ComplaintsforMunyan Restoration, Waterproofing & Painting Service of Tampa Bay, Inc.

• Initial Complaint

  09/05/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Munyan hired to paint int/ext Fall 23. 2 defects: kitchen ceiling patches/ext gables unsanded voids not patched. Munyan promised remedy. 2 estimators prom, 1 showed for kitchen, in-house ********* for gables did not. Radio silence, zero follow-up. Hostile call demanding pmt. from ***** ******/*** ***** 6-27-24. Appraised AB, reminded TB of defects/resolutions. AB gave $350 cred for int/$1000 for ext ***** ****** siding ***** install. 6-28-24 Int/Ext invoices PIF; scheduled JH est 7-1-24. **** ****** sent wrong Scope of Work 7-9-24. Re-sent SOW stating, I will redo quote to reflect removing T-111, installing a new vapor barrier, installing new ****** siding and trim and painting. 7-26-24 BT del 2 gal of ext paint. 7-29-24 start 3-day project (appr 12 hrs). Contacted BT w/concerns: ********* sitting on ground to cut siding, complaining corners breaking (offered table, refused), left orig 1x2 trim, no JH 1x4 trim, bad cuts wide gaps, ** **** pieces to patch corners, no joint/Z flashing, large nails over-driven random on panels. 7-30-24 sent pics to TB/BT. TB unavail. ** resp, Just like a tile job does not look good until its finished. Ill be by late am. We will make it perfect. No Show. Worker spilled paint on roof and pavers. Workers broke new hose sprayer and threw it away no word. Day 3 Paint-2 coats rapid succession no Loxon per SOW. Wood patches unpainted. Pics to TB/BT. ********* revealed he was a sub. Not employee of Munyan-his crew same. 8-20-24 TB met promised to return w/BT or qualified person. Pointed out job was a redo. 8-22-24 TB rtn w/ same sub. ** refused again. ********* offered to paint patches. 8-23-24 req BT to meet w/us. Refused again. Sent termination notice to **. Munyan resp w/threats to file ***** on 8-23 and 8-24. Reneged on ***** credit. Refused to give names, affiliations of workers. 8-24-24 Munyan work removed by installer recom by ** local distributor. New ****** ***** and trim installed by new company.

  Business response

  09/20/2024

  Firstly, Customer has NEVER paid a cent, not a deposit or anything, for this project.  The project was performed in accordance with contract and manufacturers installation guidelines.
  
  Munyan previously performed an interior/exterior painting project in Fall of 2023 (Different Contract than current dispute).  Customer said everything looked great, we broke down and left the property.  Once customer received the invoice, she made complaints about the ***** ends and kitchen ceiling patches.  Our project manager went and looked at the two areas.  The ***** ends were old, as best they could look. We informed client the only way to achieve the results she was looking for was to change wood and recommended an upgrade to ****** Board.  We provided a proposal for drying in T1-11 and installing ****** Board siding overtop. Customer inquired about tearing down the existing T1-11, installing new sheathing,drying it in and installing ****** Board over the new sheathing.  Once we explained that this cost would be 5Xs more expensive, customer declined and asked us to proceed using the existing t1-11 as it could be used as a sound sheathing, and so she could stay within her budget. Once speaking with her husband, he apologized and stated, Im sorry,she does this on every job.  Customer boasted about their ability to be tough on contractors several times stating Being from **********, Ive learned a lot.   Even though we completed the project in accordance with the contract and had customer acceptance before we left project.  Munyan agreed to a $350 credit to avoid further argument.  The credit was for paint purchased by the homeowner, not for inadequate work.    At no time did Munyan state anything to the effect of $1000 toward the ****** Board.  The only thing that was discussed of any type of discount toward the ****** Board job was that we wouldnt charge to repaint the new ****** Board areas, since we had just painted the area in the previous job.  This discount was already built into the initial proposal we had provided.
  
  Customer signed contract. (Contract in dispute for this complaint) We performed a mockup on the first ***** end for customer acceptance.  She liked it and asked us to proceed.  In the middle of work, Customer complained of gaps: We explained that to comply with the ***** ****** manufacturer requirements this gap needs to be present (See page 2 of ****** ***** Clearance and Flashing Requirements) and that for aesthetic reasons, a trim piece can go over the areas she was complaining about. We completed the job, walked the job with the customer and her husband, and got acceptance of the work completed.  Once we sent the invoice, customer began complaining.  We responded by having a meeting onsite on August 22nd with the intent of fixing whatever complaints she had.  She saw that we had brought the same job supervisor to make the repairs, and she asked us to leave.  Customer sent us an email the next day Aug 23rd stating she was terminating the arrangement.  Munyan gave two separate notices that nonpayment would result in a lien.  Munyan placed a Construction Lien on the property on September 4th.
  
  Again, Customer has NEVER paid a cent, not a deposit or anything, for this project.  The project was performed in accordance with contract and manufacturers installation guidelines.
  
  We absolutely spilled paint on the roof and pavers.  This was cleaned up. We also used her hose sprayer with her permission.  The sprayer nozzle broke when we were using it.  We informed her it was broken and offered to pay for it. 
  
  All of the paint was applied per ******* ******** specification, was verified by a ******* ******** representative, and did provide a warranty. 
  
  Customer did not follow the provisions clearly stated in Florida Statute ******* Notice and opportunity to repair.
  
  Munyan finds it appalling the way this client takes advantage of contractors.  We agreed to a scope of work, laid it out into a contract, the customer signed a contract, we performed the scope of work precisely to the contract, ***** ****** manufacturer recommended guidelines, and the ******* ******** paint specifications.  Customer then waited until we were finished voice her concerns.  When we responded to customer to remedy her complaints, she asked us to leave her property, did not show us the areas she was not happy with, and did not offer us the opportunity to repair as per Florida Law.  Customer has not paid ANYTHING towards this project.

  Customer response

  09/25/2024

   
  Complaint: 22240095
  
  I am rejecting this response because: Munyan had 2 choices - to respond with humility and reflect some semblance of honor, or respond with antagonistic, disgraceful falsehoods. Unfortunately, they chose the latter.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** *****-******

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