Complaints

• Initial Complaint

  01/11/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Order Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Paid to have addition added on. Complained about the issues with the shower and owner looked right at me and said he sees no issues. Had contractor come to see what needs to be done and he said it all needs taken out and replaced. There is a long list of issues with the shower. Unable to use it. No response from Smart Restoration

  

  Business response

  01/14/2023

  The client said "Paid to have addition added on. Complained about the issues with the shower and owner looked right at me and said he sees no issues. Had contractor come to see what needs to be done and he said it all needs taken out and replaced. There is a long list of issues with the shower. Unable to use it. No response from Smart Restoration"
  
  Ok lets back this up a bit. This project was completed over a year ago, our last day of service for this project was 12-3-21. This complaint for those services is being filed on 1-9-23. Why has it taken a year to file the complaint if there was an issue? We had to file a lien on the property to collect for our services as the client and her husband had begun the process of divorcing each other during the completion of the project and they were disputing amongst themselves as to whom would pay for our services. During this completion process and dispute over payments there was no mention or concern over the product provided. It wasnt until a third party realtor whom we had no contact with or contract with complained to the client that they could sell the house for more money if the shower was functional. Now lets step back a little more in this saga by saying the shower is not functional, in no way is this by fault of smart restoration. The owner had purchased and provided the shower base and doors for the shower that they wished to be installed. We installed the base during the rough in phase and during the finishes stage attempted to install the shower doors that were purchased. We found out at that time that the client had purchased 2 separate products that were not compatible with each other. There for after our efforts of laying out the pieces to install the doors to this base that they had purchase and our lost production we notified the client of their error. We also provided them with the solution to the problem at that time. Which was to replace the base with a new one that matched the door they wished to install as purchasing the door was not an option due to the product being discontinued which is why the base was on clearance. The client blamed the husband and asked us for a quote to fix the problem. Which we provided. We told the client at that time we would not make those repairs until such time as we were paid in full for our services so we could remove the lien from the property.
  We did eventually get the funds for the services and removed the lien.
  Yes the client called us and voiced concerns about the shower when her realtor told her she needed a functioning shower. In an attempt to not have to pay for the shower base mistake that they had made they started to complain about things they had not voiced concern over before. Things that had been completed for several months with plenty of time to inspect and notify us of any dissatisfaction.
  
  Client said in her complaint:Complained about the issues with the shower and owner looked right at me and said he sees no issues: This is an inaccurate statement the client has fabricated. I havent talked to the client about this issue in a year. She is not remembering the conversation as it actually took place. She made some complaints about the shower that were given to her from her realtor. These were not issues that she had with the shower but they were things that she was told by someone else to complain about. I told her we were not hired by her realtor and were not obligated to appease him with our services and that she was our client and our job was to provide a product that she was happy with. she was happy with the product for several months until the realtor started advising her. I told her we had a standard for installing and a method we used. We werent obligated to rotate tile a different direction just because someone came in and didnt like the rotation we used. I also pointed out to her some areas I wasnt happy with myself and was wanting to fix. Areas that the realtor didnt mention and that were true issues that needed resolved. We talked about those issues and came to the conclusion that when we replaced the shower base we would also take care of the addition items. As it didnt make since to either of us to repair these issues and then come back and replace the shower base which would have cause those areas to be damaged and replaced again. This entire conversation took place on February 7th 2022 2 months after we completed the entire project and over 3 months since the shower had been installed. Despite the delay we warranty our work and was willing to address the matter in a sensible timeframe. It was the client that had chosen not to proceed with the repairs or the replacement of the shower base. She stated she didnt want to deal with it at this time and that she would reach back out when she was ready to proceed. We didnt hear back from her until 11-8-22. When she emailed us asking if we could replace the shower base as soon as possible. We informed her at that time we were already scheduled out several months and wouldnt be able to get to it right away. She told us that she needed it done ASAP and that the timeline wouldnt work for her and thanked us to letting her know what the timeline was. At this time she had no issues with our services or complaints. 11 months after we completed her project. If there was a urgency to complete the project before our schedule allowed the client had 11 months to plan that out and get it scheduled for repair. They choose to procrastinate the repairs and then additionally choose to not wait for our schedule to clear up. There delays and decisions are not our burden to bare. We will not be financially responsible for their poor planning and decisions.
  
  The client said in her complaint:No response from Smart Restoration: This is a false statement every correspondent we received from the client was returned in a timely manner. here are those correspondents as we received them and replied.   On March 23 2022 We sent her a revised proposal for the replacement of the shower base. On 11/8/22 she asked us if we would start the project ASAP. Within 21 minutes we responded to the request with the appropriated information for her to make a decision on if she wanted us to perform the work or not. That same day she replayed that the timeline would not work for her and that she would try to find someone else to do the project. On 1/2/23 nearly 2 months later we hear back from her with a list of complaints about the shower. Now ill remind you we told her in November we would repair the shower by mid January and she didnt want to wait. Its now the first of January and she hasnt fixed the shower. Ill share the 1/2/23 complaint and respond to it later in this response. We responded to the complaint in email 1/3/23 letting her know that I was unavailable and out of town and that I would respond to the email when I returned. 1/4/23 She emailed inquiring when I would be back and also if someone else could address the issue because she was in a hurry to let the other contractor begin work. On 1/4/23 She received a response letting her know I would be back the following Monday (1/9/23) and that I was the only one who could address her concerns. On 1/10/23 at 4:06 PM the client sent a follow up email as to when she could expect to be reached out to concerning her concerns. On 1/11/23 at 12:36 PM she received a response that I was aware of the complaint, however I was busy and didnt have the available time to compose a response and would have it out to her by the end of the week. On 1/11/23 she filed this complaint to the BBB before I could free up the time to compose an appropriate response to her concerns. On 1/12/23 I freed up from some time from catching up on the active projects I was away from for a week. And began to compose a response to her concerns. This is a response that has now taken up over 4 hours to compose which is why I didnt have time earlier in the week to address it. I prioritize active client over clients who have procrastinated a project for a year before reaching out with urgency to complete the project. The clients poor planning and decision are not our burdens to carry. 

  
  The client stated, Unable to use it (It being the shower): It is not smart restoration fault the shower is not usable. As stated, before the shower base and shower doors purchased by the owner were incompatible, they attempted to purchase the products on clearance and didnt pay attention to the products. This was not our fault and the client recognized this during the project. They are now wanting smart restoration to carry the burden of the repairs for a product they took little care in planning out. This is not our burden to bare.  

  
  The client stated :Had contractor come to see what needs to be done and he said it all needs taken out and replaced: I am sure the new contractor did say this. He will make a lot more money replacing the entire shower vs just replacing the shower base and patching in the shower. As a sales man its his job to sell his services. We provided the client with a proposal to repair the shower base. We cannot require the client to use our services if they choose to use another contractor and buy a whole new shower that is their prerogative. We would still offer the same services if the client wanted to call and get on the schedule for us to repair the shower base. We will not be paying the bill from another contractor who is upselling his services to pad his bill.
  
