- Report: #243347
Complaint Review: Doit4me Remodeling - Dallas Texas
-
Author Confirmed
Why?
Doit4me Remodeling
13601 Preston Road, Suite 470E Dallas, 75240 Texas, U.S.A.
Phone:
972-980-1771
Web:
N/A
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
Doit4me Remodeling Did it to me Illegal, dangerous, sub-standand deck cover ripoff Dallas Texas
We have pictures and video of this entire mess
The video of the roof buckling and leaking profusely is scary
All we wanted was for it to be done properly, within a reasonable amount of time.
What we got was a frustrating, stressful, expensive, dangerous mess.
Due to the contract violations, illegal construction, child endangerment, humiliating treatment, and the extreme amount of trouble and stress we are demanding a full refund.
Summary
We hired DoIt4Me (DIFM) construction to build a corrugated plastic covering on our deck so we could have shade from the sun and protection from the rain. What we received was a, dangerous, sub-standard, poorly constructed cover that leaked like a sieve and posed a danger to our family and house and did not have a permit from the city.
We have already paid out $898 of the $1,797 contract and are demanding that all of our money be returned. The illegal work performed by DIFM was totally unacceptable and has caused us considerable stress. We had to remove their dangerous, leaky cover and replace it on our own.
The following is a documentation of the events of this situation.
February
We contacted DoIt4Me (DIFM) for a bid to do an addition for our house that included adding the following:
o Sun room
o Media room
o Two bedrooms
o Bathroom
o Deck cover ($1,547.00)
On 2/25/07 Albert provided us with a detailed bid for $125,934.00 to do the work.
March 1 13
We contacted Albert Fairclough and asked for a price on covering the deck with aluminum instead of plastic. He gave us a quote of $2,263 for an aluminum deck cover.
Since $125,934 is a big commitment for us and would require us getting the maximum limit on a home equity loan to finance, we decided to try out DoIt4Me by having them do the deck cover only. Once we saw how they did on that small part of the project, we would then decide if we wanted to use them for the additional $124,387.00 in remodeling.
Tuesday, March 13
We contacted Albert Fairclough at DoIt4Me and asked him to send the bid and contract for the plastic corrugated roof.
He sent us a contract to do the plastic roof at the aluminum roof price of $2,263.
We told him that this was the wrong price for the plastic cover.
Albert then sent us another contract for the plastic roof for $1,797.
o The original bid for the plastic cover was $1,547
o First he sends us a contract for a plastic roof at the higher aluminum price and then he corrects' it to a price that doesn't match his original bid for the roof.
o At this time we were so busy with painters and repairs to our house that we failed to notice that this was not even the correct price for a plastic cover. He slipped in a higher price that, since we were in a hurry to get this all done, we did not realize. If we had taken the time to compare this price to that in the original quote from February we would not have signed this contract. Our mistake and a sign of things to come.
The contract included the following commitments from DoIt4Me. A complete copy is attached for reference.
o Article 2: Time of Completion
The work to be preformed under this agreement shall be commenced on or before Wednesday March 14, 2007 and shall be substantially completed on or before Thursday March 15, 2007.
o Article 4: General Provisions
1. DIFM agrees to complete the work in a workman-like manner and with applicable laws.
8. If required DIFM shall be responsible to obtain all permits necessary for the work to be preformed.
9. DIFM agrees to remove all debris and leave the premise in broom clean condition.
o Article 7: Warranty
All DIFM's labor comes with a 120 day warranty.
Wednesday, March 14
DIFM sub-contracted the work to a man named Robert and his helper. They arrived on Wednesday and started the job.
DIFM did not obtain a building permit Article 4, Section 8 of the contract states that DIFM will obtain all necessary permits. The city of Garland requires a permit for the work they were contracted to do. DIFM never got the permit for the job. We have it in writing on a letter DIFM sent to us where they admit to doing our job without obtaining a building permit.
We decided that we didn't feel that the gray plastic we had selected would provide sufficient shade. We asked Robert if it would be a problem to switch out to an opaque green. He stated that it would not be a problem, since he hadn't installed any of the material yet. He just wanted us to be sure we could locate the same number of pieces of the green that he had obtained of the gray. We found the required amount that he said he needed at a local Home Depot that day.
Robert had purchased plastic sub-bracing for the corrugated plastic. We asked him if this would be a problem if we changed out the cover. He said that it wouldn't be a problem, since the same bracing was used for both types of cover. He made a point that he would be able to use the same bracing.
Note: No plastic sub-bracing was ever installed.
At the end of the day they had removed the framing and sunscreen. There were only a few pieces of the new framing installed, no covering installed at this point.
Thursday, March 15
At the end of the day - Additional framing was installed. No cover was installed.
Article 2 of the contract stated that the work shall be substantially completed on or before Thursday March 15, 2007
Friday, March 16
Robert told Ted that he needed to go back to the store to get the correct glue. Robert remarked that someone must have put the wrong tube in the bin and that it was not the proper glue for the job. He couldn't continue until he had the right glue.
