Sign in

Samuelson Construction Company Inc

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Samuelson Construction Company Inc? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Samuelson Construction Company Inc

Samuelson Construction Company Inc Reviews (1)

Review: This company installed a patio slider door for me & from day one it has not opened properly & this is not only poor construction but also a safety issue because this is an alternative fire exit in case of fire & if the front door cannot be used. I have contacted the company on numerous occasions to come take care of this since I do have a warrenty but my calls have been unsucessful.I have no choice but to address this legally now since this is under warranty & they have not have the decency to even return my calls. This door cost of alot of money & it should be repaired and or replaced at no cost to me. The management at the complex also will not help me, I hope this complaint will help me & anyone else looking to use this company, think twice about your choice, not a good business to deal with!

Product_Or_Service: slider

Desired Settlement: DesiredSettlementID: Refund

The original cost was $1512.00 so I would expect that in addition to another $500.00 for my time & effort put into this matter & fees to have other estimates done here to have door checked.Total requested $2012.00 or I will have to pursue legally which I was trying to avoid.

Business

Response:

Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2013/05/09) */

This customer contacted my business at the end of February 2010 to take a look at a leaking slider in her condo unit which she felt was a result of the existing structure. The contractor came out to assess the leak. It was determined by the contractor to be most likely a result of the slider door being around 30 years old. Customer strongly felt the leak was due to something with the structure of the building and asked the construction company to write a letter to the condo association requesting the door be replaced at the cost of the association. In the meantime, the customer hired the contractor to remove and install a new slider. A 6ft slider was installed for this customer on 3/7/10 by this construction company. During the installation the association had rejected the claim to incur the cost to replace her slider. At this point the new slider was installed, the customer continually requested of the contractor to write a letter supporting her claim that the building structure was the cause of the leak from her slider. The customer then called the town building inspector to come and evaluate the structure around the new slider to support her claim that the leak was caused by faulty siding or structure. The building inspector assessed the structure around the slider and determined that neither the structure nor the siding would have been the cause of the leaking, that it was likely the age of the slider. In addition, a week after installation the customer called having issues with closing the screen, contractor came to her home and found the screen had come off the track so within minutes was able to put the screen back on its track. The contractor has not received any type of contact from this customer until 4/21/13 leaving a message that her door was not working properly and it was a fire hazard. A return call was made the same day letting her know that I would be out of town and would contact her on 4/25/13 to set up a time to address her concerns. On 4/25/13 I called her and set up a time to come the next morning on 4/26/13 at 7:30am. When I arrived the customer reviewed her concern but was able to easily slide the door open. When asked what the problem was she showed me a small gap at the top left hand side of the door approx. 1/8 inch letting light in. I adjusted the wheel on the bottom of the door to close the gap. In regards to the screen door and track it was observed to be binding when being opened. In assessing the screen frame I noted that there was a ¼ inch bow on the top track. The screen door itself was out of square from excessive pressure used while opening and closing. To address the claim that the door is inoperable, I found the glass portion of the slider to be functioning properly. As for the screen portion of the door, I assessed it to be un-proportioned due to customer wear and tear. I informed the customer that I will contact the management company of the association to recommend they take off the exterior trim board to determine whether the structure is placing any stress on her screen. I contacted the management company upon leaving her home. I described the situation, the representative informed me he would bring this to his board the following week and would get back to her with a response. The customer was informed that she would be receiving a response from the management company. She thanked me for coming and was satisfied with my assessments. I question that if this door was a fire hazard from installation why would the customer wait 3 years to address the situation.

Consumer Response /* (-5, 10, 2013/05/09) */

I heard back from this company when I filed this complaint which was 2 weeks ago but have not heard since.he The owner came to look at the slider & agreed it needed repair & said he would speak with the management of the complex, that was 2 weeks ago. this needs to be repaired & he should've gotten back to me by now. He was very rude & implied I or my kids did something to this door which is not the case at all, it never worked from day 1 & he agreed & anyone can clearly see that is a structural problem arond the frame of the door on the outside which has to be fixed for the door to work properly before I have an emergency & won't be able to get myself or my children out of here safely. Thankyou.

Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2013/05/19) */

In regards to the complaint filed, the owner filed the complaint prior to contacting the contractor about her concerns. As stated by the owner, the issue with the slider appears to be structural. In good faith, the contractor told the owner he would relay the concern to the management company, who would be the appropriate party to address any issues with the existing structure of the building. Contractor did not indicate that he would continue to be the liaison between the owner and the management company. The owner needs to contact the management company in regards to this matter. The contractor installed a 6' slider in an existing 6' opening where a previous slider existed. It would not be the responsibility of the construction company to address any damage or issues resulting from structural sagging that may have occurred during the 3 years after installation of the slider. Contractor would like to point out that during the appointment on 4/26/13 the owner was able to open the glass slider door with ease, the issue is not with the main functioning of the door, it is the screen door that the owner had difficulty sliding open.

Check fields!

Write a review of Samuelson Construction Company Inc

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

Samuelson Construction Company Inc Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Description: Contractors - General

Address: 15 Old Town Rd, Bethel, Connecticut, United States, 06801-3110

Phone:

Show more...

Add contact information for Samuelson Construction Company 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