Town & Country Roofing

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/12/24) */ We received a call from [redacted] in January regards to getting an estimate for some repairs on the roof We scheduled on of our technicians to go out to Lyndhurst Place in San Ramon on 1/7/for a roof repair estimate Tech went out and found what the problem was and we sent the homeowner a bid Homeowner received the bid and agreed to repairsPlease note on the contract bid it states in section under our Terms and Conditions that "There is no guarantee on warranty work.) Repairs were completed on 1/20/ Repair Work to Include: Remove approximately 12' x 4' tiles around left side of home and along wall Remove deteriorated felt as needed Remove all debris Install new lbASTM felt as needed Replace approximately broken tiles(grey /flat) Clean debris from gutters around right side of homeapproximately 2" of gutter Replace approximately 1/to 2" along with rubber collars Replace broken tiles over the entry way Clean debris from gutters around left side of home Clean debris along were valley metal and roof to wall meet Re- secure slipped tiles We received a call from [redacted] on February in regards to having the same leak he had last year were repairs were made We again sent out one of our technicians to go out to the home and take a look at the leak They found that the reason why it was leaking this time is not due to other repairsThere was a metal that was installed by another trade (most likely the sheetmetal contractor who was on the job when the home was built) that was cut shortWe gave homeowner an estimate to extend the metal piece so the water could be diverted to stop the leak Our new estimate was the following: Repair Work to Include: Remove tiles around the turret section were metal was cut short by other trade Install new piece of lead to extend existing metal around the turret(Approximately ft.) Re-install existing tiles back into place Remove and clean all debris caused by firm Once bid was sent to the homeowner he was upset as to why he needed to pay an additional $1,to make those repairWe explained to the homeowner it was not from the same spot, and it was from a different location Homeowner never hired us to do the new repairs To recap: Water intrusion was caused the first time by broken and slipped tiles as well as debrisThe second leak was caused by debris build up in the metal flashing around the turret areaThis metal being installed short also was a factor in this roof leaking Just because water is coming in to the house in the same general area, does not always mean that it is caused by the same problem Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/01/10) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The owner's response is eloquent and reads wellbut the leak continued through the exact same spot in the ceiling following the very first significant rainfall during this droughtI believe the odds of a second roof defect presenting itself right after the first defect was repaired and then leaking in the exact same area is extremely lowdespite the well written explanation In additionthe company's 2nd technician even questioned why the repair did not involve an area higher on the roofthis was the same comment as the roofers of the subsequent company that eventually made a successful repair (in that area)both entities were surprised that the first technician missed "the problem" (it was also mentioned that the material used in the initial repair was "outdated"they were "like leftover scraps put together"noted by the second company) Being forbidden to speak with the owner of the company and or the 2nd technician who questioned the first repair from Town & Country Roofing only made this more frustratingnot to mention that the original technician doesn't work for the company anymorewas he fired for poor outcomes? Despite the language of the contract, I would hope that a consumer has some protection in such eventsif the inital technician had defiencies then the owner should share some responsibility for employing that person while he did substandard repairsI believe that recognition by the owner that the repair was not done to the standard of practice as well as some responsibility for the poor workmanship of one of its employees in the form of a refund of some reasonable percentage of the payment made would be fair

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/12/24) */
We received a call from [redacted] in January 2013 regards to getting an estimate for some repairs on the roof.
We scheduled on of our technicians to go out to 126 Lyndhurst Place in San Ramon on 1/7/2013 for a roof repair estimate.
Tech...

went out and found what the problem was and we sent the homeowner a bid.
Homeowner received the bid and agreed to repairs. Please note on the contract bid it states in section 6.13 under our Terms and Conditions that "There is no guarantee on warranty work.)

Repairs were completed on 1/20/13
Repair Work to Include:
1. Remove approximately 12' x 4' tiles around left side of home and along wall.
2. Remove deteriorated felt as needed.
3. Remove all debris.
4. Install new 30 lb. ASTM felt as needed.
5. Replace approximately 6 broken tiles. (grey /flat)
6. Clean debris from gutters around right side of home. approximately 2" of gutter
7. Replace approximately 5 1 1/2 to 2" along with 5 rubber collars.
8. Replace 1 broken tiles over the entry way.
9. Clean debris from gutters around left side of home.
10. Clean debris along were valley metal and roof to wall meet.
11. Re- secure slipped tiles.
We received a call from [redacted] on February 2014 in regards to having the same leak he had last year were repairs were made.
We again sent out one of our technicians to go out to the home and take a look at the leak.
They found that the reason why it was leaking this time is not due to other repairs. There was a metal that was installed by another trade (most likely the sheetmetal contractor who was on the job when the home was built) that was cut short. We gave homeowner an estimate to extend the metal piece so the water could be diverted to stop the leak.
Our new estimate was the following:
Repair Work to Include:
1. Remove tiles around the turret section were metal was cut short by other trade.
2. Install new piece of lead to extend existing metal around the turret. (Approximately 5 ft.)
3. Re-install existing tiles back into place.
4. Remove and clean all debris caused by firm.

Once bid was sent to the homeowner he was upset as to why he needed to pay an additional $1,505.00 to make those repair. We explained to the homeowner it was not from the same spot, and it was from a different location.
Homeowner never hired us to do the new repairs.
To recap: Water intrusion was caused the first time by broken and slipped tiles as well as debris. The second leak was caused by debris build up in the metal flashing around the turret area. This metal being installed short also was a factor in this roof leaking.
Just because water is coming in to the house in the same general area, does not always mean that it is caused by the same problem.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/01/10) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The owner's response is eloquent and reads wellbut the leak continued through the exact same spot in the ceiling following the very first significant rainfall during this drought. I believe the odds of a second roof defect presenting itself right after the first defect was repaired and then leaking in the exact same area is extremely lowdespite the well written explanation.
In additionthe company's 2nd technician even questioned why the repair did not involve an area higher on the roofthis was the same comment as the roofers of the subsequent company that eventually made a successful repair (in that area)both entities were surprised that the first technician missed "the problem" (it was also mentioned that the material used in the initial repair was "outdated"they were "like leftover scraps put together"noted by the second company).
Being forbidden to speak with the owner of the company and or the 2nd technician who questioned the first repair from Town & Country Roofing only made this more frustratingnot to mention that the original technician doesn't work for the company anymorewas he fired for poor outcomes?
Despite the language of the contract, I would hope that a consumer has some protection in such eventsif the inital technician had defiencies then the owner should share some responsibility for employing that person while he did substandard repairs. I believe that recognition by the owner that the repair was not done to the standard of practice as well as some responsibility for the poor workmanship of one of its employees in the form of a refund of some reasonable percentage of the payment made would be fair.