Walter Roofing

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/24) */
Contact Name and Title: *** *** Estimator
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: ***@sbcglobal.net
November 24,
RE: Revdex.com Complaint Activity Report
Case #: XXXXXXX
*** *** ***
StLouis, MO
XXXXX
To Whom It May Concern:
On March 14, 1996, MWalter Roofing Company, Inc., now Walter Roofing Company, Inc., completed a contracted roof removal and reinstallation at *** *** *** StLouis, MO XXXXX for Mr*** ***This roof installation included installation of 15# felt shingle underlayment prior to shingle application
The roof installation carried a 10-Yrworkmanship and material guarantee against leaking that expired
March 14, The shingles themselves carried a 25-YrManufacturers Warranty against defects
On May 21, 1998, loose shingles tabs were repaired and the rear east side chimney flashing was resealed under the terms of MWalter Roofing Company, Incguarantee against leaking, even though the defective shingle tabs were not the result of improper installation, but a design flaw of this particular shingle style (GAF Slateline) that now years later has become evident, but was unknown at that timeAdditionally the defective tabs did not result in a leaking condition to the interior, yet were still repaired by MWalter Roofing Company
On May 7, 2015, more than years after installation of the roof, Mr*** contacted Walter Roofing Company, Incto solicit an estimate for repair/replacement of additional shingle tabs that are missing from
the roofAn estimator met with Mr*** upon inspection of the roof, where upon Mr*** informed the estimator that another contractor solicited for an estimate for some painting/repair at the front dormer had discovered that there was no felt underlayment beneath the shingles at a singular location on the roof, a finding that has yet to be substantiatedMr*** also expressed his displeasure at the manner in which the shingle roof was terminated beneath the front dormer 21/2-story windowsill, again more than years after the roof was installed
Shortly thereafter in May of 2015, Mr*** and Walter Roofing Company, Incmanagement engaged in a conversation via phone about the perceived lack of felt installation over the entire roof area
It is Walter Roofing Company, Inc.'s belief that it is highly unlikely that installation of felt was omitted prior to the shingle roof installation back in It is also our belief that if is possible there could be a small area where there might not be felt underneath the shinglesBut after plus years of a leak-free roof installation, Walter Roofing Company, Inccontends a refund of the felting costs of the roof installation in is unwarranted based on the assumption that the entire roof was not felted if in one location, felt was missing (yet to be substantiated)
Respectfully Submitted,
*** ***
Estimator