    The client stated: There is a long list of issues with the shower: Here is the email we received from the client on 1/2/23 with the list of complaints:

  
   Good afternoon,
  I will be placing my home on the market soon and had contractor out here this morning to repair my shower that was not completed.The contractor confirmed what I had thought all along. None of the work done on this shower is acceptable and will not pass an inspection. The following is a list of issues that were found so far. 
  70-reverse cuts
  6-chipped tiles
  Grout hardener was not used tested and failed
  Inside corner not installed correctly.
  Should have started with a full tile on the bottom.
  Dura rock done wrong at pan causing a bow at the bottom.
  ********* corner not 45 or have corner inserts.
  Pan not set.
  
  I also had him look at the slider door because the seal is breaking down This is what he said
  No virgin hole. No screws in the hole.
  
  I have a real issue with ******* because he flat out took zero responsibility for the very poor quality of work. Saying he sees nothing wrong with it and was very rude when I told him the realtor was concerned about the whole shower. I also feel that he took full advantage of my situation. I will need to be fully reimbursed for the shower and correcting the plumbing if needed. I am scheduling a full inspection of all the work done by Smart Restoration due to the lack of ******************* on this job. You will be notified of all issues and I will expect reimbursement for all issues. I do not want smart restoration to repair any work done here. Prepared to reach out to my lawyer if needed. 
  
  I look forward to receiving your response.
  
  The client stated: None of the work done on this shower is acceptable and will not pass an inspection This is a false Statement. As the project was inspected by the authority having jurisdiction and it did past the inspection. We are not obligated to pass an inspection from another contractor or her realtor. This method of inspection is insane. It would be like asking Pepsi to inspect coke and tell the Coke drinker if its ok to drink Coke or should they drink Pepsi. Of course, Pepsi is going to tell them Coke is terrible and to let Pepsi provide them with all their beverage needs. Now is it a perfect shower. No. I admitted that already. I also talked to the client about the issues and provided them with a plan to repair it for them. They chose not to proceed and to delay for nearly a year. They choose not to wait for time in our schedule to open up to make the repairs after they procrastinated for 11 months.  These are not our decision or anything we can control. If the client wants to allow us to return and address the issue we will be happy to do so. If the client chooses to hire someone else.They can do that too.  we cant stop them.  
  
  The client stated : The following is a list of issues that were found so far. 
  70-reverse cuts
  6-chipped tiles
  Grout hardener was not used tested and failed
  Inside corner not installed correctly.
  Should have started with a full tile on the bottom.
  Dura rock done wrong at pan causing a bow at the bottom.
  ********* corner not 45 or have corner inserts.
  Pan not set.: 

  
  70 reverse tile cuts. Wow that is a lot. First off that would be just about every cut in the shower as being defined as a reverse cutwhich would be really cool if there was an actual definition for a reverse cuton tile. Do the research yourself everything is on the internet. ****** reverse tile cut or what is a reverse cut for tile or whatever you want to type in there. The term doesnt exist this guy made it up and sold it to the client as an issue or problem.

  
  6- chipped ********** tile has been installed for a year. Who knows what could have happened to it in that time while it was in the clints house. However If there are 6 chipped tile. We will address it. All the client has to do is call let us know and we will come out and address the concerns. They will have to wait until we can get it on the schedule. We are obligated to other clients and cant just drop those clients to address these concerns on a whim. But we will come out and address concerns brought to our attention by our clients.

  
  Grout hardener was not used. This is a correct statement. We did not use grout hardener on this project. Its not a requirement, or suggested,or advised by any standard or building law to use grout hardener. It wasnt needed for the shower. It wasnt requested to be used by the owners before we started the project. There is nothing wrong with not using grout hardener. Maybe this other contractor who is inspecting our work always uses grout hardener. Ok good for him. That doesnt make it a violation if other contractors dont use it all the time. It doesnt mean our product failed. It just means we didnt use hardener. This contractor is making things up to add to the fictional list of faults to convince the client to replace the entire shower vs only getting paid to repair the base which is what they were called out to do.

  
  Inside corners not installed correctly: I dont believe it. I didnt notice it when I inspected it myself over a year ago. They might not be installed in the manner this contractor would have done it. Id believe that.Maybe he would have lapped the left wall over the right wall vs the other way around. But those are the prerogative of the installer based on how they see the shower. We would love to come out and reinspect our work just to make sure there isnt really an issue here. If the client would call and ask for that we would fix any real issues. But we wont change the way the inside corners are laid just because some other contractor said he would lay it differently. That doesnt make the way we installed the inside corner incorrect.

  
  Should have started with a full tile on the bottom. :again this is another option based on the installer and not any type of malfunction of the shower system. There are a large number of reason for starting with a half cut vs a full cut tile. The way the base is laid, or the layout of the tile. Just because this guy said he would have stared with a full tile doesnt mean the installer of the shower did anything wrong. This was another attempt to fluff the fictional list of errors for the contractor to sell the client on replacing the full shower vs doing the smaller job of repairing the base. Regardless when the base is replaced with the new base which is inevitable then its tile is going to be getting replaces and recut to fit the new base.
  Dura rock done wrong at pan causing a bow at the bottom.:Im just going to be repeating myself here. Again he might do it differently but that doesnt mean the manner in which it was installed was incorrect. A year ago when we did this shower we used cement boards. Today we use a different product that makes this transition better. Its a lighter weight product easier to manipulate. But that doesnt mean the cement board that was installed on this shower is wrong. Its still a great product and works really well. He might be saying he doesnt install the cement board over the nailing flag of the base. Which would be wrong. But also would not cause the bow at the bottom. What I do know is that just because the cement board laps the ****** and caused a flection in the wall doesnt mean that the cement board was installed wrong. The board has to lay over the ******. This is another I would have done it differentlyitems added to the list to make is sound like he needs to get paid to replace the entire shower. We are not required to install the shower in the same manner as any random person brought into the home would have like to see it installed.We meet our own standards and the requests from the owners at the time of the installation.

  ********* corner not 45 or have corner inserts.  I dont know that this was the issue because its been so long but I do remember there being an issue with the metal installation. We offered to repair the issue. We were told by the client that they were not interested in making the repairs at that time and that they would reach out if and when they were ready. We have always maintained our willingness to address any issues that are real issues and not made up.