Note: When we removed the defective covering ourselves we discovered that DIFM had only used glue on 2 of the 30 pieces of deck cover. The 2 outside pieces that were visible from the back door had glue None of the other pieces were glued.
At the end of the day approximately 2 or 3 pieces of the covering were installed and the framing was not complete.
Saturday, March 17
The crew continued to work on the deck cover.
At the end of the day the framing was up and approximately 2/3 of the covering was installed.
Sunday, March 18
Sunday afternoon while sitting on the deck we began to see evidence of poor workmanship. We made a brief list and e-mailed it to Albert. Highlights of the email are listed below:
First email - There are boards cut too short with1/4 inch gaps in the joints, joints with no less that 20 nails in them at joints, different overhang distances, different overlapping amounts, reused wood, double cross pieces, among other things. I'm not sure this will hold up in a wind storm, I think this might leak, and these excessive nails looks really strange. I left Karen a message yesterday about the overhang issue - but we did not look at this work in this detail until today. We are very disappointed.
Second email - Albert - Ted just measured the pitch of this roof. It is an inch higher on the outside than next to the house. The roof is going to flow TO our house, not away from it. It is supposed to rain this week. Please call me.
Monday, March 19
The crew returned to complete the cover.
A crewmember of DIFM brought his wife and a small child (about 3 to 5 years old) on the construction site. Without our permission, the child played in our trampoline. We did not agree in the contract to allow small children on the job site nor would we have agreed to allow a child to play on our trampoline.
o Article 4 of the contract states that DIFM agrees to complete the work in a workman-like manner and with applicable laws
o The Texas Department of Child Protective Services will be notified that DIFM brought a small child onto an active construction site.
Monday Morning
Stephanie spoke to Albert Monday morning expressing dissatisfaction with poor workmanship. Albert insisted that Robert complete the job. She disagreed with this, but allowed that. Karen (from DIFM) couldn't meet me when I could be here. They came and said that they completed the job. Karen wanted to know when she could pick up a check for the final amount due. However, the following items were not addressed:
o Joint brackets were put up at the end to hide the 20 nails I had complained about in my e-mail. The normal process is to put the brackets up first to join the boards. Instead, they were sloppily slapped on at the end to mask sub-standard work. Not all of the joints even have a brace. Some of those that do have a brace that is bent and deformed to fit around the poor nail job.
o They said they would glue the pieces to the edges next to the house This wasn't done.
o They said they could cut off the edges to get rid of the various lengths where it sticks out beyond the deck. This wasn't done.
o When I returned at 4:15, they were gone.
Monday Night
Since the roof pitch still appeared to be flat, Ted re-measured the pitch. It now sloped away from the house, but only about 2 inches over an 18-foot span.
We placed a hose onto our house roof and allowed it to drain onto the deck roof for approximately ten minutes.
o The roof did not drain the water formed puddles and leaked profusely onto the deck. Not one drop made it to the edge to drain off.
o The plastic pieces buckled under the weight of the water
o This was only from a few minutes of a hose spraying water onto the house where it then drained onto the deck. In the event of a rain, there would be substantially more water on the deck roof The rain that will drain off the house roof onto the deck and the rain that would fall directly onto the deck roof.
o This deck cover was mounted to posts that are bolted to the bricks on the side of our house. The company that built the structure said that it would not support a composite roof. This posed a serious danger! A inch rain would result in a load on the deck of nearly 2,200 lbs. This would result in a collapse of the structure. A collapse would:
Pull the wall of bricks off our house
Pose a danger to anyone under it
Destroy our deck and items on it
Stainless steel grill
Two set of tables and chairs
Deck Swing
Fountain
Three custom built benches
Speakers & lighting
Rain was in the forecast!
Stephanie immediately called Karen and Albert.
o Albert said that he'd send Robert out here to check it out.
o Stephanie insisted that Albert needed to come out here that this thing could come crashing down if it rains and it is supposed to rain.
o After much discussion Albert finally agreed to come out with Robert
o Stephanie specifically requested that he not bring Robert because we had issues with his work, but he denied that request. He said he'd be here first thing Tuesday and see what's happening
o Stephanie expressed to him that this was an EMERGENCY and that this needed to be corrected NOW because of risk of further damage to the deck flooring and the house if it rains.
Tuesday, March 20
Tuesday 10:30 - No one has called Stephanie, no one had come
Stephanie left messages on cell phones and at the office.
Albert at 9:15 was in his office not on his way here.
Stephanie spoke with Ann at 10:15 and she indicated that he might be there but that she'd try to call him. Stephanie told her that this deck could come crashing down if we get rain and that it will take my den wall with it because they are attached.
