[redacted] this will be my response you do so patch walls in hallway and that extra paint I both was orange and I put 3rd coat on free I didn't respond to raising that last light because free work on last light on first no matter what it didn't get payed you act like I was to do all your extra for free and them other contractor's had mess my paint job up everywhere threw house I'm not going behind them when them rooms was done and payed for I gave you a great discount because of your bugget I have a fee for anything or bid of 7 days do you want add them up or should I eat that to closets you text me and said gray had buy more paint for that then I text and said ok rest of closets gray you said nothing back until I try be done then you said they was wrong you change that red color to gray after I bouth paint this job went on to long but I gave you my everyday until all was done I can't go behind other companies and fix ther mess ups for free its called a back charge but I new because you told me money was a problem with you that you was going to help touch up if that kept the price down I agreed but you patched that hallway because them walls was done looked great unroll I came back so your turn to help finish that and you never said your room was bad it look great all threw your house so call us even or lets add up the days over 7 do to contract and work fine with other contractor's they know how bussines works if they hold up my job they get a back charge of $150 daily untill done its calld a scheule got other jobs waiting on start dates sorry but the work and [redacted]e spent was a gift from me because I hung in there for you untill done
Attn Revdex.comTo: whom it may concern,This letter is in regard to [redacted]. Customer [redacted]There were extra's unpaid on this particular jobWe tore off and replaced a 4X6 porch roof above garage, cut down existing back porch from roof to floor $500.00 unpaid. We replaced bad...
drip caps and all bad siding and shingles for the sum of 1 guy $40 an hour for 40 hours $1600.00 unpaid. Also we replaced soffet at gutter on drive way side $40.00 an hour for 2 hours $80.00 unpaid. Prior to original contract we didn't know what wood needed to be replaced until we pulled off vinyl siding.From day 1 we were micro managed by [redacted].His wife [redacted] informed me that [redacted] has ADD. I immediately asked her try to keep him in the house so we would make some headway on the job. Needless to say we had issues everyday for 30 days until I pulled off the job because it became too difficult to work with this individual.Mr. [redacted] and his wife work from home and are there to monitor work being done everyday.. When [redacted] didn't like the finished product he used a wire wheel on a drill and came behind us on finished work everyday and then expected me and my guys to repaint at no extra cost.When I had to leave the job site to check the status of my other jobs [redacted] took advantage of my absence, he pretended to be on the phone with me and told my guys to pull of their tasks and had them doing work not stated in the contract.He offered me $350.00 and a gallon of paint in payment for the extras.When I pulled off the job the house was 80% completeMy company will not take a loss due to the behavior of this customer. I have satisfied customers every week. X Tim's Custom Painting308 Walnut StreetBellevue, KY 41073
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to
complaint ID [redacted] and have determined that this does not resolve our complaint.
Our original
requests, listed at the bottom of this correspondence, still stand.
1. The contractor's communication addresses
none of the deficiencies in the contracted services for which we paid.
2. It does not acknowledge, let alone respond to our demand for compensation. (Therefore, no “details of the offer” exist
to review.)
3. The contractor confirms, in his communication, that he did not complete the work.
4. The contractor’s rationalization for abandoning the work after receiving
his contract fee has no validity. His excuse is simply that he didn’t like
working with the homeowners and that he did “extra” work. His communication shows
that his recollection of the contract and the work performed is faulty. It demonstrates his
disregard for his customers. And it reflects his apparent resentment at being
held to any account for fulfilling the contract in good faith.
§
The “extras unpaid” are either
explicitly covered by our contract or were never mentioned by the contractor.
o
“Cut down existing back porch from
roof to floor” was explicitly covered in a contract addition of $3,000. (The
Revdex.com holds copies of the contract documents and text summaries they can
reference for proof.)
o
The contract addition covered any work
that had been done including soffit repair, any work on shingles and drip caps.
§
The homeowner supplied the
materials for the drip caps and installed several of them to reduce the
contractor’s work.
§
The homeowners explicitly asked
the contractor to flag any bad shingle so that the homeowners could replace them in advance of the contractor’s work.
The contractor did not indicate any shingle that needed replacement. (The
homeowner later discovered a number of places where the contractor had painted
over deteriorating shingles that would eventually need rework.)