  
  Pan not set: I mean really. I dont know. When I inspected the site there was a pan laying on the ground in the corner of the bathroom screwed to the wall with tile laid on it and a drain line hooked up to it. Looked pretty set to me. Regardless though its the wrong pan the client cant get a shower door or curtain to enclose the shower so it has to be replaced anyways. Which is the entire reason the shower is not functional. It has to be replaced. Its not an issue. There is noting we can do to fix this. We would try if we could. We will always do everything within our ability to resolve any issues the client brings to our attention. But the client has to be willing to allow us to assist them with those issues. This client has not been willing to allow us to assist. Mostly because they didnt want to deal with it at first and then several months latter wanted it done ASAP.
  
  The client said I also had him look at the slider door because the seal is breaking down This is what he said
  No virgin hole. No screws in the hole.:    the seal in the door breaking down is a manufacturers defect and not an installation defect. The solution would be to contact the manufacturer and have them send out a rep to resolve the issue. I dont even know where to begin with what the other contractor said. I guess I should start with there is nothing in the construction industry that is called what he said. The term doesnt exist. Again you can look it up yourself. Do a ****** search. But beware its not going to bring up anything construction related and its not going to be PG rated either. I dont know where he got that language from or what he is referencing to but its not the correct term to use or an appropriate term  to use with a client. My best guess is its a slang term he has picked up on through the years of working in the field and he doesnt even know its not the correct term for it or that its inappropriate to use with clients.

  
  The client said: I have a real issue with ******* because he flat out took zero responsibility for the very poor quality of work.Saying he sees nothing wrong with it and was very rude when I told him the realtor was concerned about the whole shower. I also feel that he took full advantage of my situation:  It is not true that I took zero responsibility. I pointed out areas that I was concerned about. I provided a very reasonably solution to the situation which involved removing and replacing tile at the appropriate time to limit the turnaround time based on the scope of work that still need to be performed.
   In what manner did I ever take advantage of the client? We provided a service and were paid for that service. We never provided additional services or charged for extras. We never requested or received funds outside of our contact work. There was never a point that I was in a favorable position over the client and profited from that position. Which would be the definition of taking advantage. This is a false and slanderous accusation.

  
  The client said I will need to be fully reimbursed for the shower and correcting the plumbing if needed. I am scheduling a full inspection of all the work done by Smart Restoration due to the lack of ******************* on this job. You will be notified of all issues and I will expect reimbursement for all issues. I do not want smart restoration to repair any work done here. Prepared to reach out to my lawyer if needed.  : We will not be issuing a full reimbursement for the shower and correcting the plumbing if needed. The client ordered the wrong products this is not our fault.We will not be paying for their error despite their efforts to force our hand by filing a complaint or hiring a lawyer. They have already had a full inspection done on the property by the authority having jurisdiction and that inspection passed. The client is welcome to have as many inspections done on their property as the client wants. We will not be paying for those inspections or fixing anything that is called out in the inspection unless those are issues that fall under our warranty policy agreed to in our contract. We will not be paying for any bills  the client incurred from a third party contractor to make alterations to their property. We will keep to our original agreement to make repairs to the shower at such time as the client request us to. However we will not be making the unnecessary repairs that the realtor or the third party contractor have eluted to because those issues are in fact not violating any industry standards or codes, and not faulty installation issues as I have pointed out in my response above. We always stand behind our services and are willing to make the appropriate repairs. We are not willing to pay a third parts contractors bill for unnecessary repairs.

  Customer response

  01/29/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined the response would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. 
  
  [Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
  
  

  I have rejected the response because it is unclear if business is willing to refund for the shower which includes possible plumbing. 
  It has never been functional and its been an ongoing complaint, not recent. There are several issues wrong with the shower that the manager refuses to fix without charging more money after have paid 76k. All of the issues are the fault of the builder and he not once in response takes accountability and lies and blames me and continues to take advantage of my situation. The inspector story is all wrong as well. I will reach out to ****. 

   

  Regards,

  
  
  *********************************

  
  

  Customer response

  02/01/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined the response would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. 
  
  [Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this
  My concerns regarding the shower tile and doors were initially addressed and blown off during the walk-through where the manager made it seem like it was our error and took no responsibility for the issue of the discontinued shower door. We were asked to purchase a shower pan early on in the project not a shower kit per text message attached they didnt know if the pan would need switched out or would work so we were asked to hold off on purchase of shower door, by the time we were given the OK to get the door that goes with the pan it had been discontinued by American standard and I had no choice but to purchase an entire shower kit on my own. Thats the issue with the shower door as for the tile work I expressed my concerns at the same time during the walk-through, but as I previously mentioned, the manager took no initiative or accountability to correct it, he barely walked into the bathroom from the bathroom doorway, or took his hands out of his pockets. *******, the project manager has no respect for the opinions of others, including professionals, realtors customers, other contractors, friends, or family, who also agreed that the work was low quality and unacceptable. The only assistance they offered was an estimate to fix and pay more money on top of ****** already spent, let me be clear that we paid for a functional shower and we have never had one. Its never been used. The lien per the text message attached was just filed for the sake of having it on file and I was told they had no intentions of enforcing it,regardless we paid the very next day and the only issue they ever had with payment from us was the reluctance to pay for final plumbing due to incomplete shower. We paid ****** with no delay or issues, the manager has flat out lied stating my ex-husband and myself were bickering over who would pay. This could not be further from the truth and shows how he tried to manipulate our situation. The local building inspector stated that any work outside of running water and smoke detectors, and things of that matter were between myself and builder. He said builder failed to  install smoke detector. I had to have the leak in the kitchenette drain fixed and the hot cold switched to be corrected in the bathroom. We also lost the original countertop that we drove all the way to Greenwood to pick out because Smart restoration dropped the ball. There were two instances where other contractors would stop by unexpectedly and hang around and harass me with threats because they were not getting payment from Smart restoration continued harassing phone calls from other contractors for lack of payment from Smart restoration. Smart restoration had to bring in a handyman to complete jobs because he was not paying construction crew. The tile shower was not installed by a professional. The plumber flooded bathroom and kitchenette are and I have to keep damp rid under sinks because of a smell, concerns about this were mentioned to Smart restoration with no response. The slider door was not installed correctly. It is not the manufactures fault that screws were not screwed into s**** holes and seals are already breaking down as shown in attached pictures its been a year and stuff is already breaking down and needing repaired. The last thing I would like to stress here is how the manager responded with 6 to 7 pages and never takes accountability for anything and he wrote several flat out lies. He did and continues to manipulate my personal situation of divorce. It is just not realistic that everything is always the homeowners fault. This is the reason they should not be accredited lack of customer service, lack of quality, lack of accountability, lack of compromise to create a solution to fix their errors. Thank you kindly, **********************************
  
  

  Regards,
  
  *********************************

  
  

  

  Business response

  02/14/2023

  Client said:My concerns regarding the shower tile and doors were initially addressed and blown off during the walk-through where the manager made it seem like it was our error and took no responsibility for the issue of the discontinued shower door.

