Rorvik General Contracting

Review: I contracted Rorvik to clean and sand my pavers. They proceeded to blow every bit of sand out of my pavers, making no effort to protect my pool, deck, landscaping or windows. They installed polymeric sand that was not appropriate for the wider joint pavers and applied too much water to the joints, causing the sand to wash out. Came back to remedy the sand issue in the wider joints and, once again applied too much water to the sand causing it to wash over the pavers, taking sand and polymer it. The pavers are now covered with a haze of sand and polymer that will not wash off without a specific solution being applied to remove glue residue.Desired Settlement: This contractor does not have suffient experience to perform the services he was contracted for and therefore I do not believe is is capable of remedying this problem. I have overlooked the damage to my property and the hours spent cleaning the sand out of my pool and surrounding fixtures. I am willing to get estimates from other vendors to remedy the problem and would request that Rorvik cover the expense of remediation or alternately return $1,766 so that I may use it toward remediation.

Business

Response:

We at Rorvik General Contracting have tried many remedies to get the polymeric sand in this clients patio to stick and stay. We have exhausted every avenue and spent more then what was originally charged for six separate trips to the job location and two different types of sand for the extremely wide joints. The issues with this property go back prior to Rorvik meeting this client. A pool that was installed below grade that may have been done for good reason but the contractor that originally installed the patio had to do much regrading to slope the deck away from the pool. The right hand portion of the patio grows moss within a couple weeks and is constantly wet. We did use the proper tools and equipment for the job and some sand is bound to enter the pool with using pressurized water and or whirl aways. This is not our first resand or install and will not be out last. This client is one of hundreds and when it came down to it was overly critical with many situations. Again we apologize for any inconvenience and for the record prior to redoing the work we tried selling the job to other contractors and it was denied as they saw it and heard what we were going through. If allowed pictures of our completed product will be posted.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because the facts stated in Mr. Rorvik's response are inaccurate, untrue and do not offer any resolution to the problem. The paver patio has been in place for over 14 years and there has never been an issue with the polymeric sand not binding. The patio was correctly installed to gently slope away from the house and pool. Shady areas did form moss, but never compromised the sand beneath it. I have now had two independent contractors confirm that the sand was not properly installed. Their opinion is that the pavers were not given sufficient time to dry after they were power washed and before the sand was installed. They also believe that too much water was applied to the newly installed sand, causing the polymer to wash off onto the pavers to create the haze that now remains on the surface. They further stated that the size of the joints is not an issue if the sand is of a good quality and is installed properly. The remediation will cost me over $2,700, $1,000 more than the cost of the cleaning service I paid Rorvik to perform.

I do not dispute that Rorvik tried to remedy the problem, but because of their lack of knowledge, inattention and inexperience, they made matters worse. I was very patient and reasonable throughout this process. It took over 4 months for Rorvik to concede that there was a problem with their May sand installation. When they came back in September, they used an attachment on the power washer that reduced the amount of sand deposited all over my property, but they still left large deposits of sand and polymer on the pavers. My property was left in a disgraceful condition. I have many photos to support this position.

I am appalled that a company accredited by the Revdex.com can cause such damage to my property and then not have the courtesy or willingness to at least discuss a remedy. I find Mr. Rorvik's refusal to meet with me, after I begged him on several occasion to come out to look at the final outcome, to be arrogant and unconscionable.

Mr. Rorvik should not have misrepresented his expertise in taking on a project that he was clearly incapable of completing correctly. He has caused considerable damange to my property and finances. This is not the company's first customer complaint. Rorvik has recently requested that links to his company be blocked on [redacted]'s List because of extremely negative reviews on that site.

Most people are reasonable. They understand that mistakes happen and are more than willing to work on a solution that satisfies both parties. What is not reasonable is that the customer's efforts at resolution are met with denials, excuses, fabrications and verbal attacks. This is never acceptable.

