Sign in

Pierpoint Construction, Inc.

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Pierpoint Construction, Inc.? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Pierpoint Construction, Inc.

Pierpoint Construction, Inc. Reviews (6)

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID
[redacted], and have determined that their reply would not resolve my
complaint.  For your reference, details of their response I reviewed appear
below my response to theirs.
Pierpont’s response is not accurate.
Pierpoint agreed to clean the windows after
installation in the original agreement. 
A few days after the windows were installed, the window cleaners came
out to clean the windows since there was glue and finger prints on them. They
stopped in the middle of cleaning them after we saw NOT smudges but serious
large scrapes in between the 2 panes of the windows. We noted all the windows
that were to be replaced immediately after the cleaning and alerted them to all
defective windows at the same time. 
Pieter from [redacted] came out the following day to inspect the windows and
agreed that a large percentage of windows needed to be replaced after viewing
them.
[redacted] scheduled to come back to replace the
windows and after placing 2 of the replacement windows in, Pieter and Clarence
from [redacted] told us that they could not go any further since ALL the replacement
windows they had brought were worse than the original windows that were
installed.  They came back a few weeks
later and replaced a few windows but not all again since the new ones they came
with were also scraped.  Pieter and
Clarence said that the plant have a few issues on the polishing section since
these scratches were deep scrapes in between the 2 panes. 
We were never gone for 3 weeks.  Their dates and amounts of windows each time
are incorrect.  We were gone for 1 week
on vacation that was planned a year prior. 
Pieter had also been gone for a week of vacation as well.  We NEVER delayed the installation of our
windows.  We were inconvenienced each
time while [redacted] had to come back to replace windows but never heard an “I’m
sorry for your inconvenience” from Pierpoint. 
We only received calls and emails demanding paid for the balance of a job
that had not been completed.
The last day the original installers were at
our home, we called Tom Pierpoint immediately to tell him our concerns of the
installer [redacted] reeking of Marijuana. We spoke to [redacted] and [redacted] from [redacted]
about this as well.
Tom P[redacted] DID say to me that he didn’t think
we had any money to pay the balance and he knew that we spent his money and at
that point of the conversation, I gave the phone to my husband and he had the
audacity to repeat the same non sense to him as well.  Him denying this statement is unjust.
We still have 2 scraped windows for any and
all to view to show they still have not replaced the final 2 scraped windows.
Lastly, Pierpoint claim that they and [redacted] have
a good reputation but they do not.  After
realizing that the windows were all scraped, we googled [redacted] and if we would
have seen their reviews, we would have NEVER gone with their product.  I was not able to find one kind review after
many pages of results.  Pierpoint claim
in their response that they value each customer and each product.  That was never felt or seen by us.
Regards,
[redacted]
The purpose of this letter is to respond to a customer complaint.
Pierpoint Construction, Inc. was contracted by this customer to replace their existing windows with new vinyl windows (40 windows total) at a cost of $16,000. Attached proposal is provided for Revdex.com review. The first payment of $8,000 was paid when the custom windows were ordered. The windows were ordered at the end of January and installation began on February 10 (4 day installation). After installation, the Homeowner contacted us to advise that the windows were not clean and had scuff marks on them. We offered to have the windows cleaned. The Homeowner asked to hire her own window cleaner and we agreed and deducted $180 from the contract cost so she could use a window cleaner of her choice. After the cleaning, she reported more window scratches. Our window manufacturer/installer inspected the windows and agreed to replace the glass she was unhappy with because our focus is customer satisfaction. Through March and April, the Homeowner continued to report more scratches. On April 22, we replaced all window sashes, except for the glass in the picture window due to strong wind gusts that day. We immediately called to re-schedule the picture window replacement and the Homeowner wanted to hold off because they were getting ready to go out of town for three weeks. Homeowners returned in June and we replaced the glass in the picture windows. Homeowner continued to report scratches. (NOTE: These windows are coated with Low-E and argon gas is filled between the panes to meet Energy Star requirements. Glass is not a perfect material. ASTM technical guidelines and U.S. Federal Government specifications adopted as industry standards allow for some scratches and pin holes in the glass. Further information on this can be provided.) However, to keep our customer satisfied, we replaced seven more sashes on July 7. The Homeowner identified six more units that she wanted replaced, not six out of the seven, but some were new ones that had been accepted before. We did contact the customer to ask for a partial payment since all 40 windows were installed and acceptable by industry standards and we were waiting on the six additional glass replacements. At no time was there a statement made about "the customer not having enough money" or "spending our money." This would not be acceptable. The final replacements were scheduled on July 21 and the customer wanted two more windows replaced—that met industry standards. At this point, we refused to replace any further windows. The Homeowner agreed to mail in the final payment of $7,820.
Both Pierpoint Construction, Inc., and our window manufacturer/installer have a drug-free workplace policy. This is the first time in our 5-month working relationship with the Homeowners that a drug accusation has been made. We discount this accusation based on our working knowledge and history in partnering with our window manufacturer/installer.
Pierpoint Construction, Inc., has been in business for 25 years now. We have partnered with our window manufacturer/installer for that same period of time. We have a good reputation and a long history of providing quality products, quality service, and high customer satisfaction. We have done hundreds of vinyl window installations without complaint. We believe our record stands for itself. You simply cannot stay in business this long, in this industry, and in this market without maintaining high standards. We value each customer and each project. We stand behind our products and welcome a third party inspection of our work/products. –Kim Pierpoint, Office Manager, Pierpoint Construction, Inc.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID
[redacted], and have determined that their reply would not resolve my
complaint.  For your reference, details of their response I reviewed appear
below my response to theirs.
Pierpont’s response is not accurate.
Pierpoint agreed to clean the windows after
installation in the original agreement. 
A few days after the windows were installed, the window cleaners came
out to clean the windows since there was glue and finger prints on them. They
stopped in the middle of cleaning them after we saw NOT smudges but serious
large scrapes in between the 2 panes of the windows. We noted all the windows
that were to be replaced immediately after the cleaning and alerted them to all
defective windows at the same time. 
Pieter from [redacted] came out the following day to inspect the windows and
agreed that a large percentage of windows needed to be replaced after viewing
them.
[redacted] scheduled to come back to replace the
windows and after placing 2 of the replacement windows in, Pieter and Clarence
from [redacted] told us that they could not go any further since ALL the replacement
windows they had brought were worse than the original windows that were
installed.  They came back a few weeks
later and replaced a few windows but not all again since the new ones they came
with were also scraped.  Pieter and
Clarence said that the plant have a few issues on the polishing section since
these scratches were deep scrapes in between the 2 panes. 
We were never gone for 3 weeks.  Their dates and amounts of windows each time
are incorrect.  We were gone for 1 week
on vacation that was planned a year prior. 
Pieter had also been gone for a week of vacation as well.  We NEVER delayed the installation of our
windows.  We were inconvenienced each
time while [redacted] had to come back to replace windows but never heard an “I’m
sorry for your inconvenience” from Pierpoint. 
We only received calls and emails demanding paid for the balance of a job
that had not been completed.
The last day the original installers were at
our home, we called Tom Pierpoint immediately to tell him our concerns of the
installer [redacted] reeking of Marijuana. We spoke to [redacted] and [redacted] from [redacted]
about this as well.
Tom P[redacted] DID say to me that he didn’t think
we had any money to pay the balance and he knew that we spent his money and at
that point of the conversation, I gave the phone to my husband and he had the
audacity to repeat the same non sense to him as well.  Him denying this statement is unjust.
We still have 2 scraped windows for any and
all to view to show they still have not replaced the final 2 scraped windows.
Lastly, Pierpoint claim that they and [redacted] have
a good reputation but they do not.  After
realizing that the windows were all scraped, we googled [redacted] and if we would
have seen their reviews, we would have NEVER gone with their product.  I was not able to find one kind review after
many pages of results.  Pierpoint claim
in their response that they value each customer and each product.  That was never felt or seen by us.
Regards,
[redacted]
The purpose of this letter is to respond to a customer complaint.
Pierpoint Construction, Inc. was contracted by this customer to replace their existing windows with new vinyl windows (40 windows total) at a cost of $16,000. Attached proposal is provided for Revdex.com review. The first payment of $8,000 was paid when the custom windows were ordered. The windows were ordered at the end of January and installation began on February 10 (4 day installation). After installation, the Homeowner contacted us to advise that the windows were not clean and had scuff marks on them. We offered to have the windows cleaned. The Homeowner asked to hire her own window cleaner and we agreed and deducted $180 from the contract cost so she could use a window cleaner of her choice. After the cleaning, she reported more window scratches. Our window manufacturer/installer inspected the windows and agreed to replace the glass she was unhappy with because our focus is customer satisfaction. Through March and April, the Homeowner continued to report more scratches. On April 22, we replaced all window sashes, except for the glass in the picture window due to strong wind gusts that day. We immediately called to re-schedule the picture window replacement and the Homeowner wanted to hold off because they were getting ready to go out of town for three weeks. Homeowners returned in June and we replaced the glass in the picture windows. Homeowner continued to report scratches. (NOTE: These windows are coated with Low-E and argon gas is filled between the panes to meet Energy Star requirements. Glass is not a perfect material. ASTM technical guidelines and U.S. Federal Government specifications adopted as industry standards allow for some scratches and pin holes in the glass. Further information on this can be provided.) However, to keep our customer satisfied, we replaced seven more sashes on July 7. The Homeowner identified six more units that she wanted replaced, not six out of the seven, but some were new ones that had been accepted before. We did contact the customer to ask for a partial payment since all 40 windows were installed and acceptable by industry standards and we were waiting on the six additional glass replacements. At no time was there a statement made about "the customer not having enough money" or "spending our money." This would not be acceptable. The final replacements were scheduled on July 21 and the customer wanted two more windows replaced—that met industry standards. At this point, we refused to replace any further windows. The Homeowner agreed to mail in the final payment of $7,820.
Both Pierpoint Construction, Inc., and our window manufacturer/installer have a drug-free workplace policy. This is the first time in our 5-month working relationship with the Homeowners that a drug accusation has been made. We discount this accusation based on our working knowledge and history in partnering with our window manufacturer/installer.
Pierpoint Construction, Inc., has been in business for 25 years now. We have partnered with our window manufacturer/installer for that same period of time. We have a good reputation and a long history of providing quality products, quality service, and high customer satisfaction. We have done hundreds of vinyl window installations without complaint. We believe our record stands for itself. You simply cannot stay in business this long, in this industry, and in this market without maintaining high standards. We value each customer and each project. We stand behind our products and welcome a third party inspection of our work/products. –Kim Pierpoint, Office Manager, Pierpoint Construction, Inc.