§
The homeowners performed most of
the shingle repair. The only place that they are aware of that the contractor
repaired was a single 3’x4’ section that the homeowner had prepped.
o
The homeowners were very explicit
in telling the contractor to do no work outside the contract. The contractor
agreed that any previous work on prep was covered by the contract addition.
o
The contractor’s claim of unpaid
extras comes after the fact with no previous discussion.
§
During the project, the contractor
made no mention of additional work or fees.
§
He provided no accounting of time
or costs relating to any additional work.
§
He never presented a bill.
§
Only when he was getting “hot”
over pressure to perform and he was bailing did the contractor mutter something
under his breath about extras.
o
Replacing a 28” x 8’ section of
roofing took part of one morning and was included in the payments the
homeowners made. This was corroborated by an employee. The homeowner supplied
all materials.
o
While the contractor complains that
the homeowner “took advantage of” the contractor’s absence and redirected his crew
to “work not stated in the contract,” no such thing occurred.§ Once, very near the time the
contractor ran off with his fees, the homeowner sanded a two-foot length of a five-inch trim board at ground level as an experiment.· The homeowner was concerned about
very rough flaking that might be corrected by feathering. (The contractor had
previously dismissed the homeowner’s concerns by saying, that the unevenness "adds character.”)· The homeowner saw that a worker
was using the trim color. He asked the worker if he could touch it up the
sanded section to see what it looked like.· The entire involvement of the
crewmember was less than 15 minutes, not the extensive activity that the
contractor implies in his communication.· The homeowner never represented
the instructions as coming from the contractor.§ On that same occasion, the
homeowner asked a worker to spend five minutes running a palm sander over a
single section of soffit to see if that would improve the finished look. Again,
this was not any ongoing activity of consequence. The contract stated that
sanding was included.§ These incidents precipitated the contractor's departure. · They occurred on Tuesday, 9/22, the last day contractor worked on
job.· Contractor arrives and rages · Claims homeowner is “going behind his back.” · Contractor expresses anger over delays he accuses the homeowner of
causing by interfering with work. He indicated he was going to work on another job where he could make more money and indicated he was anxious that he might lose the work if he didn't get on it. · Contractor threatens to pull crew.· Contractor again suggests that job might not be
completed this year.· Contractor suggests that he might make
additional charges for some prep work.· Contractor, after homeowner tries to calm him
down, eventually says he needs a day on another job and would be back on
Thursday. · On Wednesday, 9/23, he stopped by to “pick up some ladders for another job.” We later noticed that he also took his sign.. (Contractor and workers respond affirmatively to the comment, “see
you tomorrow.”)· On Thursday, 9/24, the contractor did not return to the job and did not respond to two phone calls. On this day, the contractor was seen on another job. · On 10/2 one of the contractor’s employees came to
house asking for help getting paid by contractor. This was when we decided to contact the Revdex.com, which we did on 10/5.
§
Judging from his complaints, the contractor
must feel that any input from a homeowner is “micromanagement.”
o
One particular incident
demonstrates how sensitive and unreasonable the contractor was about homeowner
input.
§
When the contractor indicated that
he was going to get paint, the homeowner requested that they brush on a small
test strip to compare with the swatch, before beginning general application.
§
The request produced a 30-minute
discussion and heated and defensive argument from the contractor. The
contractor said that he had never had anyone question him and that his paint
was always spot on. This was one occasion on which the contractor threatened to
walk off.
§
The contractor’s language and
demeanor became so threatening that one neighbor felt compelled to watch, out
of concern for the homeowner’s safety, the homeowner later learned.
§
In addition to raging, the
contractor called off the day’s work.
· This was when the contractor told
the homeowner that he was going to walk because he could make more money at
another job.
o Much initial communication with the contractor was so the homeowner could make any preparations necessary to make the contractor’s work as easy as possible. The homeowner regularly cleaned up the worksite and took other steps to help the contractor.o Conversations focused more on
scheduling and work practices as the homeowners began to see indications that
the contractor was taking shortcuts, not delivering the quality he originally
pitched and suggesting that the work could not be completed before winter if
the homeowner continued to bother him.
