Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 13, 2015/04/10) */ [redacted] was indeed correct that a representative was late in getting back to him with regards to a solution (which initiated this complaint) and also that I had said it was not a leakHe did neglect to say that I clarified what I considered a leak to be which was faulty materials or workmanship causing water ingressWhat we had found was water backing up and entering his attic through the ridge vent, caused by ice damming above his skylight from the unusually harsh winter we experienced (he had advised that this had not happened in previous years)I had fully intended to rectify the situation in a manner that maintained what was sold to him design wise which is what we didWe were not ready to change the existing installation style to accommodate his requested solution due to future potential warrantyI advised we would use his solution if he chose to take over the future warranty which he declinedEven though an argument could have been made that it was the harsh winter that caused this, I had a roofer return, shovel off approximately plus feet of snow from the roof, and cap off the section of ridge vent above the skylight to stop any further water ingressA few days later, [redacted] contacted me again to say there was still a "leak"We returned again and re-inspected the attic area to determine what may be the cause of this re-occurance of water ingressIt was found and photographed that again the harsh winter had caused ice damming on the roof to the extent that the water was again backing up the roof above the level of the installed ice and water shield and finding its way into his attic through whatever opening it then found in the roofThe ice and water shield was installed as per manufacturer's recommendations at a level of six feet from the roof edgeIn theory we could have told [redacted] that he had an insurance issue from natural causes and left but as a token of good will and customer satisfaction, I again had my roofer return and finish shovelling the back portion of his roof to try have the ice melt and the water ingress stop as well as confirm the roofing installation around the skylight I believe Duel Properties did everything required to honour our warranty and then some, as we did incur a lot of cost to address this complaint and to prove that we were not at fault and that it was the natural causes of an unusually harsh winter experienced by many homeowners this year [redacted]
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 13, 2015/04/10) */
[redacted] was indeed correct that a representative was late in getting back to him with regards to a solution (which initiated this complaint) and also that I had said it was not a leak. He did neglect to say that I clarified what I...
considered a leak to be which was faulty materials or workmanship causing water ingress. What we had found was water backing up and entering his attic through the ridge vent, caused by ice damming above his skylight from the unusually harsh winter we experienced (he had advised that this had not happened in previous years). I had fully intended to rectify the situation in a manner that maintained what was sold to him design wise which is what we did. We were not ready to change the existing installation style to accommodate his requested solution due to future potential warranty. I advised we would use his solution if he chose to take over the future warranty which he declined. Even though an argument could have been made that it was the harsh winter that caused this, I had a roofer return, shovel off approximately 3 plus feet of snow from the roof, and cap off the section of ridge vent above the skylight to stop any further water ingress. A few days later, [redacted] contacted me again to say there was still a "leak". We returned again and re-inspected the attic area to determine what may be the cause of this re-occurance of water ingress. It was found and photographed that again the harsh winter had caused ice damming on the roof to the extent that the water was again backing up the roof above the level of the installed ice and water shield and finding its way into his attic through whatever opening it then found in the roof. The ice and water shield was installed as per manufacturer's recommendations at a level of six feet from the roof edge. In theory we could have told [redacted] that he had an insurance issue from natural causes and left but as a token of good will and customer satisfaction, I again had my roofer return and finish shovelling the back portion of his roof to try have the ice melt and the water ingress stop as well as confirm the roofing installation around the skylight.
I believe Duel Properties did everything required to honour our warranty and then some, as we did incur a lot of cost to address this complaint and to prove that we were not at fault and that it was the natural causes of an unusually harsh winter experienced by many homeowners this year. [redacted]
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 13, 2015/04/10) */ [redacted] was indeed correct that a representative was late in getting back to him with regards to a solution (which initiated this complaint) and also that I had said it was not a leakHe did neglect to say that I clarified what I considered a leak to be which was faulty materials or workmanship causing water ingressWhat we had found was water backing up and entering his attic through the ridge vent, caused by ice damming above his skylight from the unusually harsh winter we experienced (he had advised that this had not happened in previous years)I had fully intended to rectify the situation in a manner that maintained what was sold to him design wise which is what we didWe were not ready to change the existing installation style to accommodate his requested solution due to future potential warrantyI advised we would use his solution if he chose to take over the future warranty which he declinedEven though an argument could have been made that it was the harsh winter that caused this, I had a roofer return, shovel off approximately plus feet of snow from the roof, and cap off the section of ridge vent above the skylight to stop any further water ingressA few days later, [redacted] contacted me again to say there was still a "leak"We returned again and re-inspected the attic area to determine what may be the cause of this re-occurance of water ingressIt was found and photographed that again the harsh winter had caused ice damming on the roof to the extent that the water was again backing up the roof above the level of the installed ice and water shield and finding its way into his attic through whatever opening it then found in the roofThe ice and water shield was installed as per manufacturer's recommendations at a level of six feet from the roof edgeIn theory we could have told [redacted] that he had an insurance issue from natural causes and left but as a token of good will and customer satisfaction, I again had my roofer return and finish shovelling the back portion of his roof to try have the ice melt and the water ingress stop as well as confirm the roofing installation around the skylight I believe Duel Properties did everything required to honour our warranty and then some, as we did incur a lot of cost to address this complaint and to prove that we were not at fault and that it was the natural causes of an unusually harsh winter experienced by many homeowners this year [redacted]
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 13, 2015/04/10) */
[redacted] was indeed correct that a representative was late in getting back to him with regards to a solution (which initiated this complaint) and also that I had said it was not a leak. He did neglect to say that I clarified what I...
considered a leak to be which was faulty materials or workmanship causing water ingress. What we had found was water backing up and entering his attic through the ridge vent, caused by ice damming above his skylight from the unusually harsh winter we experienced (he had advised that this had not happened in previous years). I had fully intended to rectify the situation in a manner that maintained what was sold to him design wise which is what we did. We were not ready to change the existing installation style to accommodate his requested solution due to future potential warranty. I advised we would use his solution if he chose to take over the future warranty which he declined. Even though an argument could have been made that it was the harsh winter that caused this, I had a roofer return, shovel off approximately 3 plus feet of snow from the roof, and cap off the section of ridge vent above the skylight to stop any further water ingress. A few days later, [redacted] contacted me again to say there was still a "leak". We returned again and re-inspected the attic area to determine what may be the cause of this re-occurance of water ingress. It was found and photographed that again the harsh winter had caused ice damming on the roof to the extent that the water was again backing up the roof above the level of the installed ice and water shield and finding its way into his attic through whatever opening it then found in the roof. The ice and water shield was installed as per manufacturer's recommendations at a level of six feet from the roof edge. In theory we could have told [redacted] that he had an insurance issue from natural causes and left but as a token of good will and customer satisfaction, I again had my roofer return and finish shovelling the back portion of his roof to try have the ice melt and the water ingress stop as well as confirm the roofing installation around the skylight.
I believe Duel Properties did everything required to honour our warranty and then some, as we did incur a lot of cost to address this complaint and to prove that we were not at fault and that it was the natural causes of an unusually harsh winter experienced by many homeowners this year. [redacted]