The purpose of this letter is to respond to a customer complaint. Pierpoint Construction, Inc. was contracted by this customer to replace their existing windows with new vinyl windows (40...

windows total) at a cost of $16,000. Attached proposal is provided for Revdex.com review. The first payment of $8,000 was paid when the custom windows were ordered. The windows were ordered at the end of January and installation began on February 10 (4 day installation). After installation, the Homeowner contacted us to advise that the windows were not clean and had scuff marks on them. We offered to have the windows cleaned. The Homeowner asked to hire her own window cleaner and we agreed and deducted $180 from the contract cost so she could use a window cleaner of her choice. After the cleaning, she reported more window scratches. Our window manufacturer/installer inspected the windows and agreed to replace the glass she was unhappy with because our focus is customer satisfaction. Through March and April, the Homeowner continued to report more scratches. On April 22, we replaced all window sashes, except for the glass in the picture window due to strong wind gusts that day. We immediately called to re-schedule the picture window replacement and the Homeowner wanted to hold off because they were getting ready to go out of town for three weeks. Homeowners returned in June and we replaced the glass in the picture windows. Homeowner continued to report scratches. (NOTE: These windows are coated with Low-E and argon gas is filled between the panes to meet Energy Star requirements. Glass is not a perfect material. ASTM technical guidelines and U.S. Federal Government specifications adopted as industry standards allow for some scratches and pin holes in the glass. Further information on this can be provided.) However, to keep our customer satisfied, we replaced seven more sashes on July 7. The Homeowner identified six more units that she wanted replaced, not six out of the seven, but some were new ones that had been accepted before. We did contact the customer to ask for a partial payment since all 40 windows were installed and acceptable by industry standards and we were waiting on the six additional glass replacements. At no time was there a statement made about “the customer not having enough money” or “spending our money.” This would not be acceptable. The final replacements were scheduled on July 21 and the customer wanted two more windows replaced—that met industry standards. At this point, we refused to replace any further windows. The Homeowner agreed to mail in the final payment of $7,820. Both Pierpoint Construction, Inc., and our window manufacturer/installer have a drug-free workplace policy. This is the first time in our 5-month working relationship with the Homeowners that a drug accusation has been made. We discount this accusation based on our working knowledge and history in partnering with our window manufacturer/installer. Pierpoint Construction, Inc., has been in business for 25 years now. We have partnered with our window manufacturer/installer for that same period of time. We have a good reputation and a long history of providing quality products, quality service, and high customer satisfaction. We have done hundreds of vinyl window installations without complaint. We believe our record stands for itself. You simply cannot stay in business this long, in this industry, and in this market without maintaining high standards. We value each customer and each project. We stand behind our products and welcome a third party inspection of our work/products. –Kim [redacted], Office Manager, Pierpoint Construction, Inc.