§
The homeowner came to believe that
the contractor was not making a good faith effort.
o
As the project progressed, the
homeowner noticed increasing deviance from standard practices for prepping and
painting cedar shingle siding.
o
Part way through the project,
the homeowners’ concerns were validated when one of the contractor’s workers warned the homeowner to watch the
contractor closely because he would “cut corners.”
o
As the homeowners continued to
bring work defects to the contractor’s attention, the contractor expressed increasing
impatience, eventually claiming that the homeowner was slowing him down, and
suggesting that the work might not get completed.
§
The homeowners also began to
notice what they considered to be insincere answers to their concerns. Examples:
o
When homeowner brought up concerns
about the application of primer and top coat, the contractor:
§
Claimed that work reflected normal
practices, “what we always do.”
§
Suggested that variations in
appearance were just “the way the light hits it,” and asked the homeowner if he
didn’t agree after looking at it from several angles.
§
Redirected conversation by saying
that “you’ll like it” when the work is done. Described how the finish will be
smooth “just like vinyl.” (The contractor had just removed vinyl as a part of
the contract!)
o
When homeowner pointed out missed
spots, the contractor only painted the exact spots the homeowner pointed out.
He did not check the rest of the work for similar defect which were apparent.
o
When homeowner showed contractor
that primer had not touched the bottom edge of the siding around the entire
perimeter,
§
He said they get it when they do
the masonry below it.
§
When it remained unpainted after
the masonry had been painted, he mumbled something.
§
Further research revealed
incidents where the contractor had explicitly told his workers to skip steps.
Some instances, such as not prepping window sashes were reported by the workers
themselves.
o
After the contractor walked off, a
former employee of the contractor indicated that paint was peeling, in part,
because the contractor did not allow the cedar shake siding to dry sufficiently
before he began painting. This is probably another example of cutting corners
to save money or get off job quicker.
o
A painter working on second story
discovered that there was apparently only colored primer applied to one side of
the house.
o
Another former employee reported
that the contractor had a motto, “if you can’t see it, it’s painted.” A
reasonable interpretation of this comment might be, “skip work on anything that
the homeowner won’t know about.”
§
Research also produced evidence
that the contractor had little concern for the work other than getting paint
spread and collecting the money.
o
The contractor put up a picture of
the homeowners’ color scheme on his [redacted] page so that his friends could
make fun of it.
o
The [redacted] quotes contractor
expressing indifference to aesthetics and quality and interest in only getting
paid.
o
Strongly expresses indifference to
and even hostile resentment toward the interests and concerns of others,
through images and statements. (This is particularly noticeable in the last six
months.) The homeowner won’t quote the vulgar expressions of indifference in
this communication. (Exact facsimiles of the pages in the Revdex.com’s possession.)
§
The contractor’s behavior feels
like a scam to these homeowners. He may have thought they were gullible because
they were seniors.
o
Contractor starts work with lots
of enthusiasm with big crew. Work gets done.
o
Based on progress, the homeowner
gives the contractor more money.
o
Work tapers off after money
received. Contractor is reported working on other jobs.
o
On at least one occasion when the
contractor called off work because the heat was bad for the paint, his [redacted]
page indicates he was, in fact, working on another job.
5. The contractor’s assertion that 80% of work
was done is absurd! In the homeowners’ opinion, the contractor will be
committing theft if he does not return the fees for work not performed. The work still to be done is a
large percentage of the deliverables listed on the contract.
Here’s a summary of what remains
to be done that were part of the work specified by the contract and paid
for by the homeowner.
Top coat
§
Half of basement perimeter unpainted.
§
10% of first floor unpainted.
§
Entire base of shakes around entire perimeter
unpainted (neither primer nor top coat).
§
No touchup on overspray and bad patches and
misses (especially between shakes).
Window trim, sashes,
soffit and fascia
§
Did not prep half of window frames, door frame
and back door.
§
No window trim was primed or painted with top
coat.
§
No window sashes were prepped, primed or painted with top
coat.
§
Half of soffit and fascia not prepped, primed or
painted.
Crown
molding
§ Materials
that were paid for were not purchased and no work was done cutting, mounting or
painting crown moldings.
Downspouts
§
Downspouts not prepped, primed or painted: Only
a few pieces received primer because of overspray.
§
Downspouts were not reattached to house. All
downspouts are either hanging loose or left laying on the ground.
§
Contractor did not make a new connector for
front porch downspout as he indicated he would during walk around.