  
  Response:We did not blow off any issues. We brought the issues to the clients attention and provided the client solutions to resolve the issues. The client failed to ever make a decision as to how they wished to proceed and address the issue.
  We did not make is seem like it was their error it was in fact their error. We did not purchase the products we did not select them. We were not contracted to provide these items either. We were responsible for the installation of the products that were selected and provided by the client. We stopped providing finishes from box stores and manufacturers because of issues similar to this and those issues becoming our responsibility when the manufacturer defects and delays causes issues with the construction process. By our company not being involved with the products we eliminate those issues with manufacturers from being our issues. Those are issues that the clients have with those induvial manufacturers and their short falls. We have no control over them and cannot predict them. This was a part of the construction agreement from the beginning. The client was aware of the agreement. They were responsible for selecting and providing the finishes they wished for us to install. Items such as vanity, toilet, faucets, floor covering, light fixtures, tile and grout. We assist with the process my providing quantities needed and size limitations. But we dont design or select colors for our projects.  
  

  Client says: We were asked to purchase a shower pan early on in the project not a shower kit per text message attached they didnt know if the pan would need switched out or would work so we were asked to hold off on purchase of shower door, by the time we were given the OK to get the door that goes with the pan it had been discontinued by American standard and I had no choice but to purchase an entire shower kit on my own. Thats the issue with the shower door
  

  Response:The client was provided with a complete list of all items they were responsible for purchasing for the projects at the beginning of the project (the email was sent on 3/16/2021). In that list at the very beginning of the project while they were still undecided as to what finishes they wanted and how they were going to proceed with the shower base (tile custom base or a fiberglass base) our office advised them to wait on the purchase of the shower door. With the intent of the client making a decision on the base first so they would be compatible with one another.  We did not ever restrict or advise them from purchasing these items other than when the items was needed we requested the items at stages relevant to the current stage of the construction process. Example: exhaust fans, shower faucets, and shower pan were all requested during the framing process because they had to be installed at the time of construction.We did not tell the client to purchase the base separate from the door or to get 2 products that were not compatible with one another. The only advise that was given was at the very beginning of the project while they were still making decision to hold off for now the client waited until October to make the decision of what door they wanted. Those delays are not our responsibility. They waited 7 months to get the door and are now trying to blame us for their procrastination. We asked them to get the shower pan because we needed it to progress on the project. They made the decision to purchase one on clearance from the box store to save them money.  The manufacturer didnt discontinue the product after they purchased the pan as the client alludes to. The pan was on clearance because the manufacturer had discontinued the product.
  

  Client says: per text message attached they didnt know if the pan would need switched out or would work so we were asked to hold off on purchase of shower door,

  Response: First off the message provided doesnt provide the entire conversation. When the original statement of Shower door. But lets hold on this one for right now was made the client hadnt even made a decision on what type of base was being installed. We had quoted a fiberglass base for contract reasons but at the beginning of the project it was still undecided if they would switch to a custom tile base. The comment was to hold off for that decision to be made. It wasnt because we didnt know if the pan we had installed needed changed out as the client stated. As when the statement was made the building didnt even exist yet and the shower pan wasnt even purchased yet
  
  The client said: as for the tile work I expressed my concerns at the same time during the walk-through, but as I previously mentioned, the manager took no initiative or accountability to correct it, he barely walked into the bathroom from the bathroom doorway, or took his hands out of his pockets.
  

  Response:Again. This is inaccurate and is now well documented. During this walk throughI actually stood inside the shower and have pictures in our job file that I took of the shower while I was standing in the shower. As is stated In my original response to this complaint on 1/14/23 and as I stated on the original date of the walk through and as I will state here again but the client wont listen because we wont be issuing her a check for free money. We did notice things that needed corrected about the shower we did offer to correct those items once the accounting for the project was corrected on their behalf. We did provide a reasonable solution for the repairs. It was in fact the client who procrastinated on scheduling those to be done. It was also the client who was inpatient when they did finally decide to proceed and refused to wait until we had availability in our schedule to address the concerns. I wont rehash all those details because they are already documented in the original response to their complaint.But it is well documented that we did offer to take action and accountability to correct issues that needed address. We will not be taking action of items that are not reasonable items to take action on. Those item that were debunked as being issues but were really just made up gibberish her other contractor was spewing out we will not be attempting to address. We cannot do anything about these issues without the client allowing it. At this time the client has proven difficult and unreasonable to accept any type to solution other than free money being issues to them which we will not be issuing as the truth behind entire story is not the fault of smart restoration.
  

   The client said: *******, the project manager has no respect for the opinions of others, including professionals, realtors customers, other contractors, friends, or family, who also agreed that the work was low quality and unacceptable.
  

  Response:perhaps this might be the only statement I might actually agree with to an extent. Whereas I do have a regard for the feeling and rights of theses individuals the client is referencing. It is not feasible for me to have any admiration for them in the slightest. I have never meet any of them. I dont know them from any other induvial and have zero understanding of their background or experience in the construction industry. The only information the client has provided me about anyone they are referencing are the comments they received from the other contractor. Based on those comments alone I can honestly say I have no respect for that individual. Those comments and an understanding of why I wouldnt be respectful of that individual can be found in my original response to this complaint dated 1/14/23
  

   The client said: The only assistance they offered was an estimate to fix and pay more money on top of ****** already spent,
  

  Response:We keep recirculating back to this as being inaccurate. The reasons for the inaccurateness of this statement have been documented several times over in my responses. The client owes for the error of the shower. We will not be forced into and held responsible for their mistakes. We have made several offers to make repairs to the shower. The client has failed to be reasonable in accepting those attempts and is only interested in financial reimbursement for damages we are not responsible for. The values of the entire room addition is irrelevant as the sums to repair for the mistakes made by the client are the burden of the client alone.
  

  The client said: let me be clear that we paid for a functional shower and we have never had one. Its never been used.
  

  Response:the client paid for us to set a shower base they provided. They also received a full refund for the installation of the shower doors. Even though we spent several hours opening boxes and separations parts laying out tracks of different products purchased by the client then determining that they will not work packing it all back up for them so they can return them. We even went so far as to load and unload the products from the clients personal vehicle to assist them as much as we could. We then gave them a full refund on the doors and took a loss on the production and hours spent assisting them with the doors. The functional and use of the shower is not by fault of anything smart restoration has done. We have always left the door open for the client to accept our assistances in resolving their problem with the shower. The client would need to accept and request us to assist and allow the process to take place. To date the client has either been procrastinating the issue or when they did decided they were ready they were unwilling to be patient.
  
  The client said: The lien per the text message attached was just filed for the sake of having it on file and I was told they had no intentions of enforcing it, regardless we paid the very next day and the only issue they ever had with payment from us was the reluctance to pay for final plumbing due to incomplete shower.
  

