We signed with Sharp Exteriors on April 16 to do our roof and was told it was about 5 weeks wait to get the roof done. 9 weeks later, on June 16, one business day before they were to start work, I was told my roof was suddenly too steep and if they were to do it they’d have to get more equipment and, although we had a signed contract and everything was ready to go (the roofing materials and bin were on my driveway and had been there 3 weeks waiting for the work to start) I was responsible for all of the $800/day charge to rent the additional equipment. I said no as they need to stick to the signed contract however honouring signed contracts doesn’t seem to be of interest to them and they walked away from the project. No call from any of the owners to explain or apologize for this inconvenience or their lack of judgement. I guess it could have been worse, they could have suddenly asked for more money mid-project and then we'd really have been caught in a bind. With a signed contract in place, 9 weeks having passed, and the workers already having been on the roof weeks earlier, is it fair for them to try and charge us thousands more than we'd agreed to?
- Approximate cost of services:
- $3,000.00
- What could this company do to improve their services?
- Any advice to offer fellow homeowners facing a similar project?
- Company Response
Roger and Misa, I am surprised to see your words as this situation came about solely as a health and safety issue. The discussions were amicable and the final outcome was agreed to by both parties. Our workers concerns were explained to you and your wife in meetings and in detail and certainly not sudden.
One of our best crews was assigned to do your roof and when they arrived to do your home they called our office having concerns with 2 roof slopes on the home that they felt could not be re-roofed using conventional methods or equipment. I personally went out to the site along with the salesman Jonathan and met with the crew. The majority of the roof was steep and complicated by design, vast landscaping, hot tub, luxury items throughout the back yard and 5 feet separating the home from the neighbour. This was not the issue. We have been in the re-roofing business for 38 years and we have special equipment and procedures that can protect these items from harm. The crews concerns were the 2 roof slopes on the right and left side of the house, facing the home. The ground to eavestrough height was over 30 ft with only 5 feet separating the house from the neighbors fence. A ladder could not be positioned properly to perform any work safely. The slopes pitch from up on the roof was much different than was noted from the ground. It was not a typical steep 12/12 pitch it was pretty much a wall. There is no roofing equipment manufactured that will accommodate this slope. This was an access and equipment safety issue, that was brought to the companies attention. Under the new "Working at heights" regulations "A worker can refuse to work if he or she has reason to believe that: the physical condition of the workplace or workstation is likely to endanger himself or herself [clause 43(3)(b)] " To allow the use of a rope and harness to repel down the roof slope to perform work is illegal, and if they were stopped by the ministry, the worker, the company and many times the owner of the property would be heavily fined. A safety review of was performed on site and Jonathan arranged a meeting with both Roger and Misa that same Friday evening June 16th. The meeting took place and the access and safety issues explained. It was determined that the only way to access these 2 roof slopes was with a special machine called a manlift which could lift the worker safely up to the roof slope however, this manlift could only access these 2 slope from his 2 neighbours properties. Jonathan expressed that he was able to get a excellent rental rate of $800.00 per day for the machine and only asked for the "at cost" fee of rental and that both slopes possibly could be done in one day. There was no mark up or addition man hour charges associated with the extra charge. Jonathan said that Roger had no objections and was very supportive of the crew working safely and immediately took Jonathan over to one neighbour and introduced him. The neighbour was very accommodating and was willing to let us use his driveway to access the roof with the Manlift. Roger then went to his other neighbour on his left but they were not home. A meeting was arranged for the next day June 17th so they could meet. The morning of June 17th Roger called Jonathan and cancelled the meeting. He had a sudden change of heart and said he did not believe that he should be responsible for any additional cost regardless of the situation and that if we did not cover these costs he was going to go with another roofing company. I reviewed the situation that morning with Jonathan and agreed our offer was more than fair and the safety access of these slopes was unforeseen. We agreed that Roger could terminate the contract and go with a competitor. Our materials were promptly removed and deposit returned.
I wanted to thank you for choosing Sharp Exteriors. I know Jonathan spent a lot of time assessing and re-designing your ventilation issues, both intake and exhaust. He is a well trained professional and always conducts himself with his customers best interest in mind.
Richard S