Electrical and
fittings
§
Did not reattach electrical service and cable.
Wires are left hanging free, off house.
§
Did not reattach water meter.
o
Meter was simply torn out.
o
Seal will have to be broken to reach attachment
screws. Homeowner will now have to contact utilities for service and possibly
pay a service fee.
§
AC outlet boxes were not reattached. They are
left hanging by wires.
§
AC power box not reattached. It is left hanging.
§
Radon vent stack not painted and is partially
covered with overspray.
Cleanup
§
Chips, scrapings, dust and wood need to be
cleaned up from ground around perimeter of house.
o
Contractor said he would use drop
cloths to catch materials, but did not.
o
Homeowner had to regularly clean and sweep work
area.
§
Large pile of project-related trash needs to be
removed from driveway.
o
Contractor did have dumpster on site at one
point, but had it removed before work was complete.
6. The homeowners also believe they have been cheated by
the contractor delivering substandard work.
The
homeowner projects having to redo about 40% of the prep and painting in the
spring.
The primer and paint are already failing, coming
loose in places and even hanging in sheets.
In some places, the primer began to peel within one day of its application.
It appears that paint has now begun to bulge and
loosen throughout.
Defects
include the following:
Insufficient
or deficient prep on shake siding
§
In many places loose paint was left on.
§
Areas of weathered wood were not cleaned
sufficiently to hold primer or paint.
§
Contractor did not make homeowner aware of any
potential problems with prep.
§
Edges of remaining paint were not feathered.
This was especially apparent on trim and soffits.§ Primer was applied before shakes were adequately dried.
Deficient
application techniques on primer and top coat
§
The contractor did not brush in or roll in the
primer or paint as it was being applied with a sprayer.
o
Brushing or rolling in is the standard practice
described in any reference.
o
Contractor deflected homeowner’s attempts to
discuss this defect, using manipulative techniques previously described.
§
The contractor applied material—especially the
primer—too sparingly.
o
Coating described by another professional
painter who observed application as a “mist.”
o
Surface finish varied where coating was not sufficient
and the wood absorbed all the paint.
§
Missed spraying areas on siding and generally failed to apply paint between
shakes.
§
Contractor recoated only the few places pointed
out as examples of misses, peeling,
and inadequate coverage. He did not inspect or correct problem any other place.
Failure
to use products described as quality features on contract walk around.
o
“Metal-bonding primer” on downspouts.
o
“Sealing” primer on masonry.
Failure
to apply products in a manner that qualifies for manufacturer’s warranty.
o
[redacted] only warrants their
“Resilience” paint line if two coats are applied.
o
The contractor applied only one top coat.
o
The contractor did not mention these
consequences when he presented the application specified in the contract.
o
The homeowners believe they will have no
recourse when the paint coating fails.
§
Application does not meet manufacturer’s
requirements.
§
There is no reasonable expectation that this
contractor will stand behind his work, given his failure to complete contracted
work and his attempt to deflect any discussion of work quality.
The Revdex.com has received photographs demonstrating these failures.
7. Our requests remain unchanged. §
Contractor to not come on property or contact
homeowner except through Revdex.com representative. §
Contractor to return $4,305.00 to homeowner and
approximately $300 for costs incurred from trash removal, purchase of paint and
replacement of downspout parts smashed by crew. §
Contractor to pay cost of repairs on his work
needed in the spring. Repair service will be selected by homeowner.
Regards,
[redacted]
This job was only bid for 7 days when we started she told me she had other contractor's coming that is a hold up I charge $150 a day on delays by law that's my right to but I didn't act on it because they was going on vacation and yes I'm a great guy [redacted] was patching walls after I left for a...