At this point, Stephanie had informed Albert and Karen that this roof won't drain. The first call was at 6:30 last night. She told them how much damage this could cause if it rained. Now it's 10:30 Tuesday and she just spoke with Ann at the office. I expressed to her how much damage could be caused if this thing comes down.
Karen (on-site job supervisor who didn't really do anything other than call to pick up the check) called and said Robert and Albert would come out this afternoon. I spoke with her in a very calm manner about all of this. I expressed why having Robert here isn't a good idea. She understands it all. She said she would talk to Albert.
Wednesday, March 21
Wed. 8:00 AM
Stephanie called Albert on his cell since he never called her back. He said my only option was to have Robert come back, change the pitch 1.75 and put extra supports in. He was smart with her and said she was over-managing this project. She said, I am telling you what is wrong I'm not managing it. He said his obligation is to complete the deck.
Albert said to Stephanie - I've been in the construction business for 31 years so my experience trumps yours. What a thing to say to a customer!
Stephanie said it wasn't a matter of trumping, that she sees what's wrong and he doesn't. He refused to meet with her and look at what is wrong. Robert created this mess, and Albert's only solution was to send the same guy back.
Albert said the deck wasn't plumb and that was the problem.
Then he said the deck should have been demolished. (Funny how he didn't mention that before.)
Then he asked Stephanie if she knew what plumb was. She was flabbergasted and didn't think to say that no only does she know but no constructed areas truly are plumb it's just an excuse for poor workmanship.
She told him there was numerous trips to the store for materials and proper planning would have prevented that. He acknowledged that the brackets at the joints were added at the end for support. They are the type that is screwed into a piece of wood and the piece perpendicular to it slides down into the slot. He did not seem to think gaps at the joints are a problem.
Albert refused to meet with Stephanie. He said she's budding in and trying to become the manager of this. He did acknowledge that I had some reason to be concerned.
The nails used to hold up the last minute extra supports are held up by random fasteners - new nails, old nails, rusty screws, and random used inconsistent nails
Somehow Ted's name came up and he said to have Ted talk to him instead of me. Stephanie told him that he does not want to talk to Ted because he's so angry, that I'm the calm nice one in conflict. When asked about these mistakes, he didn't want to really deal with them said Ted would have to tell him. Maybe he thought I was just a complaining woman that Ted wouldn't have any problems..wrong. I told him that in reality I saw many of the problems.
At that point, Albert said, Oh, so this is all about you and not Ted. Stephanie said that we were both in 100% agreement with these problems. But he wanted to think that Ted was ok with things but that I was being a complainer.
Albert said he wanted to fix this because, I don't want a problem with you at the end of this job. He began to treat Stephanie like she's a whining woman.
At one point Albert didn't think Stephanie understood something and he said, Wait, you didn't hear me right.
Also said Albert wouldn't listen to Stephanie.
Here's his only proposal:
Robert returns
Adds support
Drops the outer edge 1 3/4 inches
Trims the edges
Albert says it will take 6 hours. It took DIFM 5 days to put up 44 boards and the top..something told me that it might take more than 6 hours.
Wed 9:30 AM
Stephanie called Albert back around 9:30. After some discussion she proposed that DIFM remove the plastic and put up lattice because we don't think this drain problem could be fixed by Robert. Albert says that might work if we pay for materials and any labor over 6 hours. I said I wasn't surehe said he'd have to see what the costs would be and get back with me. Here's my point.I'll pay for lattice, they put it up at no cost. Eat it their mistake we didn't even want lattice, but considering that we have to have a contractor I have no faith in, this is the best solution.
Wed 1:30 PM
Stephanie did not hear from Albert until 1:30 then he proposed his plan. Instead of appeasing this unhappy customer, he added more cost to this project saying that the color change cost 6 hours. We had originally selected a gray and it was too light so we switched to green. See Wed 3/14 bullet point # 2 where Robert agrees to change out the material at no additional charge. Robert couldn't plan anything, much less how many hours that took. I found the new color, I told him where it was he picked it up. That took one-hour max. I'll agree that maybe one other hour was spent calling and looking for this stuff. But THEN he RAN OUT. back to the store they are out off to other stores; why is it MY cost if he can't plan how much he needs they had what he asked for and more until he ran out and started looking again. His inability to plan is not our problem.
Wed Evening
Ted takes down fiberglass. Discovers:
A nail in one section this would leak
Glue ONLY on the outer edge next to the flowerbed and around the corner and glue under ONE seam. This is the one area people would check. No glue on any other pieces. A glob of glue on the underside of the piece next to the flowerbeds.
Ted removed all fiberglass pieces in 2.5 hours, almost half the time Robert estimated to Albert that it would take him to complete it.
110 screws were on this deck that is 18X24 and had 44 sections.
The section that was glued (the visible one next to the house) had screws every 6 to 12 inches. The other 43 sections had only a screw every 3 to 4 feet.
o This, in our opinion, was an intentional misrepresentation of quality: First section has glue and numerous screws appears to be an intentional short cut by doing it right where we'd check, but not the rest because it's physically impossible to check without removing the fiberglass. No one would do that.