We recently had a new front door unit (entire framed section) replaced and were very pleased with the results. The installers were very personable, professional, and really knew what they were doing. Quality of work these days is hard to come by and we were not disappointed in this case. We will be needing some other work done in the future and I will definitely hire them again.

The purpose of this letter is to respond to a customer complaint. Pierpoint Construction, Inc. was contracted by this customer to replace their existing windows with new vinyl windows (40 windows total) at a cost of $16,000. Attached proposal is provided for Revdex.com review. The first...

payment of $8,000 was paid when the custom windows were ordered. The windows were ordered at the end of January and installation began on February 10 (4 day installation). After installation, the Homeowner contacted us to advise that the windows were not clean and had scuff marks on them. We offered to have the windows cleaned. The Homeowner asked to hire her own window cleaner and we agreed and deducted $180 from the contract cost so she could use a window cleaner of her choice. After the cleaning, she reported more window scratches. Our window manufacturer/installer inspected the windows and agreed to replace the glass she was unhappy with because our focus is customer satisfaction. Through March and April, the Homeowner continued to report more scratches. On April 22, we replaced all window sashes, except for the glass in the picture window due to strong wind gusts that day. We immediately called to re-schedule the picture window replacement and the Homeowner wanted to hold off because they were getting ready to go out of town for three weeks. Homeowners returned in June and we replaced the glass in the picture windows. Homeowner continued to report scratches. (NOTE: These windows are coated with Low-E and argon gas is filled between the panes to meet Energy Star requirements. Glass is not a perfect material. ASTM technical guidelines and U.S. Federal Government specifications adopted as industry standards allow for some scratches and pin holes in the glass. Further information on this can be provided.) However, to keep our customer satisfied, we replaced seven more sashes on July 7. The Homeowner identified six more units that she wanted replaced, not six out of the seven, but some were new ones that had been accepted before. We did contact the customer to ask for a partial payment since all 40 windows were installed and acceptable by industry standards and we were waiting on the six additional glass replacements. At no time was there a statement made about “the customer not having enough money” or “spending our money.” This would not be acceptable. The final replacements were scheduled on July 21 and the customer wanted two more windows replaced—that met industry standards. At this point, we refused to replace any further windows. The Homeowner agreed to mail in the final payment of $7,820. Both Pierpoint Construction, Inc., and our window manufacturer/installer have a drug-free workplace policy. This is the first time in our 5-month working relationship with the Homeowners that a drug accusation has been made. We discount this accusation based on our working knowledge and history in partnering with our window manufacturer/installer. Pierpoint Construction, Inc., has been in business for 25 years now. We have partnered with our window manufacturer/installer for that same period of time. We have a good reputation and a long history of providing quality products, quality service, and high customer satisfaction. We have done hundreds of vinyl window installations without complaint. We believe our record stands for itself. You simply cannot stay in business this long, in this industry, and in this market without maintaining high standards. We value each customer and each project. We stand behind our products and welcome a third party inspection of our work/products. –Kim [redacted], Office Manager, Pierpoint Construction, Inc.

Review: BUYER BEWARE!!!! This has been the worst experience! Pierpoint Construction and [redacted] are not interested in customer satisfaction. We paid $16,000 for the best product line and service they had to offer and got far less than what we expected. During this entire ordeal, we never heard from anyone from Pierpoint Construction except for the calls and emails wanting payment before the job was complete. [redacted] came out six times to replace 25 of the 40 windows, often times not even wanting to install the replacements because they were worse than what they had already installed. After the 4th time of sending [redacted] to replace broken and scratched windows, Todd [redacted], the owner of Pierpoint Construction called us and accused us of “spending [his] money” and “not having the money to pay [me]” because we refused to pay the balance until the final 6 windows were installed without defects. There are still two remaining windows that have scratches inside the panes they refuse to replace. Their installers showed up after lunch each day, stoned and with an odor of marijuana on them. We started this project in February when there was still snow on the ground, it was almost August before they finally said they were not going to satisfy us with two remaining scratched windows. Their premium product is flawed and grossly misrepresented. The demo showroom windows we looked at did not have any scratches in them, yet, a majority of the ones that made it to our house and even many of the replacement windows that followed 6 times were flawed. This consistency in delivering a flawed product tells me it is a pervasive problem. Stay away from Pierpont Construction and [redacted], they will take advantage of you.Desired Settlement: replace the final 2 windows without defects and clean our final windows