week waiting on her floor guy I went to new damages on walls that was already painted and done she had put some drywall mud on walls while I was gone it was very heavy looking that wall was done do to her other contractor's she reached it and hung a note by it that is a extra #1she asked if I can change her lights and take down ceiling fans and put up lights I did that extra #2 she ask me to raise the lights in bathroom on first floor I did that extra#3 fix doors so they close fix her door jams was hanging off at top of jam ..the wall she said she had redone because she patched that wall her fault not mine if she wants add up what I never got payed for then and my daily rate of job delays at $150 a day then she can call us even and never call me again because her in side paint job looks awesome to me and I got plenty of days over 7 day sorry about this article
[redacted] this will be my response you do so patch walls in hallway and that extra paint I both was orange and I put 3rd coat on free I didn't respond to raising that last light because free work on last light on first no matter what it didn't get payed you act like I was to do all your extra for free and them other contractor's had mess my paint job up everywhere threw house I'm not going behind them when them rooms was done and payed for I gave you a great discount because of your bugget I have a fee for anything or bid of 7 days do you want add them up or should I eat that to closets you text me and said gray had buy more paint for that then I text and said ok rest of closets gray you said nothing back until I try be done then you said they was wrong you change that red color to gray after I bouth paint this job went on to long but I gave you my everyday until all was done I can't go behind other companies and fix ther mess ups for free its called a back charge but I new because you told me money was a problem with you that you was going to help touch up if that kept the price down I agreed but you patched that hallway because them walls was done looked great unroll I came back so your turn to help finish that and you never said your room was bad it look great all threw your house so call us even or lets add up the days over 7 do to contract and work fine with other contractor's they know how bussines works if they hold up my job they get a back charge of $150 daily untill done its calld a scheule got other jobs waiting on start dates sorry but the work and [redacted]e spent was a gift from me because I hung in there for you untill done
Attn Revdex.comTo: whom it may concern,This letter is in regard to [redacted]. Customer [redacted]There were extra's unpaid on this particular jobWe tore off and replaced a 4X6 porch roof above garage, cut down existing back porch from roof to floor $500.00 unpaid. We replaced bad...
drip caps and all bad siding and shingles for the sum of 1 guy $40 an hour for 40 hours $1600.00 unpaid. Also we replaced soffet at gutter on drive way side $40.00 an hour for 2 hours $80.00 unpaid. Prior to original contract we didn't know what wood needed to be replaced until we pulled off vinyl siding.From day 1 we were micro managed by [redacted].His wife [redacted] informed me that [redacted] has ADD. I immediately asked her try to keep him in the house so we would make some headway on the job. Needless to say we had issues everyday for 30 days until I pulled off the job because it became too difficult to work with this individual.Mr. [redacted] and his wife work from home and are there to monitor work being done everyday.. When [redacted] didn't like the finished product he used a wire wheel on a drill and came behind us on finished work everyday and then expected me and my guys to repaint at no extra cost.When I had to leave the job site to check the status of my other jobs [redacted] took advantage of my absence, he pretended to be on the phone with me and told my guys to pull of their tasks and had them doing work not stated in the contract.He offered me $350.00 and a gallon of paint in payment for the extras.When I pulled off the job the house was 80% completeMy company will not take a loss due to the behavior of this customer. I have satisfied customers every week. X Tim's Custom Painting308 Walnut StreetBellevue, KY 41073
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to
complaint ID [redacted] and have determined that this does not resolve our complaint.
Our original
requests, listed at the bottom of this correspondence, still stand.
1. The contractor's communication addresses
none of the deficiencies in the contracted services for which we paid.
2. It does not acknowledge, let alone respond to our demand for compensation. (Therefore, no “details of the offer” exist
to review.)
3. The contractor confirms, in his communication, that he did not complete the work.
4. The contractor’s rationalization for abandoning the work after receiving
his contract fee has no validity. His excuse is simply that he didn’t like
working with the homeowners and that he did “extra” work. His communication shows
that his recollection of the contract and the work performed is faulty. It demonstrates his
disregard for his customers. And it reflects his apparent resentment at being
held to any account for fulfilling the contract in good faith.
§
The “extras unpaid” are either
explicitly covered by our contract or were never mentioned by the contractor.
o
“Cut down existing back porch from
roof to floor” was explicitly covered in a contract addition of $3,000. (The
Revdex.com holds copies of the contract documents and text summaries they can
reference for proof.)
o
The contract addition covered any work
that had been done including soffit repair, any work on shingles and drip caps.
§
The homeowner supplied the
materials for the drip caps and installed several of them to reduce the
contractor’s work.
§
The homeowners explicitly asked
the contractor to flag any bad shingle so that the homeowners could replace them in advance of the contractor’s work.
The contractor did not indicate any shingle that needed replacement. (The
homeowner later discovered a number of places where the contractor had painted
over deteriorating shingles that would eventually need rework.)
