Target Restoration Services LLC

[redacted] Ph: (254) [redacted] Waco, TX [redacted] (877) [redacted] Fax (254) [redacted] To: Whom it may concern The purpose of this letter is to respond to complaint [redacted] I have read the customer's statement and understand their concerns to be as follows: 1) Roof does not meet code, 2) Workmanship is shoddy, 3) Project Manager never responds, 4) Buyers/Agent was told the roof was the fault of the seller, 5) Lies were toldFollowing is our response to the concernsi know the customer is attempting to sell the home and as a result of a building inspection it has been discovered that several issues need to be addressed prior to the sellOne of the many items needing attention is the replacing of the chimney flashing that appears to be allowing water in to damage the fasciaTarget Restoration Services replaced the roof on this structure in November of This raised the question as to whether or not any portion of the damage is covered under the warranty of the roof replacementThis particular project carries a Three Year warranty for the insuredI have discussed with the particular insurance carrier and have learned that the Warranty is Non-Transferrable and therefore was void at the time the home was soldI've reviewed the scope of work performed and also discovered that the chimney flashing was not an item removed/replaced under our contract for repairsIn short, the items that need to be repaired are not covered by our warranty for two reasons, first because the warranty is voided, and second because they are items we did not contract forItems replaced under our contract were: Shingles, roof felt, valley metal, drip edge, and pipe jack flashingI've discussed with the home inspector and verified that the workmanship of these items are installed correctly and not in a "shoddy" mannerHe has also verified that these items are not the contributing factor to the damaged sidingThe primary cause of damage to the siding is the absence of f lashing that was never installed at the time of constructionThis is a condition that existed prior to our involvement with the propertyAccording to the Customer's Statement the Project Manager never respondsHowever, the statement also indicates that the Project Manager did make a site inspection, sent a foreman to inspect, and spoke with the home owners on the 12, 13, 14, of JanuaryWe requested the contact information for the inspector, but were only provided the inspection reportWe contacted the buyer's agent only to obtain the Home Inspector's contact information since this was not provided by the customer as requestedAny delays in response are the result of a delay in receiving this informationI'm sure it is an aggravating situation that customer is in, but unfortunately not a situation we are responsible or obligated to assist withThank you, [redacted] Project Manager Target Restoration Services

Dear Revdex.com, In response to the customer complaint ID *** Target Restoration Services had been in negotiations with the insurance carrier and adjuster in an attempt to advocate for our customerIn short, the carrier did not want to cover the extent of the repairs that they should have
initially approvedThis took some time and negotiating to finally be approved on the 5th of December Our company felt it was not in our best interest to perform a service that had not been approved and therefore we may not be paid forThis process was lengthy and I know it was frustrating to our customer not to have their property repaired immediatelyDuring the negotiation time period the roof puncture had been tarped to prevent any further damage and a portion of the interior repairs were madeAfter the carrier and adjuster finally agreed to the coverage on 12/5/Target Restoration began the remaining repairs within daysTarget Restoration was scheduled to make the repairs earlier than the day mark and were unable to perform due to scheduling issuesI spoke with the customer the same day their complaint was filed and I assured him that I would look into the reason that the services were not performed the week priorAt that time I asked if he would like me to follow up with in regards to why the services were not performed the previous week and why he was not made awareHe said he did not need that information he just wanted his property repaired and I assured him that is what we would do, and that is what we did*** *** General Manager Target Restoration Services LLC

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Regards,
[redacted]
How sad that such a minor repair project that could have been completed in two weeks has taken months and months to get to even near final completion. Their neglect has made me resort to researching who the actual owners of the company are and making it clear to the guy that their performance is in no way acceptable in any manner to any acceptable standard and that the manager's excuses of "we tried to contact the adjuster three weeks ago but haven't heard back" are not acceptable excuses as to why they have not made progress on the project.  I have been in commercial and residential construction for 30 years and I know what comparable construction/repair times are and it ISN'T four months or more. The owner and managers of Target Restoration should be embarressed at their response and completion times. Let it be known that if someone EVER asked me as to who to hire to do storm damage repair, that person asking me will absolutely hear all about my experience with Target Restoration in Waco Texas. If the Waco Tribune or Channel 44 or 25 contact me, I will absolutely relate a true and factual interview with them and all that ask. Sad but true.

I first met the [redacted] on the morning of 5/25/2016, a fire had damaged their home located at [redacted]  in [redacted], TX.  The second floor of the two story home was severely damaged by the fire to the extent that 80% of the roof was missing.  This first floor of the home was...