Business

Response:

The purpose of this letter is to respond to a customer complaint. Pierpoint Construction, Inc. was contracted by this customer to replace their existing windows with new vinyl windows (40 windows total) at a cost of $16,000. Attached proposal is provided for Revdex.com review. The first payment of $8,000 was paid when the custom windows were ordered. The windows were ordered at the end of January and installation began on February 10 (4 day installation). After installation, the Homeowner contacted us to advise that the windows were not clean and had scuff marks on them. We offered to have the windows cleaned. The Homeowner asked to hire her own window cleaner and we agreed and deducted $180 from the contract cost so she could use a window cleaner of her choice. After the cleaning, she reported more window scratches. Our window manufacturer/installer inspected the windows and agreed to replace the glass she was unhappy with because our focus is customer satisfaction. Through March and April, the Homeowner continued to report more scratches. On April 22, we replaced all window sashes, except for the glass in the picture window due to strong wind gusts that day. We immediately called to re-schedule the picture window replacement and the Homeowner wanted to hold off because they were getting ready to go out of town for three weeks. Homeowners returned in June and we replaced the glass in the picture windows. Homeowner continued to report scratches. (NOTE: These windows are coated with Low-E and argon gas is filled between the panes to meet Energy Star requirements. Glass is not a perfect material. ASTM technical guidelines and U.S. Federal Government specifications adopted as industry standards allow for some scratches and pin holes in the glass. Further information on this can be provided.) However, to keep our customer satisfied, we replaced seven more sashes on July 7. The Homeowner identified six more units that she wanted replaced, not six out of the seven, but some were new ones that had been accepted before. We did contact the customer to ask for a partial payment since all 40 windows were installed and acceptable by industry standards and we were waiting on the six additional glass replacements. At no time was there a statement made about “the customer not having enough money” or “spending our money.” This would not be acceptable. The final replacements were scheduled on July 21 and the customer wanted two more windows replaced—that met industry standards. At this point, we refused to replace any further windows. The Homeowner agreed to mail in the final payment of $7,820. Both Pierpoint Construction, Inc., and our window manufacturer/installer have a drug-free workplace policy. This is the first time in our 5-month working relationship with the Homeowners that a drug accusation has been made. We discount this accusation based on our working knowledge and history in partnering with our window manufacturer/installer. Pierpoint Construction, Inc., has been in business for 25 years now. We have partnered with our window manufacturer/installer for that same period of time. We have a good reputation and a long history of providing quality products, quality service, and high customer satisfaction. We have done hundreds of vinyl window installations without complaint. We believe our record stands for itself. You simply cannot stay in business this long, in this industry, and in this market without maintaining high standards. We value each customer and each project. We stand behind our products and welcome a third party inspection of our work/products. –Kim [redacted], Office Manager, Pierpoint Construction, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID

[redacted], and have determined that their reply would not resolve my

complaint. For your reference, details of their response I reviewed appear

below my response to theirs.

Pierpont’s response is not accurate.

Pierpoint agreed to clean the windows after

installation in the original agreement.

A few days after the windows were installed, the window cleaners came

out to clean the windows since there was glue and finger prints on them. They

stopped in the middle of cleaning them after we saw NOT smudges but serious

large scrapes in between the 2 panes of the windows. We noted all the windows

that were to be replaced immediately after the cleaning and alerted them to all

defective windows at the same time.

Pieter from [redacted] came out the following day to inspect the windows and

agreed that a large percentage of windows needed to be replaced after viewing

them.

[redacted] scheduled to come back to replace the

windows and after placing 2 of the replacement windows in, Pieter and Clarence

from [redacted] told us that they could not go any further since ALL the replacement

windows they had brought were worse than the original windows that were

installed. They came back a few weeks

later and replaced a few windows but not all again since the new ones they came

with were also scraped. Pieter and

Clarence said that the plant have a few issues on the polishing section since

these scratches were deep scrapes in between the 2 panes.

We were never gone for 3 weeks. Their dates and amounts of windows each time

are incorrect. We were gone for 1 week

on vacation that was planned a year prior.

