The Struthoff Company, Inc

This is my written response to the referenced complaint: 1.         Delay Claim: The Struthoff Company, Inc. was delayed on the project due to the Owner’s non response or failure to schedule his equipment deliveries, the Owner’s design teams errors in the...

design and incorrect plans, Owner / Design Team’s failure to acquire permits in a timely manner, incorrect structural design on roof members, electrical design change for Owner furnished equipment and Owner furnished millwork. See delays listed below. a.         SAWS permit delay                                     �...⇄ 137 calendar days b.         SAWS inspector assignment delay                    14 calendar days c.          Truss inspection and correction delay              28 calendar days d.         Structural permit delay                                     �...⇄ 27 calendar days e.         Electrical change on equipment                         10 calendar days These delays caused a start/stop effect on the construction project. The Owner has agreed and paid for half of the cost of the delay caused by himself or his design team. He has completely turned the truth in his statement to make it appear that The Struthoff Company, Inc. caused the delays. 2.         Punch List: All items were completed and all corrections were made to all items on the punch list. These items were all corrected within a week of receiving the punch list. Additional efforts were made to satisfy the Owner on a couple of non-punch list items,  where the Owner made a bad color selection and complained of the appearance. The Struthoff Company, Inc. spent several thousand dollars trying to satisfy his complaint, at Struthoff’s expense, and never billed for the costs incurred. 3.         Project Manager: The [redacted] project has always had a project manager in place for the complete project. It was never left without a project manager. The Struthoff Company, Inc. kept a full time superintendent on the project during the time that the Owner had his own subcontractors working on the Owner furnished millwork. Struthoff did not charge for this additional cost for the supervision. 4.         Schedule: The first construction schedule was developed on 11.11.2013 and sent to the Owner. The schedule was updated on 12.2.2013 along with the pay application showing our first delay due to permitting issues. The second update to the schedule was done on 2.3.2014 again due to delays caused by the Owner/Owner’s design team. The third update was done on 3.27.2014 again due to the Owner’s & Owner’s design team to make corrections and decisions on the project. Another revision was made on 7.15.14 after some of the problem with the Owner’s / Owner’s designs team, Owner’s suppliers were resolved. The Owner is requesting reimbursement for the delays that were caused by either himself, his design team, his vendors, his inability to schedule his own subcontractors and employees. A Certificate of Occupancy was acquired from COSA on September 29, 2014. This could have been acquired nearly a month sooner but the Owner & Owner’s vendors either did not have their equipment, or wrong equipment installed or the electrical or plumbing requirements were incorrect on the building plans. The Owner elected to wait till December to open his business and has included this in his claim.    This is a bogus claim on the Owners behalf. The Struthoff Company, Inc. should be entitled to well over $200,000.00 in additional fees for all the delay caused by the Owner, the Owner’s design team and Owner’s vendors. Individuals like this person, who make false and bogus claims against a 22 year old company with an impeccable reputation for turning over project on time, in budget  and of the highest quality should be barred from the Revdex.com.   Contact me if you have any questions or comments.   [redacted]