§
The homeowners performed most of
the shingle repair. The only place that they are aware of that the contractor
repaired was a single 3’x4’ section that the homeowner had prepped.
o
The homeowners were very explicit
in telling the contractor to do no work outside the contract. The contractor
agreed that any previous work on prep was covered by the contract addition.
o
The contractor’s claim of unpaid
extras comes after the fact with no previous discussion.
§
During the project, the contractor
made no mention of additional work or fees.
§
He provided no accounting of time
or costs relating to any additional work.
§
He never presented a bill.
§
Only when he was getting “hot”
over pressure to perform and he was bailing did the contractor mutter something
under his breath about extras.
o
Replacing a 28” x 8’ section of
roofing took part of one morning and was included in the payments the
homeowners made. This was corroborated by an employee. The homeowner supplied
all materials.
o
While the contractor complains that
the homeowner “took advantage of” the contractor’s absence and redirected his crew
to “work not stated in the contract,” no such thing occurred.§ Once, very near the time the
contractor ran off with his fees, the homeowner sanded a two-foot length of a five-inch trim board at ground level as an experiment.· The homeowner was concerned about
very rough flaking that might be corrected by feathering. (The contractor had
previously dismissed the homeowner’s concerns by saying, that the unevenness "adds character.”)· The homeowner saw that a worker
was using the trim color. He asked the worker if he could touch it up the
sanded section to see what it looked like.· The entire involvement of the
crewmember was less than 15 minutes, not the extensive activity that the
contractor implies in his communication.· The homeowner never represented
the instructions as coming from the contractor.§ On that same occasion, the
homeowner asked a worker to spend five minutes running a palm sander over a
single section of soffit to see if that would improve the finished look. Again,
this was not any ongoing activity of consequence. The contract stated that
sanding was included.§ These incidents precipitated the contractor's departure. · They occurred on Tuesday, 9/22, the last day contractor worked on
job.· Contractor arrives and rages · Claims homeowner is “going behind his back.” · Contractor expresses anger over delays he accuses the homeowner of
causing by interfering with work. He indicated he was going to work on another job where he could make more money and indicated he was anxious that he might lose the work if he didn't get on it. · Contractor threatens to pull crew.· Contractor again suggests that job might not be
completed this year.· Contractor suggests that he might make
additional charges for some prep work.· Contractor, after homeowner tries to calm him
down, eventually says he needs a day on another job and would be back on
Thursday. · On Wednesday, 9/23, he stopped by to “pick up some ladders for another job.” We later noticed that he also took his sign.. (Contractor and workers respond affirmatively to the comment, “see
you tomorrow.”)· On Thursday, 9/24, the contractor did not return to the job and did not respond to two phone calls. On this day, the contractor was seen on another job. · On 10/2 one of the contractor’s employees came to
house asking for help getting paid by contractor. This was when we decided to contact the Revdex.com, which we did on 10/5.
§
Judging from his complaints, the contractor
must feel that any input from a homeowner is “micromanagement.”
o
One particular incident
demonstrates how sensitive and unreasonable the contractor was about homeowner
input.
§
When the contractor indicated that
he was going to get paint, the homeowner requested that they brush on a small
test strip to compare with the swatch, before beginning general application.
§
The request produced a 30-minute
discussion and heated and defensive argument from the contractor. The
contractor said that he had never had anyone question him and that his paint
was always spot on. This was one occasion on which the contractor threatened to
walk off.
§
The contractor’s language and
demeanor became so threatening that one neighbor felt compelled to watch, out
of concern for the homeowner’s safety, the homeowner later learned.
§
In addition to raging, the
contractor called off the day’s work.
· This was when the contractor told
the homeowner that he was going to walk because he could make more money at
another job.
o Much initial communication with the contractor was so the homeowner could make any preparations necessary to make the contractor’s work as easy as possible. The homeowner regularly cleaned up the worksite and took other steps to help the contractor.o Conversations focused more on
scheduling and work practices as the homeowners began to see indications that
the contractor was taking shortcuts, not delivering the quality he originally
pitched and suggesting that the work could not be completed before winter if
the homeowner continued to bother him.
