On 11/17/2014, to maintain a good working relationship with our customer and in good faith, Scott Roofing Company agreed to compensate the homeowners in the amount of $1,for the patio ceiling damage they incurredThey have additionally rescinded their complaint with the [redacted] , per their letter attachedPlease feel free to contact us with any additional questions
To Whom It May Concern;
Scott Roofing Company promptly addressed the concerns and damage once we were notified by Ms. [redacted] & Mr. [redacted] which was one week after completion and final inspection of the work.
• We were not made aware of any problems until one week after the...
completion of our work and final inspection, at which time there was no visible drywall failure or concerns brought to our attention by the homeowner.
• We are not responsible for these damages as there was no faulty workmanship or negligence on our part.
• Scott Roofing Company, at no time, shall be deemed liable for inherent defective building design.
• We contacted a drywall expert, [redacted] with [redacted]who assessed and determined the probable cause of the damage to be old/dry/brittle material.
We take every precaution possible prior to and during our work to prevent any foreseeable issues.We address those issues immediately and/or notify the homeowner(s) of such to protect the working relationship with our customer. Also, when we are notified of an occurrence or issue after the completion of work, we address it promptly and take responsibility for the issue if it is deemed to be faulty work or negligence on our part. Unfortunately, Scott Roofing Company does not find that to be the case here. The age, underlying condition, workmanship and maintenance of the patio drywall ceiling is not our expertise and it did not show any visible concerns for us to address prior to or during our work. We feel we are being accused of guilt by association and that any disturbance to the structure could have caused this damage .
Please see the attached affidavits by the superintendent, [redacted], and the Production Coordinator, [redacted], along with photographs and other supporting documents .
On 11/17/2014, to maintain a good working relationship with our customer and in good faith, Scott Roofing Company agreed to compensate the homeowners in the amount of $1,680.00 for the patio ceiling damage they incurred. They have additionally rescinded their complaint with the [redacted], per their letter attached. Please feel free to contact us with any additional questions.
On 11/17/2014, to maintain a good working relationship with our customer and in good faith, Scott Roofing Company agreed to compensate the homeowners in the amount of $1,for the patio ceiling damage they incurredThey have additionally rescinded their complaint with the [redacted] , per their letter attachedPlease feel free to contact us with any additional questions
To Whom It May Concern;
Scott Roofing Company promptly addressed the concerns and damage once we were notified by Ms. [redacted] & Mr. [redacted] which was one week after completion and final inspection of the work.
• We were not made aware of any problems until one week after the...
completion of our work and final inspection, at which time there was no visible drywall failure or concerns brought to our attention by the homeowner.
• We are not responsible for these damages as there was no faulty workmanship or negligence on our part.
• Scott Roofing Company, at no time, shall be deemed liable for inherent defective building design.
• We contacted a drywall expert, [redacted] with [redacted]who assessed and determined the probable cause of the damage to be old/dry/brittle material.
We take every precaution possible prior to and during our work to prevent any foreseeable issues.We address those issues immediately and/or notify the homeowner(s) of such to protect the working relationship with our customer. Also, when we are notified of an occurrence or issue after the completion of work, we address it promptly and take responsibility for the issue if it is deemed to be faulty work or negligence on our part. Unfortunately, Scott Roofing Company does not find that to be the case here. The age, underlying condition, workmanship and maintenance of the patio drywall ceiling is not our expertise and it did not show any visible concerns for us to address prior to or during our work. We feel we are being accused of guilt by association and that any disturbance to the structure could have caused this damage .
Please see the attached affidavits by the superintendent, [redacted], and the Production Coordinator, [redacted], along with photographs and other supporting documents .
On 11/17/2014, to maintain a good working relationship with our customer and in good faith, Scott Roofing Company agreed to compensate the homeowners in the amount of $1,680.00 for the patio ceiling damage they incurred. They have additionally rescinded their complaint with the [redacted], per their letter attached. Please feel free to contact us with any additional questions.