Aico Construction Inc

Purchased house in February. We discovered an acute on chronic water damage issue (from a window caulking failure+\-vinyl decking failure) that caused significant water damage around two windows that also damaged exterior OSB below window frames and rotted rim board/ledger board segments below the two windows. Work entailed to remove vinyl decking, affected deck plywood, remove stucco to expose the rotted OSB, remove 6-8 inches of stucco above entire deck surface to prep for new vinyl, remove & replace rotted OSB, remove and properly seal two affected windows over the deck, remove & replace two segments of rim board/ledger board, and cut/sister-in joists under deck. This repair was not covered by insurance.

We interviewed 4 companies for this job and also read many reviews before hiring. AICO was the last company we interviewed and was also the successful bid for this project. They were chosen not because they were the cheapest (they were in fact initially higher than some of our early quotes) but because of good first impressions, mostly positive social media reviews and a project manager/owner that offered a lot of empathy and reassurance. The owner also made a point of driving out and introducing himself and to assess the job requirements. Unfortunately, a few days prior to the reconstruction phase we got caught up in an internal company issue where the project manager assigned to our repair took employment with another company. This subsequently caused significant delays to our repair and resulted in a lot of stress in sorting the issues out. A summary of positive and negatives include:

Pros
- had an excellent first impression as project manager and company manager visited homeowner and were present at the same time as the insurance adjuster to help make a case for insurance coverage (which unfortunately did not pan out). However their effort to plead on my behalf impressed.
- Availability to start repairs was very fast (until internal issues arose that delayed the project)
- the company manager was easy to reach and was attentive to customer concerns and provide solutions/negotiate. I was especially impressed when the manager arranged a conference call on a Friday evening at 9pm before a long weekend to discuss issues with the subcontractor company. Another positive experience was that the 50% deposit was able to be negotiated. After we felt uncomfortable with a 50% deposit, they were able to compromise with a 20% deposit and 80% on completion.
- accountability: When discrepancies were noted in billing or accidental damages occurred in the home - the company owner took responsibility of the problem and took reasonable steps to resolve the issues
- company manager did a visit on completion to pick up the final payment but also came in to check repair. He did take steps to resolve a substandard repaired baseboard that did not meet homeowner quality expectations.
- Company used treated wood to replace ledger board and rim board
- Company consulted a structural engineer (of homeowners choice) prior to any rim board repair. This was an extra expense that the homeowner took on but their caution with structural integrity left a positive impression.

Cons
- Company is not a BBB member
- The job to repair affected areas of the first window was quoted for the "job". To repair affected areas of the second window (which was discovered later) the manager gave us two options: pay for the job or pay hourly. I was advised hourly was less confusing and likely the cheaper of the two options. In retrospect the hourly billing became confusing and some discrepancies did arise. However, the company was very responsive to when the discrepancies were brought up and charges were amended (it was a lot of extra work for us to figure out billing).
- Prepayment: During reconstruction phase, 50% down payment was requested before any work was done. However owner was able to negotiate 20% prepayment for us when we didn't feel comfortable with the first request.

In summary, the company did complete and deliver on the repair work. The owner was very responsive to our concerns until job completion. Due to unforeseen issues, the job wound up being quite stressful and it did not go smoothly as we had anticipated. On a positive note, the owner of the company was pleasant/flexible to work with through the entire experience. Felt that the company could improve on some major issues such as having way more quality control audits (more frequent manager drop-in or have quality control personnel to drop by and scrutinize work: no job is too small in my opinion for this step). Audits would also ensure workers are placing proper protection to flooring and containing construction debris. Better measures need to be taken to affix tarps better to exterior stucco areas under construction. Hourly billing option was stressful . Another recommendation for improvement is to reevaluate asking for 50% deposits unless there is a prepaid contractor license. We felt paying 50% prior to any work commencement was atypical.

Purchased house in February. We discovered an acute on chronic water damage issue (from a window caulking failure+\-vinyl decking failure) that caused significant water damage around two windows that also damaged exterior OSB below window frames and rotted rim board/ledger board segments below the two windows. Work entailed to remove vinyl decking, affected deck plywood, remove stucco to expose the rotted OSB, remove 6-8 inches of stucco above entire deck surface to prep for new vinyl, remove & replace rotted OSB, remove and properly seal two affected windows over the deck, remove & replace two segments of rim board/ledger board, and cut/sister-in joists under deck. This repair was not covered by insurance.

We interviewed 4 companies for this job and also read many reviews before hiring. AICO was the last company we interviewed and was also the successful bid for this project. They were chosen not because they were the cheapest (they were in fact initially higher than some of our early quotes) but because of good first impressions, mostly positive social media reviews and a project manager/owner that offered a lot of empathy and reassurance. Initially, the owner also made a point of driving out and introducing himself and to assess the job requirements. However, a few days prior to the reconstruction phase we got caught up in an internal company issues where the project manager assigned to our repair took employment with the company that AICO subcontracted to fix our home. The same project manager then attempted to solicit our job away from AICO to the new company that he took a position with - all without his former employers knowledge. The employer only became aware after the homeowner attempted to clarify the project managers intention to move our repair contract. The internal company issues that subsequently arose caused significant delays to our repair and resulted in a lot of stress. Adding to that burden is that we had other contractors that were becoming impatient for AICO to finish the job (a vinyl deck company, paint company, a soffit/cladding contractor). When work finally did resume we had another employee issue arise. One of two employees that were sent out was in poor health and not able to meet deadlines (which we were charged hourly for). A summary of positive and negatives include:

Pros
- had an excellent first impression as project manager and company manager visited homeowner and were present at the same time as the insurance adjuster to help make a case for insurance coverage (which unfortunately did not pan out). However their effort to plead on my behalf impressed.
- Availability to start repairs was very fast (until internal issues arose that delayed the project)
- the company manager was easy to reach and was attentive to customer concerns and provide solutions/negotiate. I was especially impressed when the manager arranged a conference call on a Friday evening at 9pm before a long weekend to discuss issues with the subcontractor company. Another positive experience was that the 50% deposit was able to be negotiated. After we felt uncomfortable with a 50% deposit, they were able to compromise with a 20% deposit and 80% on completion. The employee that was in poor health was replaced after we expressed concern with hourly charges and missed deadlines.
- accountability: When errors were noted in billing or accidental damages occurred in the home - the company owner took responsibility of the problem and took reasonable steps to resolve the issues
- company manager did a visit on completion to pick up the final payment but also came in to check repair. He did take steps to resolve a substandard repaired baseboard that did not meet homeowner quality expectations.
- Company used treated wood to replace ledger board and rim board
- Company consulted a structural engineer (of homeowners choice) prior to any rim board repair. This was an extra expense that the homeowner took on but their caution with structural integrity left a positive impression.

Cons
- Company is not a BBB member
- The job to repair affected areas of the first window was quoted for the "job". To repair affected areas of the second window (which was discovered later) the manager gave us two options: pay for the job or pay hourly. I was advised hourly was less confusing and likely the cheaper of the two options. In retrospect I regretted paying hourly for the second window because it turned us into supervisors and time keepers for the labourers and we had to continually double check hours billed by the company to what we observed. Eventually the billing became very confusing as some things that were quoted to be done from the first job wound up being charged again on the hourly quote.
- Prepayment: During reconstruction phase, 50% down payment was requested before any work was done (company had no Alberta prepaid contractor license).
- Quality control/audit: after the project manager departed we were left to scrutinize work quality by the crew sent out. Some examples of quality control issues include:
a. red tuck tape was used on the hardwood floors to secure the protection paper (but the red tuck tape left residue when lifted away - which my spouse had to clean). Another irritant was that while protection paper was used in the immediate work area none was placed from the door entry all the way to the work area. Subsequently we had a lot of dusty floors from all the entry and exit by workers.
b. Red tuck tape was also used to secure a tarp over the exterior construction area but it was frustrating because red tuck tape does not affix to stucco more than a couple hours at best. Homeowner was left to constantly rehang the tarps to fend away rain and had to purchase own Gorilla tape (at own cost) to affix the tarps to stucco (works better). Had the project started at the original intended date we probably wouldn't have had as many frustrations with tarps falling off.
c. A window frame was damaged when a pry bar was improperly positioned to remove a window. A baseboard was also snapped when removed. Company did readily fix these issue when notified. (Baseboard was fixed to a better standard upon final inspection by company owner.)
d. After noticing 9 inch board was purchased to fit into a 12 inch rim board slot - was advised by worker on site that they were going to affix a 9 inch wide piece and sister in a 3 inch piece on top. Homeowner notified the company manager that proper 12 inch board was required to keep water out which they complied with.

e. Worker organization skills: workers were not prepared with basic required materials when they arrived to the job site on some days. For example, they needed a ladder downstairs for which they borrowed ours. On another day they didn't have appropriate flooring protection materials and used garbage bags to protect floor which was slippery. Felt that employee time management and advance planning was poor. Workers sometimes arrived late and ended their days early (frustrating when paying hourly and timelines severely delayed).

In summary, the company did complete the repairs but it did not go smoothly and took much longer than anticipated. Supervising employees and their workmanship was very negative. On a positive note, the owner of the company was pleasant/flexible to work with through the entire experience. Felt that the company could improve on some major issues such as having way more quality control audits (more frequent manager drop-in or have quality control personnel to drop by and scrutinize work: no job is too small in my opinion for this step). Audits would also ensure workers are placing proper protection to flooring and containing construction debris. Better measures need to be taken to affix tarps better to exterior stucco areas under construction. Hourly billing option is terrible as it puts the company, its employees and the homeowners at odds with each other when work hour discrepancies arise, deadlines are missed or when employees are unwell enough to complete jobs efficiently. With respect to the slow/unwell employee we had on site - it was an awful feeling for the homeowner to report that an employee (who was a really nice guy) was not working at an expected pace due to illness. However we were forced into that uncomfortable position when hourly rates were racking up (it put the homeowner in position of employee supervision which is what I pay the company to do). Another recommendation for improvement is to reevaluate asking for 50% deposits unless there is a prepaid contractor license. We felt paying 50% prior to any work commencement put us in a situation of risk and created an atmosphere of mistrust. All the other contractors we hired over the summer for other jobs required no prepayments except one other who asked for a reasonable 10% to order materials. For companies to improve, feedback matters to help improve future client encounters - which we hope this provides.