§
The homeowner came to believe that
the contractor was not making a good faith effort.
o
As the project progressed, the
homeowner noticed increasing deviance from standard practices for prepping and
painting cedar shingle siding.
o
Part way through the project,
the homeowners’ concerns were validated when one of the contractor’s workers warned the homeowner to watch the
contractor closely because he would “cut corners.”
o
As the homeowners continued to
bring work defects to the contractor’s attention, the contractor expressed increasing
impatience, eventually claiming that the homeowner was slowing him down, and
suggesting that the work might not get completed.
§
The homeowners also began to
notice what they considered to be insincere answers to their concerns. Examples:
o
When homeowner brought up concerns
about the application of primer and top coat, the contractor:
§
Claimed that work reflected normal
practices, “what we always do.”
§
Suggested that variations in
appearance were just “the way the light hits it,” and asked the homeowner if he
didn’t agree after looking at it from several angles.
§
Redirected conversation by saying
that “you’ll like it” when the work is done. Described how the finish will be
smooth “just like vinyl.” (The contractor had just removed vinyl as a part of
the contract!)
o
When homeowner pointed out missed
spots, the contractor only painted the exact spots the homeowner pointed out.
He did not check the rest of the work for similar defect which were apparent.
o
When homeowner showed contractor
that primer had not touched the bottom edge of the siding around the entire
perimeter,
§
He said they get it when they do
the masonry below it.
§
When it remained unpainted after
the masonry had been painted, he mumbled something.
§
Further research revealed
incidents where the contractor had explicitly told his workers to skip steps.
Some instances, such as not prepping window sashes were reported by the workers
themselves.
o
After the contractor walked off, a
former employee of the contractor indicated that paint was peeling, in part,
because the contractor did not allow the cedar shake siding to dry sufficiently
before he began painting. This is probably another example of cutting corners
to save money or get off job quicker.
o
A painter working on second story
discovered that there was apparently only colored primer applied to one side of
the house.
o
Another former employee reported
that the contractor had a motto, “if you can’t see it, it’s painted.” A
reasonable interpretation of this comment might be, “skip work on anything that
the homeowner won’t know about.”
§
Research also produced evidence
that the contractor had little concern for the work other than getting paint
spread and collecting the money.
o
The contractor put up a picture of
the homeowners’ color scheme on his [redacted] page so that his friends could
make fun of it.
o
The [redacted] quotes contractor
expressing indifference to aesthetics and quality and interest in only getting
paid.
o
Strongly expresses indifference to
and even hostile resentment toward the interests and concerns of others,
through images and statements. (This is particularly noticeable in the last six
months.) The homeowner won’t quote the vulgar expressions of indifference in
this communication. (Exact facsimiles of the pages in the Revdex.com’s possession.)
§
The contractor’s behavior feels
like a scam to these homeowners. He may have thought they were gullible because
they were seniors.
o
Contractor starts work with lots
of enthusiasm with big crew. Work gets done.
o
Based on progress, the homeowner
gives the contractor more money.
o
Work tapers off after money
received. Contractor is reported working on other jobs.
o
On at least one occasion when the
contractor called off work because the heat was bad for the paint, his [redacted]
page indicates he was, in fact, working on another job.
5. The contractor’s assertion that 80% of work
was done is absurd! In the homeowners’ opinion, the contractor will be
committing theft if he does not return the fees for work not performed. The work still to be done is a
large percentage of the deliverables listed on the contract.
Here’s a summary of what remains
to be done that were part of the work specified by the contract and paid
for by the homeowner.
Top coat
§
Half of basement perimeter unpainted.
§
10% of first floor unpainted.
§
Entire base of shakes around entire perimeter
unpainted (neither primer nor top coat).
§
No touchup on overspray and bad patches and
misses (especially between shakes).
Window trim, sashes,
soffit and fascia
§
Did not prep half of window frames, door frame
and back door.
§
No window trim was primed or painted with top
coat.
§
No window sashes were prepped, primed or painted with top
coat.
§
Half of soffit and fascia not prepped, primed or
painted.
Crown
molding
§ Materials
that were paid for were not purchased and no work was done cutting, mounting or
painting crown moldings.
Downspouts
§
Downspouts not prepped, primed or painted: Only
a few pieces received primer because of overspray.
§
Downspouts were not reattached to house. All
downspouts are either hanging loose or left laying on the ground.
§
Contractor did not make a new connector for
front porch downspout as he indicated he would during walk around.