  Response:lien laws, a contractor must file to reserve their lien rights within 60 days of completion of work or they forfeit their lien rights. They then have up to a year from the date of the filing to enforce the lien if the client fails to pay for the final bill. This client did finally pay the final bill which had been outstanding for more than 30 days but less then the 60 days allowed by state law. The final payment was the only issue we had for receiving payment from the client. They were very prompt in issuing payments up to this point. We at that time had no intentions of enforcing the lien due to the clients promptness of payment up to that point. But would have enforced it had we not received payment before the one-year limitation were up.
  
  The client said:  We paid ****** with no delay or issues, the manager has flat out lied stating my ex-husband and myself were bickering over who would pay. This could not be further from the truth and shows how he tried to manipulate our situation.
  

  Response:I was repeating the information provided to me by the client herself. If there was alternative motives for delaying the final payment those motives were not communicated to me from the client. She had in fact stated that they were trying to figure out who was going to pay for the project as they were stating the divorce proceedings. She though he should have to pay for it and I believe he did end up making the payment. He felt since she was keeping the house then those were her responsibilities. None of it matters as we received the payment and released the lien.
  
  The client said: The local building inspector stated that any work outside of running water and smoke detectors, and things of that matter were between myself and builder. He said builder failed to  install smoke detector.
  

  Response:the builder (the project manager) holds multiple certifications from the international code council ( the organization the writes the building code which is what the building official enforces) the inspector doesnt hold any certifications from the international code council. The building code doesnt require us to install new smoke detector for this project as we didnt add any new bedrooms. A fact that we were able to take advantage of on behalf of the clients for several cost saving for the project. Saving in the amount of tens of thousands of dollars..
  The client benefited from several building code allowances we were able to take advantage of due to our extensive experience and knowledge of building standards. If the inspector made a comment about failed to install smoke detector it was an ignorant statement and I would be more than happy to provide him with a  more extensive understanding of the legal requirements for smoke detectors. Similarly to the conversations I had with him about your project in relation to the energy standards and compliances with those regulations. Where the same inspector attempted to unjustly enforce requirements on the clients  project that would have cause them to endure additional expenses. I, on the clients behalf, was able to show the inspector the error in his enforcement and prevent the additional job expenses from being incurred.
  

  The client said: I had to have the leak in the kitchenette drain fixed and the hot cold switched to be corrected in the bathroom.
  

  Response:Smart restoration did not self-perfume the plumbing on the project. State law requires that licensed plumbers be used. We hired a third part licensed pluming contractor to perform the plumbing. If there were plumbing issues and those issues were brought to our attention, we would have notified the third party plumber to resolve the issues. As those would have been their issues to resolve. However we were not until just now (well over a year later) told of these issues or concerns.
  

   The client said We also lost the original countertop that we drove all the way to Greenwood to pick out because Smart restoration dropped the ball. There were two instances where other contractors would stop by unexpectedly and hang around and harass me with threats because they were not getting payment from Smart restoration continued harassing phone calls from other contractors for lack of payment from Smart restoration.
  

  Response:The only contractor who had payment issues for this project was the plumber. those issues were due to your complaints (coming up later in this message) about him flooding the project. We had to respond with our labor forces and equipment to dry out the structure. The plumber owed use for those services. He also owed ********************** for issues unrelated to your project. There was a payment dispute as there is commonly in the construction industry. We no longer use ************ due to these issues he had with your project and others before yours.We did balance out the finances and severed ties with the company.
  

  The client said Smart restoration had to bring in a handyman to complete jobs because he was not paying construction crew.
  

  Response:there were several different level of experience of  crew members used on the project as there are with all construction project. We assigned the task out to the appropriate individuals based on their level of competency. We utilized licensed individual when required as we used general labore for task that suited their ability. The derogative manner in which you refer to handyman says more about you than it does about our company. All individuals were paid based on their level of experience and skill. All of the individuals were construction crews members.
  

  The client said The tile shower was not installed by a professional.
  

  Response:Im not going to continues repeating this over and over again. Comments about the shower have already been made. The resolution has been offered. There is nothing more smart restoration can do but provide the offer. Its up to the client now.
  

  The client said The plumber flooded bathroom and kitchenette are and I have to keep damp rid under sinks because of a smell,concerns about this were mentioned to Smart restoration with no response.
  

  Response:plumber did flood the area during the framing rough in stage of the project. We no longer use this plumber due to the experience with them on this project. There is nothing further we can do about their services. We can come out an look at any smells that are coming from the area to assess a solution.
  

  The client said The slider door was not installed correctly. It is not the manufactures fault that screws were not screwed into s**** holes and seals are already breaking down as shown in attached pictures
  

  Response.This was a new constitution door. There are nail flanges on the exterior of the door behind the siding this door nails to the wall. There shouldnt be any screws holding the new construction door in place. The clients new (better than me) contractor has again provided them with false information.
  Ive looked to the pictures uploaded. This is a new construction addition to an existing house. The pictures show expansion and settlement cracks and shrinkage of caulking around inside corners. There are literally thousands of documents online concerning new construction and expansion and settlement cracking from just as many contractors across the country. Dont take my word for it go read the documents for yourself.  Anyone can look those up and know its unavoidable and not the fault of the contractor. We still acknowledge these are not a desired outcome from the clients perspective and we offer to all our clients (this one included) to come back within the year and address these issues for them without additional charges. This is one of the reasons we leave the wall paint onsite with the clients so we will have the color match onsite when we return.
  

  I also notices a lot of photos taken that the client is intentionally attempting to misrepresent the actual final product. Photos taken from unrealistic angles.Photos of cabinet screws taken from within the cabinet. Photos taken from angles of laying down on the floor and looking up at something. Angles that nobody during the course of a normal life would be looking at these products.
  There is a photo provided that looks like a missing shoe mold near the dishwasher,this was shown to the client at the time of construction. We explained to them the situation and provided them with the option of installing the shoe mold or leaving it off. We didnt care either way. WE explained that if it was installed it would hinder the client from removing the dishwasher. We explained that we can either install it and it will have to be removed with the dishwasher or we can leave it off. It was up to them. She didnt care at that time with what she was going through I dont blame her. But now wants to act like it wasnt an entire conversation and we just left her with it. If she wants a shoe mold installed all she should have had to do was ask and we would have gone out to install it. Instead she is choosing slander.
  

  The client said  been a year and stuff is already breaking down and needing repaired.
  

  Response:we were contracted to perform the original new build of the structure. We are not responsible for the continued maintenance of the structure.
  

  The client said The last thing I would like to stress here is how the manager responded with 6 to 7 pages and never takes accountability for anything and he wrote several flat out lies. He did and continues to manipulate my personal situation of divorce. It is just not realistic that everything is always the homeowners fault.
  

