] contacted us again March 7, regarding repairs and scheduled to meet w/David? Bid Proposal/contract submitted March 20, 2013, showing NAP discount of $1,500.00, (see attached)? The discount was for the paving? The bid proposal/contract was not dated or signed? Please note the job was done October, and contact for repairs was March, ? North American Paving, IncWarranty for workmanship and materials is year
As we found during the construction process, and, again, during the repair process, North American Paving (NAP) has an excuse for everything that has not gone well. The most recent comments from NAP are just one more song and dance as to why the less than acceptable paving of our parking area remains incomplete and basically a crappy job. NAP has not, and likely will continue not to, accept responsibility to perform their work in a businesslike manner. The workmanship is inferior. The final product is inferior. The company is inferior.The comment in the latest rebuttal by NAP, "NAP was contracted to install 2" think asphalt and roll & compact. The sub-grade was not included." Our question is simple - what was compacted? The sub-grade certainly was not. NAP simple smoothed over ruts in our gravel parking area - apparently using sand and/or other on-site materials - and applied asphalt over those areas. The first time that a delivery truck was driven on the parking lot, the asphalt failed. NAP's response was to offer to "fix" the problem at a significant cost. It is our contention that Mr [redacted] of NAP did not fully explain the process that would be employed on the project, proceeded to perform the work, and then claimed "that wasn't part of the contract" when asked to correct the problem.It is companies that do business like this that have made lawyers a lot of money. NAP should not be allowed to continue operating in this manner of bilking clients with the claim of "that wasn't part of the contract". NAP should put on their big boy pants, admit that they did a less than adequate job, and correct the failures of their work [redacted]
As we found during the construction process, and, again, during the repair process, North American Paving (NAP) has an excuse for everything that has not gone well The most recent comments from NAP are just one more song and dance as to why the less than acceptable paving of our parking area remains incomplete and basically a crappy job NAP has not, and likely will continue not to, accept responsibility to perform their work in a businesslike manner The workmanship is inferior The final product is inferior The company is inferior.The comment in the latest rebuttal by NAP, "NAP was contracted to install 2" think asphalt and roll & compact The sub-grade was not included." Our question is simple - what was compacted? The sub-grade certainly was not NAP simple smoothed over ruts in our gravel parking area - apparently using sand and/or other on-site materials - and applied asphalt over those areas The first time that a delivery truck was driven on the parking lot, the asphalt failed NAP's response was to offer to "fix" the problem at a significant cost It is our contention that Mr [redacted] of NAP did not fully explain the process that would be employed on the project, proceeded to perform the work, and then claimed "that wasn't part of the contract" when asked to correct the problem.It is companies that do business like this that have made lawyers a lot of money NAP should not be allowed to continue operating in this manner of bilking clients with the claim of "that wasn't part of the contract" NAP should put on their big boy pants, admit that they did a less than adequate job, and correct the failures of their work [redacted]