Thank you for your efforts and intercession on my behalf. They are greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Business

Response:

In defense to this complaint. We care about all of our customers and concerns. In reference to complaint made by a client named [redacted] which is not relevant to this customers job, a grading job that tried to go to the courts but failed due to theft of services. In other words the client changed the scope of the work so much there were no funds to complete the job to rorvikllc standards. The case was dropped and I found that [redacted]'s list is just another way for [redacted] to get rich. I asked [redacted]'s to remove the complaint due to the customers distortion of the truth and then when they denied my request I then used the analogy so if I wanted to badmouth my competion I can pay a fee and have freedom of slander whether is be true or false? I personally know a contractor that paid [redacted] to remove comments but it doesn't advertise that nor would the site let me post a bad comment about it after my dispute. As far [redacted]'s patio we apologize we could not come to a reasonable avenue of settlement perhaps the 1000 up charge from another contractor is due to the foreseeing of trouble with the project. We completed the patio to specification there is no way around that. And for other readers information the pool deck has been ok since out first appearance on the job the problem occurred with the antiquea Techo block walkway around 200 square feet roughly. After the last occuurance it took the client weeks after completion to file another complaint. At that time her pool had been winterized and pictures were messaged of all the fasasous earth that came from the pump. Small amounts of sand on the perimeter of these jobs is normal, I believe the client thought we should have laid tarps everywhere to catch the sand. So we will agree to disagree at this point in time. Good luck to the next contractor. We also have attached pictures of some work not relevant to this case

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because the contractor still has not addressed why a film of polymeric haze and sand was left on the surface of my patio, causing me to pay to have it removed. Here is an excerpt from my research on the topic:

"The problem with polymer haze is that when you finished applying the sand to the pavers you needed to use a leaf blower to get all the sand remaining on the pavers into the joints and cracks. Only then, should you hose down the pavers, because when water mixes with this sand, it turns into a cement-like binding substance that is impossible to remove when it dries. This binding agent is needed, however, to help lock the pavers together and keep the sand from washing away when it rains. The good news about your situation is that paver companies make a cement-release product that you can apply to the area in order to remove the spots of cement. Once everything is cleaned up the way that you like it, you should seal the surface of the pavers to keep them in good shape for a long time to come."

It appears that it is not unusual for the polymeric haze to occur and the fix seems relatively easy. I would have hoped that Mr. Rorvik could at least of done this clean up for us. I would have even paid for the product made for this purpose.

The attached pictures are time stamped and were taken the weekend after the work was done. My husband and I have a long commute during the week and were not able to inspect the work until then. I did not immediately contact Mr. Rorvik because I knew he was getting married that weekend and wanted to respect his private time. I trusted that he would come back to remediate the work. He was recommended by a trusted friend at whose wedding we shared a table. I had no reason to believe that I had to act with great urgency or that he would so rigoursly deny wrongdoing.

The pool company did not come out until October 10 to close the pool. They are professionals and would have no reason to spread ""fasasous" earth all over my pavers. Don't think my pool pump has any of that anyway. Only sand in the pool pump was that sucked in from the sand blown into in by Rorvik and they dumped that on my grass.

I don't take much stake in [redacted]'s list but it is an outlet for consumers whose rights are not protected by anyone else. It helps them share their experiences with other consumers and hopefully helps to prevent future victimization. I don't believe it is a platform for one contractor to slam other contractors. Any good, honest, reputable contractor has enough work without undermining his competitors.

As previously noted, it is obvious that Rorvik had no experience with cleaning the pavers as contracted. After the fact, his foreman, [redacted], was surprised that power washing was even necesary. He stated that there was a product on the market to clean off the moss off the pavers that would have created a lot less mess than the course that was taken. He apolozied to me for the mess and their inexperience. He told me that, subsequent to completeing the job, they learned that there was an attachment to the power washer that would have greatly decreased the volume of sand deposited into the pool and all over my property. When they came back the second time in September, they did have this attachment for which I was grateful. If only they had cleaned up after themselves, we would not have to deal with this issue.

It was clear that they had never done this type of work before and should have declined the work, especially if they knew they would not stand behind it. Rorvik would have to conclude that blowing hundreds of pounds of sand out of my pavers to remove a little moss was overkill and, because of the huge volumes of water pumped onto the surface and beneath, this action may have permanently compromised the stone and sand base of my patio. The remediation or replacement of which will cost me $10,000 to $20,000. Just to have some moss removed.

I can see that this has become a case of "he said, she said" There can be no conclusion with no admission of guilt. I have no guilt here. I contracted a service based on the estimate and promptly paid for the service. The service that was provided was inferior and damaging to my property. The fact that Mr. Rorvik refused to come out and inspect the work reenforces that he is in denial about what occurred here. It is admirable to support his employees, but what happened here was short of vandalism. it could be that it was intentional and therefore explains Mr. Rorvik's reluctance to remedy the problem. It seems there is no answer here but to go to litigation. I am confident that I have the supportive evidence and collaboration of experts in the field, to command a settlement greater than $1,738.

Peace,