I feel pretty sure he wanted this job to stop. We e-mailed this afternoon about how to resolve this. He wanted us to pay for 6 hours that it cost Robert for our color change. We told him that was unreasonable as I located the new color, selected 14 pieces as he requested.he got them. THEN he ran outpoor planning. I did not want to pay for 6 hours, I said I'd compromise with 3, as long as the project was complete by Friday at 5:00. No response from that final e-mail. Won't return my call was in the office when I called, according to Stephanie the secretary girl, yet he sent the line right to voice mail he hates talking to me avoids me at every cost.
The more we look at this thing from the big picture..the more we feel we have been intentionally ripped-off by Robert. He knew he was cutting corners. and what's funny is he cut corners and still took five days to complete a 2-day project. We just don't understand why Albert defends someone who made these mistakes. I was never rude I simply stated what was wrong.
Albert does not stand behind his product.
What we had before this job:
Over half the deck framed and sunscreen on it.
After this fiasco, we now have a
Fully, poorly framed deck
Our sunscreen has been disposed of.
So, after the removal of the fiberglass that was improperly installed, we have a frame that is only 40% larger than what we had.
We're not ahead by much. We're ahead by only the 40% of framing and we're behind in topping and we're a week behind schedule. Additionally, the framing is sub-standard quality and looks horrible.
Thursday, March 22
Deal is off. Thursday morning Albert insists charging additional costs for a horrible job because Robert spent time looking for materials. That is simply a lie.
Robert didn't buy enough materials in the first place and would have still had to have gotten more because he only had 14
The nerve of Albert to ask for MORE money on a botched project is purely bad business horrible customer service.
o Make a product in triple the time promised in writing in the contract
o Make a poor quality, dangerous, shoddy product
o And charge MORE. That is totally unacceptable
Robert never mentioned that there was any additional cost to this project. When asked about these changes, he said, It's no problem since I haven't started. No mention of money.
Friday, March 23
We install the lattice ourselves Takes 13 hours.
After working on laying the lattice, we find that nails, screws, random DIFFERENT things that were used to attach the brackets they added after the fact. Found more nails that don't go into anything simply in the middle of a board but they were left there.
Is the reason he wouldn't let someone else come out is because anyone else would say we had to start over because this is so bad? Or was it because they would discover the work was done without a permit?
DIFM used scrap wood in our pile of scrap wood as two of the supports. The agreement stated they would mount the new roof to the existing structure. It was not to re-use scrap lumber, rusty nails, and rusty screw from our existing cover.
They installed a random old board that is butted up to a new one doesn't even go to the edges of the section. May had been because of the way they laid the fiberglass or maybe because they cut the boards too short? Totally unacceptable It looks hideous.
Albert said this stuff isn't supposed to be glued just screwed. But there was a row of glue on the side. Fluttering is good no glue he said. However, Robert said he was using glue (See , March 16.)
Friday, March 30
We received a final letter demanding payment, which had a Post It note attached that also stated the following:
That DIFM did not have a building permit..but it specifically said in the contract that THEY would get the permit so this was a simple admission that he didn't get a permit which is required by law
And that they wanted to know when they should report our non-payment to Equifax, a credit reporting company.
Final bill is actually wrong to our advantage. The final payment was to be $898 plus the extra three hours we compromised on for the color change. Final bill came and it was $778. Go figure. He can't add. But it doesn't matter we're not paying it. DIFM has $898 of our money and here's how he improved our deck: it is now 40% larger than what they started with. (We had framing on 60% before they came.) I don't think that extra framing and horrible customer service is worth $898. Oh, and that building permit.
The contract said the job would be completed in two days final nail on first pass was completed on day 5. Contract stated that THEY would get the permit they didn't. Did they know it wouldn't pass inspection, so they intentionally didn't get one? Well, that's our opinion on why, anyway. They said they'd put a lien on our house and report us to Equifax. I just want them to go away. And I don't want them to do business with anyone else no one should have to put up with people like this. All they have done is give contractors a bad name.
Stephanie
Garland, Texas
U.S.A.
The video of the roof buckling and leaking profusely is scary
All we wanted was for it to be done properly, within a reasonable amount of time.
What we got was a frustrating, stressful, expensive, dangerous mess.
Due to the contract violations, illegal construction, child endangerment, humiliating treatment, and the extreme amount of trouble and stress we are demanding a full refund.
Summary
We hired DoIt4Me (DIFM) construction to build a corrugated plastic covering on our deck so we could have shade from the sun and protection from the rain. What we received was a, dangerous, sub-standard, poorly constructed cover that leaked like a sieve and posed a danger to our family and house and did not have a permit from the city.