Pieter had also been gone for a week of vacation as well. We NEVER delayed the installation of our

windows. We were inconvenienced each

time while [redacted] had to come back to replace windows but never heard an “I’m

sorry for your inconvenience” from Pierpoint.

We only received calls and emails demanding paid for the balance of a job

that had not been completed.

The last day the original installers were at

our home, we called Tom Pierpoint immediately to tell him our concerns of the

installer [redacted] reeking of Marijuana. We spoke to [redacted] and [redacted] from [redacted]

about this as well.

Tom P[redacted] DID say to me that he didn’t think

we had any money to pay the balance and he knew that we spent his money and at

that point of the conversation, I gave the phone to my husband and he had the

audacity to repeat the same non sense to him as well. Him denying this statement is unjust.

We still have 2 scraped windows for any and

all to view to show they still have not replaced the final 2 scraped windows.

Lastly, Pierpoint claim that they and [redacted] have

a good reputation but they do not. After

realizing that the windows were all scraped, we googled [redacted] and if we would

have seen their reviews, we would have NEVER gone with their product. I was not able to find one kind review after

many pages of results. Pierpoint claim

in their response that they value each customer and each product. That was never felt or seen by us.

Regards,

The purpose of this letter is to respond to a customer complaint.

Pierpoint Construction, Inc. was contracted by this customer to replace their existing windows with new vinyl windows (40 windows total) at a cost of $16,000. Attached proposal is provided for Revdex.com review. The first payment of $8,000 was paid when the custom windows were ordered. The windows were ordered at the end of January and installation began on February 10 (4 day installation). After installation, the Homeowner contacted us to advise that the windows were not clean and had scuff marks on them. We offered to have the windows cleaned. The Homeowner asked to hire her own window cleaner and we agreed and deducted $180 from the contract cost so she could use a window cleaner of her choice. After the cleaning, she reported more window scratches. Our window manufacturer/installer inspected the windows and agreed to replace the glass she was unhappy with because our focus is customer satisfaction. Through March and April, the Homeowner continued to report more scratches. On April 22, we replaced all window sashes, except for the glass in the picture window due to strong wind gusts that day. We immediately called to re-schedule the picture window replacement and the Homeowner wanted to hold off because they were getting ready to go out of town for three weeks. Homeowners returned in June and we replaced the glass in the picture windows. Homeowner continued to report scratches. (NOTE: These windows are coated with Low-E and argon gas is filled between the panes to meet Energy Star requirements. Glass is not a perfect material. ASTM technical guidelines and U.S. Federal Government specifications adopted as industry standards allow for some scratches and pin holes in the glass. Further information on this can be provided.) However, to keep our customer satisfied, we replaced seven more sashes on July 7. The Homeowner identified six more units that she wanted replaced, not six out of the seven, but some were new ones that had been accepted before. We did contact the customer to ask for a partial payment since all 40 windows were installed and acceptable by industry standards and we were waiting on the six additional glass replacements. At no time was there a statement made about "the customer not having enough money" or "spending our money." This would not be acceptable. The final replacements were scheduled on July 21 and the customer wanted two more windows replaced—that met industry standards. At this point, we refused to replace any further windows. The Homeowner agreed to mail in the final payment of $7,820.

Both Pierpoint Construction, Inc., and our window manufacturer/installer have a drug-free workplace policy. This is the first time in our 5-month working relationship with the Homeowners that a drug accusation has been made. We discount this accusation based on our working knowledge and history in partnering with our window manufacturer/installer.

Pierpoint Construction, Inc., has been in business for 25 years now. We have partnered with our window manufacturer/installer for that same period of time. We have a good reputation and a long history of providing quality products, quality service, and high customer satisfaction. We have done hundreds of vinyl window installations without complaint. We believe our record stands for itself. You simply cannot stay in business this long, in this industry, and in this market without maintaining high standards. We value each customer and each project. We stand behind our products and welcome a third party inspection of our work/products. –Kim Pierpoint, Office Manager, Pierpoint Construction, Inc.

Check fields!

Write a review of Pierpoint Construction, Inc.

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Pierpoint Construction, Inc. Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Description: Home Improvements, Construction & Remodeling Services, Contractors - General, Residential Remodelers (NAICS: 236118)

Address: 37 Barrett Heights Rd, Stafford, Virginia, United States, 22556-3841

Phone:

Show more...

Web:

This website was reported to be associated with Pierpoint Construction, Inc..



Add contact information for Pierpoint Construction, Inc.

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated