Roof Brokers, Inc.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2015/07/17) */
Roof Brokers, Inc.
[redacted] 1
[redacted] XXXXX
XXX-XXX-XXXX
July 17, 2015
Re: XXXXX [redacted]
Aurora, CO XXXXX
We received the complaint from [redacted] regarding the roof leak at XXXXX [redacted]...

from the Revdex.com:
Here is a timeline:
March 21, 2012 - Roof inspected at request of owner [redacted]
March 22, 2012 - 5 year certification purchased by owner [redacted] - transferred to buyer, [redacted]. The certification was 'as is', even with minor blistering and minor heat cracking and had at least 5 years of serviceable life. From the certification:
o This certification is our professional opinion based on the examination of the visible elements of the general condition of the roof. Contractor will repair subsequent leaks only. Contractor will not repair interior damage caused by subsequent leaks where roof was not entirely replaced by contractor. This certification is not a warranty & will not result in roof replacement. Cosmetic conditions are not a factor when determining whether or not a roof is certifiable. We do not guarantee that the roof will be deemed insurable by an insurance company. Hail is defined as past, present or future
May 24, 2012 - Whole roof quote sent to [redacted] per his request, at that time the quote included adding 4 RV-53 roof vents for sufficient ventilation, and to mitigate the possibility of condensation problems due to poor ventilation.
March 13, 2015 - [redacted] called requesting an inspection, stated the soffit on back slope was leaking.
March 24, 2015 - Inspected - found there to be no starter course on back slope, the roof was spongy, and it was leaking at the front porch through the soffit.
March 25, 2015 - Sent a quote to [redacted] for $0.00, for 27' of starter on the back slope of the roof. This repair is not covered by the certification. However, we did in fact install 27 feet of starter course on the back roofing slope at our expense.
June 17, 2015 - Sent another inspector out - he met with [redacted]. The inspector was there for over an hour, at this time the drywall was not wet, (see attached picture), and he re-tarped. The inspector believes the leak to the interior is most likely from the off ridge venting system. The swamp cooler not functioning, though dry. Swamp cooler is corroded and rusted through the metal at the pan, (see attached picture).. The swamp cooler flashing is rusted at roof level. The vent in question was lifted on 1 corner, most likely from storm activity, and rusted, (see attached picture). We sealed and re-shingled around the vent. We also performed a water test on June 29, 2015 to verify it was leak free.
July1, 2015 inspected to confirm repairs completed at RBI
expense.
July 2, 2015 [redacted] met with the insurance adjuster. At which time we told the homeowner to provide us with the insurance paperwork to see what the insurance company was actually covering. It has been two weeks and he has neither sent the paperwork nor returned our phone calls. There is no way we can do anything further without cooperation from [redacted].
It is possible the water leak came from either the unmaintained swamp cooler or the unmaintained vent. The homeowner has had no maintenance done, or inspections done in three years so we do not know when the damage occurred. The certification clearly states that we are not responsible for and do not repair interior water leaks if we have not replaced the entire roof. Our website clearly outlines that we will not cover leaks caused by storm activity or failure of the homeowner to provide proper maintenance.
The lack of maintenance may also be seen in the [redacted] photos, (see attached photos April 2015), which clearly shows multiple tree branches overhanging a significant portion of the roof. The homeowner did not have regular inspections, which we encourage homeowners to have done at least annually, nor was regular maintenance may be done to ensure there will be no water penetrations.
From our website: [redacted]
"Roof Certifications
Roof Certifications are a professional opinion based an inspection of the roof. Any leaks past or present must be disclosed prior to the inspection. Our goal is to bring the roof to a serviceable condition for the certification period barring any natural disaster. A serviceable roof is one that is not leaking and in good condition. A certification is not a warranty. A roof can be certified "as-is", "even with" minor cosmetic issues that have not damaged the mat of the shingle or roof may require either repairs or replacement to certify. A roof certification can be transferred from a seller to a buyer. If repairs or replacement are needed for roof to certify, there is no charge for our evaluation. We will provide you with free estimates for the minimum work needed to certify.
Roof Certification Inspection Includes Checking the Roof for:
1. Proper installation, missing flashing, nail pattern, all penetrations such as vents & skylights are flashed properly from the roof line up.
2. Hail damage.
3. Wind damage.
4. Proper ventilation.
5. Heat Cracking, blister, loss of granules and manufacturer defect.
6. We inspect for damage caused by trees, animals & people.
We do not inspect chimney caps unless specifically asked to do so. Unless a leak already exists our inspection is exterior only. We do not inspect gutters or siding as part of the roof certification. [redacted] inspection relates to where skylight meets roof line and not the glass pane of skylight.
Once repairs have been made and certification has been issued the contractor is not responsible for future damage caused by wind, hail, animals, trees, people or failure for home owner to have routine maintenance such as sealing flashing performed. Cosmetic issues are not a factor in determining if a roof is serviceable. However, the contractor will fix roof leaks at no cost due to normal wear conditions during the certification period on composition and shake roofs. Interior repairs are never included where the roof has not been replaced entirely. "
At this time we feel we have gone above and beyond the scope of our certification. Additionally, [redacted] must have appropriate maintenance done, specifically trimming back tree branches that overhang or drop on the roof, cleaning the gutters of debris, having annual inspections so that preventative maintenance like resealing flashings or pipe jacks might be done.
If you have any questions, please email or call our office.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2015/07/30) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I will start by saying 90% of their response is false.
In March 2015 Roof brokers did come out and agreed that the started course and spongy part of the roof needed to be fixed, but they did not send any quote, nor did they fix anything or install starter course shingles.
In June,2015, Roof Brokers came out to inspect damage to the ceiling, sofit and facia. [redacted] saw the wet drywall and crawled into the attic,and stated that the decking was wet at the spongy point that was pointed out in March 2015.
A few days later in June 2015 another inspector was sent out, he did not crawl in the attic but was able to see the wet drywall and the wet insulation on top of the wet ceiling. Pictures were taken on the roof of rusted flashing around the swamp cooler which is part of the roof that was certified by Roof Brokers.
As for the pan of the swamp cooler it does have weak points, although the swamp cooler is non-functioning and had been covered for eight months, along with not even being hooked up to any kind of water source therefore the leak can not be caused by the swamp cooler.
In June 2015, a contractor ([redacted]) was sent out by Roof Brokers to look at the ceiling as they stated they were going to take care of the damage to the ceiling, sofit and facia under the roof in which had no starter shingles replaced.
After sending the contractor ([redacted]) to look at all the damage, Roof brokers did finally replace the starter course of shingles, in which should have been done in March of 2015, after extensive damage to facia and sofit. Along with putting some cocking around the spongy point that once again should have been done in March 2015.
In July 2015 they came out and meet with the insurance adjuster at which point [redacted] offered to work with all the insurance money and to do the roof at cost, which still meant money out of pocket.
Insurance did give us an answer as of the third week of July 2015, at this point Roof brokers had not made any attempts to contact me. Although after hearing from the insurance company I began to call Roof Brokers with no response, I had to call over and over to get a hold of [redacted] who was assigned our case. After speaking with her she stated she would call me back by Friday July 24th, in which I did not hear from her. On July 30, 2015 I personally went to the office in [redacted] because they would not return any of my phone calls, when in the office, I was told they will not do anything to rectify this situation.
I do or can pull all phone records to prove when they did and did not contact me in March, June or July as stated in their comments.

I would like for them to pay for what they stated they would be fixing, this includes the ceiling, sofit, facia and the whole section of roof in which the leak has started. I am not prepared to let them do any actual work on my home as I do not trust them or their work ethic/business practices. I believe this is called accountability or integrity.
I have attached a few pictures of the ceiling and the sofit that needs to be replaced and fixed.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2015/08/11) */
[redacted] did come to our office on July 30, 2015. When he became aggressive and verbally abusive, yelling and using profanity, our office manager turned the voice recorder on her phone on so we could record him.
We did call him and left a message for him to forward us a copy of the insurance paperwork. Per his conversation with [redacted], who told him we would 'try' to help him once we had a copy of the insurance report.
[redacted] did not send the insurance report, nor did he return [redacted]'s voicemail. The next time we heard from him was July 30, 2015 when he called demanding we pay his deductible.
No, [redacted] did not return that call, instead she spoke with the office manager and waited for [redacted] to make a determination on how to proceed.
Before that could happen however, [redacted] showed up at our office.
He demanded that we not only pay another contractor to fix his roof, (which we'd like to remind him we did NOT put on in the first place), but he demanded we pay his insurance deductible.
We told him that was against Colorado law and insurance fraud. [redacted] stated clearly, (and we have this recorded), he did not care what we called it, he wanted us to pay it.
[redacted] offered to fix the fascia board, [redacted] stated, "So pay to replace the fascia and pay my deductible and I'll go away".
We will not commit insurance fraud. We will not pay another contractor to fix something that we can easily do.
[redacted] has consistently given us conflicting statements, at this point we feel we have gone above and beyond, and [redacted] is using the Revdex.com in an attempt to extort a new roof from us as well as violate Colorado law by demanding we pay his insurance deductible so 'he will go away.'
We sincerely regret that in the beginning his problem slipped past us, we do the best we can. Which is why we have done work, that normally we would not have done, at no cost to him.
But to be clear. The certification is our 'professional opinion' only! Regardless of what [redacted] would like to call it, it is not, nor has it ever been a guarantee or warranty. The certification clearly states that we do not repair interior leaks, and that the certification is void if the homeowner does not have regular maintenance done to the roof.
At this point we do not see how we can resolve this to [redacted]'s satisfaction with breaking the law.