We have already paid out $898 of the $1,797 contract and are demanding that all of our money be returned. The illegal work performed by DIFM was totally unacceptable and has caused us considerable stress. We had to remove their dangerous, leaky cover and replace it on our own.
The following is a documentation of the events of this situation.
February
We contacted DoIt4Me (DIFM) for a bid to do an addition for our house that included adding the following:
o Sun room
o Media room
o Two bedrooms
o Bathroom
o Deck cover ($1,547.00)
On 2/25/07 Albert provided us with a detailed bid for $125,934.00 to do the work.
March 1 13
We contacted Albert Fairclough and asked for a price on covering the deck with aluminum instead of plastic. He gave us a quote of $2,263 for an aluminum deck cover.
Since $125,934 is a big commitment for us and would require us getting the maximum limit on a home equity loan to finance, we decided to try out DoIt4Me by having them do the deck cover only. Once we saw how they did on that small part of the project, we would then decide if we wanted to use them for the additional $124,387.00 in remodeling.
Tuesday, March 13
We contacted Albert Fairclough at DoIt4Me and asked him to send the bid and contract for the plastic corrugated roof.
He sent us a contract to do the plastic roof at the aluminum roof price of $2,263.
We told him that this was the wrong price for the plastic cover.
Albert then sent us another contract for the plastic roof for $1,797.
o The original bid for the plastic cover was $1,547
o First he sends us a contract for a plastic roof at the higher aluminum price and then he corrects' it to a price that doesn't match his original bid for the roof.
o At this time we were so busy with painters and repairs to our house that we failed to notice that this was not even the correct price for a plastic cover. He slipped in a higher price that, since we were in a hurry to get this all done, we did not realize. If we had taken the time to compare this price to that in the original quote from February we would not have signed this contract. Our mistake and a sign of things to come.
The contract included the following commitments from DoIt4Me. A complete copy is attached for reference.
o Article 2: Time of Completion
The work to be preformed under this agreement shall be commenced on or before Wednesday March 14, 2007 and shall be substantially completed on or before Thursday March 15, 2007.
o Article 4: General Provisions
1. DIFM agrees to complete the work in a workman-like manner and with applicable laws.
8. If required DIFM shall be responsible to obtain all permits necessary for the work to be preformed.
9. DIFM agrees to remove all debris and leave the premise in broom clean condition.
o Article 7: Warranty
All DIFM's labor comes with a 120 day warranty.
Wednesday, March 14
DIFM sub-contracted the work to a man named Robert and his helper. They arrived on Wednesday and started the job.
DIFM did not obtain a building permit Article 4, Section 8 of the contract states that DIFM will obtain all necessary permits. The city of Garland requires a permit for the work they were contracted to do. DIFM never got the permit for the job. We have it in writing on a letter DIFM sent to us where they admit to doing our job without obtaining a building permit.
We decided that we didn't feel that the gray plastic we had selected would provide sufficient shade. We asked Robert if it would be a problem to switch out to an opaque green. He stated that it would not be a problem, since he hadn't installed any of the material yet. He just wanted us to be sure we could locate the same number of pieces of the green that he had obtained of the gray. We found the required amount that he said he needed at a local Home Depot that day.
Robert had purchased plastic sub-bracing for the corrugated plastic. We asked him if this would be a problem if we changed out the cover. He said that it wouldn't be a problem, since the same bracing was used for both types of cover. He made a point that he would be able to use the same bracing.
Note: No plastic sub-bracing was ever installed.
At the end of the day they had removed the framing and sunscreen. There were only a few pieces of the new framing installed, no covering installed at this point.
Thursday, March 15
At the end of the day - Additional framing was installed. No cover was installed.
Article 2 of the contract stated that the work shall be substantially completed on or before Thursday March 15, 2007
Friday, March 16
Robert told Ted that he needed to go back to the store to get the correct glue. Robert remarked that someone must have put the wrong tube in the bin and that it was not the proper glue for the job. He couldn't continue until he had the right glue.
Note: When we removed the defective covering ourselves we discovered that DIFM had only used glue on 2 of the 30 pieces of deck cover. The 2 outside pieces that were visible from the back door had glue None of the other pieces were glued.
At the end of the day approximately 2 or 3 pieces of the covering were installed and the framing was not complete.
Saturday, March 17
The crew continued to work on the deck cover.
At the end of the day the framing was up and approximately 2/3 of the covering was installed.
Sunday, March 18
Sunday afternoon while sitting on the deck we began to see evidence of poor workmanship. We made a brief list and e-mailed it to Albert. Highlights of the email are listed below:
First email - There are boards cut too short with1/4 inch gaps in the joints, joints with no less that 20 nails in them at joints, different overhang distances, different overlapping amounts, reused wood, double cross pieces, among other things. I'm not sure this will hold up in a wind storm, I think this might leak, and these excessive nails looks really strange. I left Karen a message yesterday about the overhang issue - but we did not look at this work in this detail until today. We are very disappointed.