Electrical and
fittings
§
Did not reattach electrical service and cable.
Wires are left hanging free, off house.
§
Did not reattach water meter.
o
Meter was simply torn out.
o
Seal will have to be broken to reach attachment
screws. Homeowner will now have to contact utilities for service and possibly
pay a service fee.
§
AC outlet boxes were not reattached. They are
left hanging by wires.
§
AC power box not reattached. It is left hanging.
§
Radon vent stack not painted and is partially
covered with overspray.
Cleanup
§
Chips, scrapings, dust and wood need to be
cleaned up from ground around perimeter of house.
o
Contractor said he would use drop
cloths to catch materials, but did not.
o
Homeowner had to regularly clean and sweep work
area.
§
Large pile of project-related trash needs to be
removed from driveway.
o
Contractor did have dumpster on site at one
point, but had it removed before work was complete.
6. The homeowners also believe they have been cheated by
the contractor delivering substandard work.
The
homeowner projects having to redo about 40% of the prep and painting in the
spring.
The primer and paint are already failing, coming
loose in places and even hanging in sheets.
In some places, the primer began to peel within one day of its application.
It appears that paint has now begun to bulge and
loosen throughout.
Defects
include the following:
Insufficient
or deficient prep on shake siding
§
In many places loose paint was left on.
§
Areas of weathered wood were not cleaned
sufficiently to hold primer or paint.
§
Contractor did not make homeowner aware of any
potential problems with prep.
§
Edges of remaining paint were not feathered.
This was especially apparent on trim and soffits.§ Primer was applied before shakes were adequately dried.
Deficient
application techniques on primer and top coat
§
The contractor did not brush in or roll in the
primer or paint as it was being applied with a sprayer.
o
Brushing or rolling in is the standard practice
described in any reference.
o
Contractor deflected homeowner’s attempts to
discuss this defect, using manipulative techniques previously described.
§
The contractor applied material—especially the
primer—too sparingly.
o
Coating described by another professional
painter who observed application as a “mist.”
o
Surface finish varied where coating was not sufficient
and the wood absorbed all the paint.
§
Missed spraying areas on siding and generally failed to apply paint between
shakes.
§
Contractor recoated only the few places pointed
out as examples of misses, peeling,
and inadequate coverage. He did not inspect or correct problem any other place.
Failure
to use products described as quality features on contract walk around.
o
“Metal-bonding primer” on downspouts.
o
“Sealing” primer on masonry.
Failure
to apply products in a manner that qualifies for manufacturer’s warranty.
o
[redacted] only warrants their
“Resilience” paint line if two coats are applied.
o
The contractor applied only one top coat.
o
The contractor did not mention these
consequences when he presented the application specified in the contract.
o
The homeowners believe they will have no
recourse when the paint coating fails.
§
Application does not meet manufacturer’s
requirements.
§
There is no reasonable expectation that this
contractor will stand behind his work, given his failure to complete contracted
work and his attempt to deflect any discussion of work quality.
The Revdex.com has received photographs demonstrating these failures.
7. Our requests remain unchanged. §
Contractor to not come on property or contact
homeowner except through Revdex.com representative. §
Contractor to return $4,305.00 to homeowner and
approximately $300 for costs incurred from trash removal, purchase of paint and
replacement of downspout parts smashed by crew. §
Contractor to pay cost of repairs on his work
needed in the spring. Repair service will be selected by homeowner.
Regards,
[redacted]
This job was only bid for 7 days when we started she told me she had other contractor's coming that is a hold up I charge $150 a day on delays by law that's my right to but I didn't act on it because they was going on vacation and yes I'm a great guy [redacted] was patching walls after I left for a...
week waiting on her floor guy I went to new damages on walls that was already painted and done she had put some drywall mud on walls while I was gone it was very heavy looking that wall was done do to her other contractor's she reached it and hung a note by it that is a extra #1she asked if I can change her lights and take down ceiling fans and put up lights I did that extra #2 she ask me to raise the lights in bathroom on first floor I did that extra#3 fix doors so they close fix her door jams was hanging off at top of jam ..the wall she said she had redone because she patched that wall her fault not mine if she wants add up what I never got payed for then and my daily rate of job delays at $150 a day then she can call us even and never call me again because her in side paint job looks awesome to me and I got plenty of days over 7 day sorry about this article