  Response:the client obviously didnt read all 6-7 pages as I repeatedly took responsibility for the issues that were real issues that we were responsible for. However, the client was only interested in hearing us take responsibility for the items they were errored in so they wouldnt have to pay extra out of pocket for fixing their mistakes. We are not going to do that. We are not responsible for it and we will not be paying for it. The client is accusing me of not taking accountability when I have repeatedly stated we are willing to address the issues with the shower. They have also repeatedly not allowed that to happen. The only item *** said was the owner fault was the error in ordering the incorrect products for the shower not addressing the issues in a timely manner. Failing to be patient when they did finally decided to address the issues and then attempting to place the blame on us for their mistakes.
  

  The client said This is the reason they should not be accredited lack of customer service, lack of quality, lack of accountability,lack of compromise to create a solution to fix their errors. Thank you kindly,*********************************.
  

  Response:there is nothing more to say on the matter that hasnt already been said. we made our offer and we are sticking by it as it is a fair offer. 

  Customer response

  02/17/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined the response would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. 
  
  [Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
  I seriously dont know what ******* is talking about. No one laid on the floor to take pics. They are as plain as day and can be seen all over. I told ******* I wanted a tile shower. I dont know how they are built or what doors or pans would be needed. He states they offered a fair solution. Can you please have him relay what that is to all of us so we are on the same page. I have spoke with two trust worthy contractors who both said the entire shower needs to be replaced. Meaning all tiles removed. ******* does nothing but fabricate the truth to benefit him. Again, no accountability for their errors. No attempt to provide a resolution or appease the customer. 
  Regards,
  
  *********************************
  

• Initial Complaint

  03/16/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Order Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  We contracted for a pier post foundation for a mini-barn/cabin. The work was not done according to the contract and it was not at all done in a workmanlike manner. Once the construction was started, contractor was immediately notified that the work was totally unacceptable. Contract was for 18 deep concrete pier posts. **** post forms were not used, instead the concrete was poured freely into holes that were not uniform & not in alignment with each other. As a result the concrete is uneven, not level, & there is no way to know if it is 18 deep or not, some appear to be very shallow. The concrete work is so poor that it will have to be removed, it cannot be salvaged. The wood beams & supports sitting on the concrete are crooked, unlevel, & out of alignment. Some of the support beams are wobbly & can be moved freely back and forth despite being affixed to the concrete. Some of the support brackets have up to inch gap between the support bracket itself & the beam it is supposed to support, other support brackets have gaps between them & the post they are affixed to, possibly allowing the support beams to collapse into the brackets when put under weight. There was virtually no communication from this contractor, even when he knew how unhappy we were with the substandard construction. He had planned & expected to reset the mini barn on this structure with no walk through, as promised in the contract & no approval from us which, in view of the absolutely terrible construction, seems to be an intentional act to hide the workmanship. Had he been able to reset the building, the flaws and defects would have been covered up and hidden and we would have been stuck with the building on an unsound structure. We pulled contractor off the job after paying $5178, and before the job was deemed complete. Asked for the payment back and that no further payments be expected. Contractor is demanding $836.26 and had filed a mechanics lien.

  

  Business response

  04/18/2022

  Response to the complaint filed:
  
                  The initial contact from the client to our office occurred on 9/4/21. On 11/9/21 Smart Restoration sent over the contract document and scope of work for the client to approve. There were several different meetings and conversation between smart restoration and the client between theses dates (including the dates of : 9/9/21, 9/13/21, 9/16/21,9/24/21, 10/7/21, 11/4/21, and 11/9/21 details of those conversation and a timeline of event will be included as an attachment to collaborate our side of the events that took place and the open and frequent communication that took place on the project)
  
  On 11/29/21 the client signed and returned the contract and scope of work to smart restoration. They were notified at that time that due to the time of the year and the unpredictable weather conditions that it would possibly be a better idea to wait until spring to proceed. The client stated that they understood the concerns and were ok with going ahead and proceeding with the project now and understood that delays might be incurred due to weather conditions.
  
  Work began the week of December 6th  the client was notified by text message and the client responded before our arrival that work would start at their require.We removed the building off the current site and relocated it to a new position out of the way so the new pier footers could be poured. Shortly after the piers were pored the ground became saturated due to rain and access to the build site became a hinderance. On 12/2021 the client called and wanted to know when work would progress. It was explained to him again at that time due the saturation of the ground and the amount of rain we had endured that access to the site was limited and we would not be able to proceed until such time as the ground became frozen. After the initial conversation with ******* on the phone the client then proceeded to *************** to inquire about the same issue and was told that he had already been informed earlier that day of the situation and that he would need to wait until the ground was frozen.
  
  On 1/11/21 we were able to return to the job site as the ground had frozen over enough for the vehicles to gain access. We proceeded to install the 6x6 post on top of the concrete piers and frame up the beams.
  
  On 1/13/22 our ********* onsite call me and said that the client had left a hand written note at the build site on the building materials stating that they wished the front side of the building not be more then 24off the ground. We called the client immediately to discuss the issue and left them a voice message to return our call. Later on that morning the client called back and spoke with ******* for just short of 6 minuets about the project including their request to lower the building height to less that 24 off the ground on the front elevation. It was explained to **** at that time that due to the grade slope the building was at its lowest possible height. And that the only option of lowering the height would be to change the building site grade elevation so the site was flat and not on a hill. It was explained that this was not mentioned before and that a change to the contract documents would be needed to execute this new request. We were told at that time that **** was previously as a profession been a *********, plumber and hvac tech so he understood construction and what was being said to him. It was explained to **** that the back right corner of the building was as close to the ground as we could possibly make it and the rest of the building was level off of that corner. We explained to him that the building code would not allow us to place the beams any closer than 6 off of soil and we would have to remove the soil to accommodate their new restrictions. The client asked during this conversation why we had designed **** large beams ( 2 ply 2x12) instead of smaller beams which would lower the structure. It was explained to him at that time that we referenced the building code and the standard per the code was a 2 ply 2x12. Both ***************** and ******* ended the conversation with the same understanding that no changes would be made to the scope of work and that we would progress as planned.
  
  On 1/13/22 the client called back again back to discuss one more concern he had about the project. He mentioned that he is not a smoker and that he understands that my crew does smoke. Me mentioned to me that he would appreciate it if the crew would pick up the buds from the job site and not leave them laying around. I agreed with his request and informed him I would talk to them that day and make sure they understood it was not appropriate to litter the site with cigarette buds.
  