Second email - Albert - Ted just measured the pitch of this roof. It is an inch higher on the outside than next to the house. The roof is going to flow TO our house, not away from it. It is supposed to rain this week. Please call me.
Monday, March 19
The crew returned to complete the cover.
A crewmember of DIFM brought his wife and a small child (about 3 to 5 years old) on the construction site. Without our permission, the child played in our trampoline. We did not agree in the contract to allow small children on the job site nor would we have agreed to allow a child to play on our trampoline.
o Article 4 of the contract states that DIFM agrees to complete the work in a workman-like manner and with applicable laws
o The Texas Department of Child Protective Services will be notified that DIFM brought a small child onto an active construction site.
Monday Morning
Stephanie spoke to Albert Monday morning expressing dissatisfaction with poor workmanship. Albert insisted that Robert complete the job. She disagreed with this, but allowed that. Karen (from DIFM) couldn't meet me when I could be here. They came and said that they completed the job. Karen wanted to know when she could pick up a check for the final amount due. However, the following items were not addressed:
o Joint brackets were put up at the end to hide the 20 nails I had complained about in my e-mail. The normal process is to put the brackets up first to join the boards. Instead, they were sloppily slapped on at the end to mask sub-standard work. Not all of the joints even have a brace. Some of those that do have a brace that is bent and deformed to fit around the poor nail job.
o They said they would glue the pieces to the edges next to the house This wasn't done.
o They said they could cut off the edges to get rid of the various lengths where it sticks out beyond the deck. This wasn't done.
o When I returned at 4:15, they were gone.
Monday Night
Since the roof pitch still appeared to be flat, Ted re-measured the pitch. It now sloped away from the house, but only about 2 inches over an 18-foot span.
We placed a hose onto our house roof and allowed it to drain onto the deck roof for approximately ten minutes.
o The roof did not drain the water formed puddles and leaked profusely onto the deck. Not one drop made it to the edge to drain off.
o The plastic pieces buckled under the weight of the water
o This was only from a few minutes of a hose spraying water onto the house where it then drained onto the deck. In the event of a rain, there would be substantially more water on the deck roof The rain that will drain off the house roof onto the deck and the rain that would fall directly onto the deck roof.
o This deck cover was mounted to posts that are bolted to the bricks on the side of our house. The company that built the structure said that it would not support a composite roof. This posed a serious danger! A inch rain would result in a load on the deck of nearly 2,200 lbs. This would result in a collapse of the structure. A collapse would:
Pull the wall of bricks off our house
Pose a danger to anyone under it
Destroy our deck and items on it
Stainless steel grill
Two set of tables and chairs
Deck Swing
Fountain
Three custom built benches
Speakers & lighting
Rain was in the forecast!
Stephanie immediately called Karen and Albert.
o Albert said that he'd send Robert out here to check it out.
o Stephanie insisted that Albert needed to come out here that this thing could come crashing down if it rains and it is supposed to rain.
o After much discussion Albert finally agreed to come out with Robert
o Stephanie specifically requested that he not bring Robert because we had issues with his work, but he denied that request. He said he'd be here first thing Tuesday and see what's happening
o Stephanie expressed to him that this was an EMERGENCY and that this needed to be corrected NOW because of risk of further damage to the deck flooring and the house if it rains.
Tuesday, March 20
Tuesday 10:30 - No one has called Stephanie, no one had come
Stephanie left messages on cell phones and at the office.
Albert at 9:15 was in his office not on his way here.
Stephanie spoke with Ann at 10:15 and she indicated that he might be there but that she'd try to call him. Stephanie told her that this deck could come crashing down if we get rain and that it will take my den wall with it because they are attached.
At this point, Stephanie had informed Albert and Karen that this roof won't drain. The first call was at 6:30 last night. She told them how much damage this could cause if it rained. Now it's 10:30 Tuesday and she just spoke with Ann at the office. I expressed to her how much damage could be caused if this thing comes down.
Karen (on-site job supervisor who didn't really do anything other than call to pick up the check) called and said Robert and Albert would come out this afternoon. I spoke with her in a very calm manner about all of this. I expressed why having Robert here isn't a good idea. She understands it all. She said she would talk to Albert.
Wednesday, March 21
Wed. 8:00 AM
Stephanie called Albert on his cell since he never called her back. He said my only option was to have Robert come back, change the pitch 1.75 and put extra supports in. He was smart with her and said she was over-managing this project. She said, I am telling you what is wrong I'm not managing it. He said his obligation is to complete the deck.
Albert said to Stephanie - I've been in the construction business for 31 years so my experience trumps yours. What a thing to say to a customer!
Stephanie said it wasn't a matter of trumping, that she sees what's wrong and he doesn't. He refused to meet with her and look at what is wrong. Robert created this mess, and Albert's only solution was to send the same guy back.
Albert said the deck wasn't plumb and that was the problem.