also damaged by water used to extinguish the fire.  A Target Restoration work authorization document was signed by the [redacted] on the morning of 5/25/2016. [redacted] large loss adjuster [redacted] instructed Target Restoration to proceed with a large tarp over the roof of the home to protect the existing elements.   We removed all of the salvageable contents per the request of the homeowner and [redacted] and are currently storing those contents at our climate controlled storage facility until the homeowner and [redacted] instruct us on where to deliver the contents.  All contents were inventoried, cleaned, ozone treated to remove smoke and re-boxed.During the cleaning and storage process the [redacted] requested several items be returned to them, in each instance as instructed by [redacted], I submitted the proper paperwork for review, after review the contents were returned to the [redacted].  We were instructed by Mr. [redacted] that the second floor of the structure was not to be disturbed as the fire was under investigation and the cause of origin examiner had not completed their file.  This investigation took approximately one month.  On 5/26/16 Mr. [redacted] instructed us to begin partial demolition on the first floor drywall and flooring, which we did.  The first week in July after the investigation was complete Target was authorized to complete remaining demolition per the [redacted] estimate.It is the policy of Target Restoration that no employee under any circumstances smoke on customers property.  At no time did myself or any of my associates witness anyone smoking at the premises of [redacted], TX.  In regards to the trash, there was a large amount of old food wrappers, drink cans and cigarette butts found in the walls and crawl spaces left behind from new construction crews when the house was built.  During the 3 week long demolition phase Target Restoration filled three 40 yard dumpsters full of trash and rubble from the job site.    In reference to the sub floor, it is common construction practice to first get a project dryed-in.  This requires putting a roof on the structure prior to completing interior components.  The sub floor was not damaged to the extent that it was dangerous and was to be used as a platform while replacing the trusses and roof.Target Restoration is a preferred vendor with [redacted] property insurance, the estimate for a total of $22,073.62 was approved by the adjuster [redacted] on 9/6/16. The estimate includes all demolition, cost of roof trusses on site, partial roof construction and antimicrobial treatment to entire structure.  During the process I believe I had a good working relationship with the [redacted], we met on several occasions to discuss material selections and time lines.  On 6/6/2016 I was contacted by the Bell County Arson investigator Lucas Dragoo, Mr. Dragoo asked me to meet him at his office and give a written statement regarding the second fire at the [redacted] residence.  The investigator informed me that my written statement would stay confidential and would only be used if I was subpoenaed to testify in the future.  During subsequent meetings with the [redacted] they informed me that the investigator told them that I gave a statements which did not agree with theirs.  Being that they were the ones under investigation, it is my belief that this knowledge of the legal statement given to the arson investigator has a major factor why the [redacted] have bad feelings towards Target Restoration.[redacted] Diserens

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Regards,
[redacted]I spoke to the tenant yesterday and he says that the work is still NOT finished. Yesterday was January 7, 2015. The tenant says there is siding, cornice work and some gutter work that is still not finished. True enough, Target did get the carpet laid soon after I informed them I was filing a complaint. There is still no reason why the minor work is still unfinished. How many more months to finish the work??

[redacted] Ph: (254) [redacted] Waco, TX [redacted] (877) [redacted]   Fax (254) [redacted]   To: Whom it may concern The purpose of this letter is to respond to complaint [redacted]. I have read the customer's statement and understand their concerns to be...

as follows: 1) Roof does not meet code, 2) Workmanship is shoddy, 3) Project Manager never responds, 4) Buyers/Agent was told the roof was the fault of the seller, 5) Lies were told. Following is our response to the concerns. I know the customer is attempting to sell the home and as a result of a building inspection it has been discovered that several issues need to be addressed prior to the sell. One of the many items needing attention is the replacing of the chimney flashing that appears to be allowing water in to damage the fascia. Target Restoration Services replaced the roof on this structure in November of 2013. This raised the question as to whether or not any portion of the damage is covered under the warranty of the roof replacement. This particular project carries a Three Year warranty for the insured. I have discussed with the particular insurance carrier and have learned that the Warranty is Non-Transferrable and therefore was void at the time the home was sold. I've reviewed the scope of work performed and also discovered that the chimney flashing was not an item removed/replaced under our contract for repairs. In short, the items that need to be repaired are not covered by our warranty for two reasons, first because the warranty is voided, and second because they are items we did not contract for. Items replaced under our contract were: Shingles, roof felt, valley metal, drip edge, and pipe jack flashing. I've discussed with the home inspector and verified that the workmanship of these items are installed correctly and not in a "shoddy" manner. He has also verified that these items are not the contributing factor to the damaged siding. The primary cause of damage to the siding is the absence of f lashing that was never installed at the time of construction. This is a condition that existed prior to our involvement with the property. According to the Customer's Statement the Project Manager never responds. However, the statement also indicates that the Project Manager did make a site inspection, sent a foreman to inspect, and spoke with the home owners on the 12, 13, 14, of January. We requested the contact information for the inspector, but were only provided the inspection report. We contacted the buyer's agent only to obtain the Home Inspector's contact information since this was not provided by the customer as requested. Any delays in response are the result of a delay in receiving this information. I'm sure it is an aggravating situation that customer is in, but unfortunately not a situation we are responsible or obligated to assist with. Thank you, [redacted] Project Manager Target Restoration Services

[redacted] Ph: (254) [redacted] Waco, TX [redacted] (877) [redacted]   Fax (254) [redacted]   To. Whom it may concern The purpose of this letter is to respond to complaint #[redacted]. I have read the customer's statement and understand their concerns to be as follows. The work is not complete as of January 7, 2015. Following is our response to the concern. After reviewing the file and receipts it has been determined that the work was completed on Friday January 16, 2015. Tenant confirmed satisfactory completion of the restoration. Thank you, [redacted] Project Manager Target Restoration Services