  On 1/12/22 I received an email from the client expressing concerns about the existing structure and its location on the property. They expressed concerns about the cabin being warped. And the doors not operating properly. We had not been informed that the cabin was going to be utilized during the course of construction. We did express to the client on several occasions previously that we were unable to guarantee any time table for completion as the weather would play a big roll in our ability to progress. We asked the client before we started work if you wished to wait until spring instead of winter so we may get some more favorable weather. That we would need the ground to be either dry so we could access the site or frozen without snow covering it for us to access the site and if it rained and didnt freeze we would not be able to work for as long as mother nature saw it fit for us to not gain access to the job site. The client on several occasions expressed that they understood our limitations. But now wants to send an email expressing delays and their concerns about the structure.
  
  On 1/18/22 ******* received a phone call from **** and ********************* We talked for just shy of 10 minuets. This was the first conversation ******* has had with ****** and had not even known that there was another party to the project before this date. **** started the conversation and again inquired about the front end height of the building. ******* had reiterated our previous conversation from 1-13-22 as to the restrictions imposed on us due to building standards and our limitation with complying with those standards. This is when ****** spoke up. She voiced concerns as to why the scope of work even needed to be concerned with the building standards and why we were adhering to them. That the project didnt require a permit or inspections so why would we need to be concerned with those standards.  I mentioned to her that we have to for liability reasons comply with a written standard and that if we were to deviate from that standard for any project and that project regardless of who the current owners were to cause harm we would still be on the hook for faulty construction practices. After hearing the reasons for the existing construction ****** stated she still didnt like the height of the front end of the structure and would need to talk it over with **** and they would get back with me as to what they wish to do to proceed. She asked when we planned on placing the structure on the new foundation to which ******* replied Today. ******* had to call all involved with the project and scheduled to be onsite that day and cancel all work for that day. Due to the request from the client and *******.
  
  1/24/22 and 1/25/22 ******* called the client to inquire about progression with the project and find out what they decided to do about continuing the project.He left a voice message on both occasions.
  
  1/27/22 ******* spoke to **** and ********************* on the phone where they expressed to him they no longer wish for us to continue any work on the project. They expressed that they understood why the foundation was constructed as it was and they expressed that they understood why it had to be done that was. They also expressed that they were still not pleased with the outcome and no longer wished to continue with the project with smart restoration. They went on to express that they wanted a refund of the money paid out to smart restoration. They requested half of the fund to be returned to them and that if that took place they would not proceed with any legal action against smart restoration. ******* attempted to again communicant with the client but was interrupted on several occasions before he could complete a sentence or thought and was told they no longer cared what he had to say about the process that had taken place or why the project was the way it was. ******* expressed that Smart Restoration was not going to agree to those terms and that he would go back and look at the financials of the project and would let them know where the project stood with the funds paid or due. After speaking to **** and ********************* on the phone ******* followed up with **** in a text message to inquire about permission to go the site and retrieve the remaining building materials and to return the access key they provided to us. **** responded to ******* that the locks had been changed and that we are not welcome on the property. He also commented that there were no remaining materials on site that he knew about.******* Responded with a list of some of the materials that remained on site.To which **** responded that he would be available Monday morning @ 10:00 am to allow the crew to come back and pick up the materials.
  
  1/27/22 ******* revised the final invoice and notified the client in an email of the funds due. In the email sent she mentioned the assumption that the materials would be returned to us.
  
  1/29/22 I received an email from *********************. Where she expressed concerns about owing a balance due on work performed and that she was wanting us to credit funds back to her. She made threats that she would complain to the BBB and obtain legal counsel if we did not refund money back to her as she pleases.
  
  1/31/22 The field crew arrived onsite as scheduled to pick up remaining materials. They were able to retrieve the remaining bags of concrete however the client refused them access to the framing materials and threated to press charges of trespassing if they attempted to acquire the materials. The field staff noted to the office that the client was open carrying a side arm pistol during the conversation. Use threating language and appeared hostile.
  
  2/10/22 We received legal notice from an attorney representing the client notifying us of their representation. I wont go into details of these legal proceeding Other that to state that on 3/25/22 we received an email from our attorney stating the client was issuing a check for the remaining balance for our services that they owned for. We received the funds within the following weeks.
  
  3/16/22 The client filed a complaint with the BBB.
  
  To address the statements made in the complaint to the BBB.
  We contracted for a pier post foundation for a mini-barn/cabin. : We were contracted to move the existing structure off the build site and construct a post and pier foundation system them place the structure back on top of the new foundation system. The client was to install the skirting around the structure and deal with the trash haul off( which was requested by the owner to self-perform as a cost savings). A sketch and details line item estimate was prepared for the client and approved by the client.
  
  The work was not done according to the contract and it was not at all done in a workmanlike manner. :
  We performed the scope of work in compliance with the proposed scope of work to the ** The client complains about workmanship on a product we were not allowed to finish. We were asked not to complete the scope of work and then after we were no longer allowed access to the site (and we left with the intent to return and make adjustments before setting the building) the client them started to make statements about workmanship that had not previously been mentioned. We were not requested to stop work on the project due to workmanship we were in fact requested to stop work due to our unwillingness to ignore the building standard and construct the foundation in nonconformance with the building standard.
  
  Once the construction was started, contractor was immediately notified that the work was totally unacceptable. : Work began on the project on the week of 12/6/21 our first notification from the client about any concerns was during the week of 1/13/22. More than a month after work had started.
  
  The wood beams &supports sitting on the concrete are crooked, unlevel, & out of alignment.Some of the support beams are wobbly & can be moved freely back and forth despite being affixed to the concrete. : The scope of work was incomplete. We were in production and not allowed to finish the construction plan. Critical mechanical fasteners were not installed,inspected or finished installed before we were asked not to return to the site.The current product doesnt represent our final product as we were not allowed to provide a final product. At the request of the owner.
  Contract was for 18deep concrete pier posts.: The contract was for 18 diameter concrete piers not 18 deep piers. The building standard for our area for the depth of the piers is 30 which we exceeded with all piers.The diameter of the piers also meet the scope of work and were 18 or larger.
  
  **** post forms were not used : This is the first accurate statement of the complaint.
  
  instead the concrete was poured freely into holes that were not uniform & not in alignment with each other. : The piers were poured in a manner necessary to meet building standards and be utilized for their intended purpose as a structural foundation. The proposed scope of work has these piers being completely concealed within the skirting the owner stated they were to install and there for a floated finish was put on the top of the pier. Had the owner expressed any concerns about the finish on the top of the footer AKA pier foundation we would have addressed those concerns. However nothing was said to us so we performed the scope of work per industry standards. The client complaint about the alignment of the footers with on another again we installed the piers in accordance with their intended purpose. We squared up the building. We laid out the location of the beam lines to avoid existing framing member on the structure. And constructed the system so the beams run in a straight line with one another.Photos of the system are included with this response showing perfectly straight and level beams for the structure to sit on.
  