Then he said the deck should have been demolished. (Funny how he didn't mention that before.)
Then he asked Stephanie if she knew what plumb was. She was flabbergasted and didn't think to say that no only does she know but no constructed areas truly are plumb it's just an excuse for poor workmanship.
She told him there was numerous trips to the store for materials and proper planning would have prevented that. He acknowledged that the brackets at the joints were added at the end for support. They are the type that is screwed into a piece of wood and the piece perpendicular to it slides down into the slot. He did not seem to think gaps at the joints are a problem.
Albert refused to meet with Stephanie. He said she's budding in and trying to become the manager of this. He did acknowledge that I had some reason to be concerned.
The nails used to hold up the last minute extra supports are held up by random fasteners - new nails, old nails, rusty screws, and random used inconsistent nails
Somehow Ted's name came up and he said to have Ted talk to him instead of me. Stephanie told him that he does not want to talk to Ted because he's so angry, that I'm the calm nice one in conflict. When asked about these mistakes, he didn't want to really deal with them said Ted would have to tell him. Maybe he thought I was just a complaining woman that Ted wouldn't have any problems..wrong. I told him that in reality I saw many of the problems.
At that point, Albert said, Oh, so this is all about you and not Ted. Stephanie said that we were both in 100% agreement with these problems. But he wanted to think that Ted was ok with things but that I was being a complainer.
Albert said he wanted to fix this because, I don't want a problem with you at the end of this job. He began to treat Stephanie like she's a whining woman.
At one point Albert didn't think Stephanie understood something and he said, Wait, you didn't hear me right.
Also said Albert wouldn't listen to Stephanie.
Here's his only proposal:
Robert returns
Adds support
Drops the outer edge 1 3/4 inches
Trims the edges
Albert says it will take 6 hours. It took DIFM 5 days to put up 44 boards and the top..something told me that it might take more than 6 hours.
Wed 9:30 AM
Stephanie called Albert back around 9:30. After some discussion she proposed that DIFM remove the plastic and put up lattice because we don't think this drain problem could be fixed by Robert. Albert says that might work if we pay for materials and any labor over 6 hours. I said I wasn't surehe said he'd have to see what the costs would be and get back with me. Here's my point.I'll pay for lattice, they put it up at no cost. Eat it their mistake we didn't even want lattice, but considering that we have to have a contractor I have no faith in, this is the best solution.
Wed 1:30 PM
Stephanie did not hear from Albert until 1:30 then he proposed his plan. Instead of appeasing this unhappy customer, he added more cost to this project saying that the color change cost 6 hours. We had originally selected a gray and it was too light so we switched to green. See Wed 3/14 bullet point # 2 where Robert agrees to change out the material at no additional charge. Robert couldn't plan anything, much less how many hours that took. I found the new color, I told him where it was he picked it up. That took one-hour max. I'll agree that maybe one other hour was spent calling and looking for this stuff. But THEN he RAN OUT. back to the store they are out off to other stores; why is it MY cost if he can't plan how much he needs they had what he asked for and more until he ran out and started looking again. His inability to plan is not our problem.
Wed Evening
Ted takes down fiberglass. Discovers:
A nail in one section this would leak
Glue ONLY on the outer edge next to the flowerbed and around the corner and glue under ONE seam. This is the one area people would check. No glue on any other pieces. A glob of glue on the underside of the piece next to the flowerbeds.
Ted removed all fiberglass pieces in 2.5 hours, almost half the time Robert estimated to Albert that it would take him to complete it.
110 screws were on this deck that is 18X24 and had 44 sections.
The section that was glued (the visible one next to the house) had screws every 6 to 12 inches. The other 43 sections had only a screw every 3 to 4 feet.
o This, in our opinion, was an intentional misrepresentation of quality: First section has glue and numerous screws appears to be an intentional short cut by doing it right where we'd check, but not the rest because it's physically impossible to check without removing the fiberglass. No one would do that.
I feel pretty sure he wanted this job to stop. We e-mailed this afternoon about how to resolve this. He wanted us to pay for 6 hours that it cost Robert for our color change. We told him that was unreasonable as I located the new color, selected 14 pieces as he requested.he got them. THEN he ran outpoor planning. I did not want to pay for 6 hours, I said I'd compromise with 3, as long as the project was complete by Friday at 5:00. No response from that final e-mail. Won't return my call was in the office when I called, according to Stephanie the secretary girl, yet he sent the line right to voice mail he hates talking to me avoids me at every cost.
The more we look at this thing from the big picture..the more we feel we have been intentionally ripped-off by Robert. He knew he was cutting corners. and what's funny is he cut corners and still took five days to complete a 2-day project. We just don't understand why Albert defends someone who made these mistakes. I was never rude I simply stated what was wrong.
Albert does not stand behind his product.
What we had before this job:
Over half the deck framed and sunscreen on it.
After this fiasco, we now have a
Fully, poorly framed deck
Our sunscreen has been disposed of.
So, after the removal of the fiberglass that was improperly installed, we have a frame that is only 40% larger than what we had.
We're not ahead by much. We're ahead by only the 40% of framing and we're behind in topping and we're a week behind schedule. Additionally, the framing is sub-standard quality and looks horrible.
Thursday, March 22
Deal is off. Thursday morning Albert insists charging additional costs for a horrible job because Robert spent time looking for materials. That is simply a lie.
Robert didn't buy enough materials in the first place and would have still had to have gotten more because he only had 14
The nerve of Albert to ask for MORE money on a botched project is purely bad business horrible customer service.
o Make a product in triple the time promised in writing in the contract
o Make a poor quality, dangerous, shoddy product
o And charge MORE. That is totally unacceptable
Robert never mentioned that there was any additional cost to this project. When asked about these changes, he said, It's no problem since I haven't started. No mention of money.
Friday, March 23
We install the lattice ourselves Takes 13 hours.
After working on laying the lattice, we find that nails, screws, random DIFFERENT things that were used to attach the brackets they added after the fact. Found more nails that don't go into anything simply in the middle of a board but they were left there.
Is the reason he wouldn't let someone else come out is because anyone else would say we had to start over because this is so bad? Or was it because they would discover the work was done without a permit?
DIFM used scrap wood in our pile of scrap wood as two of the supports. The agreement stated they would mount the new roof to the existing structure. It was not to re-use scrap lumber, rusty nails, and rusty screw from our existing cover.
They installed a random old board that is butted up to a new one doesn't even go to the edges of the section. May had been because of the way they laid the fiberglass or maybe because they cut the boards too short? Totally unacceptable It looks hideous.
Albert said this stuff isn't supposed to be glued just screwed. But there was a row of glue on the side. Fluttering is good no glue he said. However, Robert said he was using glue (See , March 16.)
Friday, March 30
We received a final letter demanding payment, which had a Post It note attached that also stated the following:
That DIFM did not have a building permit..but it specifically said in the contract that THEY would get the permit so this was a simple admission that he didn't get a permit which is required by law
And that they wanted to know when they should report our non-payment to Equifax, a credit reporting company.
Final bill is actually wrong to our advantage. The final payment was to be $898 plus the extra three hours we compromised on for the color change. Final bill came and it was $778. Go figure. He can't add. But it doesn't matter we're not paying it. DIFM has $898 of our money and here's how he improved our deck: it is now 40% larger than what they started with. (We had framing on 60% before they came.) I don't think that extra framing and horrible customer service is worth $898. Oh, and that building permit.
The contract said the job would be completed in two days final nail on first pass was completed on day 5. Contract stated that THEY would get the permit they didn't. Did they know it wouldn't pass inspection, so they intentionally didn't get one? Well, that's our opinion on why, anyway. They said they'd put a lien on our house and report us to Equifax. I just want them to go away. And I don't want them to do business with anyone else no one should have to put up with people like this. All they have done is give contractors a bad name.
Stephanie
Garland, Texas
U.S.A.
2 Updates & Rebuttals
Scott Tatum
Garland,Texas,
United States of America
doitfme
#2UPDATE EX-employee responds
Thu, September 01, 2011
I worked for difm when they were first opening a office off preston and alpha rd, I found out in a hurry that they are not in the business to do construction right or even care. With in weeks we started to have nuemores complaints about substandard work by subs and they did not know what they were doing. I have been in the construction field for 30 years and I could see this for myself and tryied to tell Albert that he could not just hire anyone with a hammer, But he didnt care Alberts looking for the dollar only and could carre less about his sales staff or subs, Because he is allways lieing about the money and short changeing everyone. I think the attorney genral should get involved in on this company and shut them down. The End result is the customer is getting the worst end of all this!
Doit4me
Dallas,Texas,
U.S.A.
This situation could have been resolved if customer hadn't became "unreasonably emotional".
#3UPDATE Employee
Wed, August 20, 2008
Doit4Me serves hundreds of residential customers each year. We do make mistakes but our policy is to try to satisfy each and every customer. Mrs. Zajac changed her mind on the type of material she wanted for her project and did not want to incur any additional costs for the change. As a result of that fact Mr. Zajac escalated to "unreasonable" immediately. As anyone can see from the extent of her Report for a realtively small project - a $898. project of which she was only charged for materials. She mentions an estimate for $125,000. remodel project of which Albert spent several hours to prepare and Mrs. Zajac had no intention of doing any more than the $1,500. project. From time to time any remodeling company that does any volume will encounter a customer that is obssesive-compulsive and or mentally unstable, anyone who reads Mr. Zajac's diatribe can decide for themselves what category she is in. If there is a website out there that could warn remodeling companies and trades people against having any dealings with Mrs. Zajac I would sure like to make a report inorder to spare others the stress of dealing with such an individual.