  As a result the concrete is uneven, not level, & there is no way to know if it is 18 deep or not,some appear to be very shallow. : The contract was for 18 diameter concrete piers not 18 deep piers. The building standard for our area for the depth of the piers is 30 which we exceeded with all piers. The diameter of the piers also meet the scope of work and were 18or larger. It would be very easy for them to dig next to each pier down 18 if they choose to verify they exceeded that depth. It would not be so easy to dig to the bottom of the piers that actually exceed 30 deep.
  
  The concrete work is so poor that it will have to be removed, it cannot be salvaged. It is their property they can do with the product as they please. If they wish to remove the product and replace it we wont object. However for the intended purpose we installed these piers they meet every standard and are completely functional.
  
  The wood beams &supports sitting on the concrete are crooked, unlevel, & out of alignment.Some of the support beams are wobbly & can be moved freely back and forth despite being affixed to the concrete. Some of the support brackets have up to inch gap between the support bracket itself & the beam it is supposed to support, other support brackets have gaps between them & the post they are affixed to, possibly allowing the support beams to collapse into the brackets when put under weight. : The designed system is missing critical members we were not allowed to install or finish our work. Had we be allowed to complete our contacted scope of work and install the remaining mechanical products to the system these issues would not exist.
  
  There was virtually no communication from this contractor, even when he knew how unhappy we were with the substandard construction. : We have documented communication with the client on numerous occasions. We notified them of our intent to be on the property before we arrived every time. We communicated to them issues with weather. We communicated with them building code concerns,we communicated with them the intended scope of work. We talked to them weekly or bi weekly depending on the progress of the project. We always responded to any inquiry they had and returned emails and phone calls promptly. They might not have like what they were being told however that doesnt constitute as lack of communication.
  
  He had planned &expected to reset the mini barn on this structure with no walk through, as promised in the contract & no approval from us which, in view of the absolutely terrible construction, seems to be an intentional act to hide the workmanship. : We had planned to execute the contact as agreed upon. There was never a planned walk through of the work before the structure was reset. There was only a scheduled walk though at the completion of the project. Had at any time the client mentioned the need to meet onsite and look at the project we would have gladly obliged. We would have loved the opportunity to talk about the project in person with them. To this date we have never even meet ******* in person who is the one that has filed this complaint. It is difficult to please a client whom you have never meet nor even knew existed until they have decided to remove you from the project. There was no act to hid anything as the client was from the beginning intended to install the skirting on the structure not us. As such anything that could be hidden would only have been hidden when they installed the skirting. We stand behind our services when we are allowed to perform them in compliance with the standards.
  
  Had he been able to reset the building, the flaws and defects would have been covered up and hidden and we would have been stuck with the building on an unsound structure. : Had we been allowed to finish the project you would have received exactly what you paid for. Which is a structurally sound foundation for the building to sit on for years. Per Indiana warranty laws; had we been able to complete the contract the structure would have been mandated to carry a 10 year warranty free from defects. Which the foundation would have passed easily. Everything we performed was per industry standard it wasnt until we refused to constructed the foundation in nonconformance that we were removed from the project.
  
  We pulled contractor off the job after paying $5178, and before the job was deemed complete. Asked for the payment back and that no further payments be expected. Contractor is demanding $836.26 and had filed a mechanics lien.: Had the client allowed us to retrieve the remaining materials and not threated the tradesman collecting the remaining materials the remaining balance would have been half what it ended up being due. Even though we were intitled to additional fund, due to the removal of us from the project we did not attempt to collect on those funds contractually owed. Our intentions were honest and pure, we simply requested to be compensated for the scope of work we were contracted to perform and that we performed in compliances will all standards and laws. We cannot be held liable for changed made during the project and alteration request that are deemed to be in nonconformance with the laws. Threats of legal action and complaints to the BBB **** as the one made 1/29/22 if we dont comply with these demands are unacceptable from the client and will not yield the reaction the client wishes.
  
  Summary: We performed the scope of work exactly as we had proposed to perform the scope of work. The clients wife had a problem with the height of the structure. We were not able to make any alteration under the existing contract to remedy those concerns. By the time these concerns were brought to our attention the only method to remedy the situation would have cost the client additional funds that they were not willing to approve of. They wanted us to correct their problem without approval for the funds to do so. When it became clear to the client that we were not willing to construct the foundation in a manner that was in nonconformance with the building standard and that we were not willing to expense our own funds to solve their concerns they removed us from the project. It wasnt until after they removed us from the project that we received any notification of displeasure with the workmanship of any kind other than the height of the structure in relation to the ground. Both the height and ground elevation were out side of our control and the approved scope of work. Please see the attached photos of the foundation from our last day allowed onsite. 

  Customer response

  04/20/2022

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined the response would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. 
  
  The work done by this contractor was not done in a workmanlike manner.  He claims that the scope was incomplete at the time that he was pulled off the job.  That is true, however the scope of the work that had been completed to that point included: 
  vertical wood posts that were unlevel, uneven, out of alignment, and had been hacked on so badly that the top of the posts were uneven and not flat (apparently he did not have the proper tools needed to cut the beams);
  those same beams were affixed to the concrete, some of them at an angle of 25 or 30 degrees and they were moved freely, even being affixed;
  horizontal beams that were so crooked that they literally look wavy from one end to the other (it doesnt seem that any type of a level was used on any part of this); 
  multiple support brackets that have gaps between the posts they are supposed to sit on and the beams that they are holding (the hacked on vertical beams are part of the problem with some of these, since the support brackets cant sit flush on the posts), or that have gaps between the bottom of the bracket and where the beam is supposed to sit in the bracket;
  concrete that was poured so sloppy that it literally looks like it was just dumped on the ground   
  
  The contractor states that critical mechanical fasteners were not installed, inspected, or finished installed before we were asked not to return to the site, and that The designed system is missing critical members we were not allowed to install or finish our work.  Had we be(en) allowed to complete our cont(r)acted scope of work and install the remaining mechanical products to the system these issues would not exist.  He is implying that these critical mechanical fasteners, would correct the construction flaws and defects of the amateurish carpentry work that had been performed.  The critical mechanical fasteners should be there to provide additional stability and support, not to make up for the unsafe and unsound carpentry work that had been done.
  
  Contractor also stated our first notification from the client about any concerns was during the week of 1/13/22.  More than a month after work had started.  Please note, the concrete had been poured a month earlier and covered with insulation.  We did not interfere or touch the insulation during that time period.  The construction of the wood frame started on January 11, 2022.  Client was on site January 12, 2022, and immediately notified contractor on January 13, 2022 of concerns about the poor quality construction work and about the height of the structure.  He chose to ignore the complaints about the poor construction and proceed to continue with more poor construction work.
  
  The contract does say Smart Restoration will schedule a walk-through with the Property Owner near the final completion and agree on a final punch list.  That walk-through was never mentioned or scheduled.  This contractor saw the work that had been done.  It was not structurally sound, nor was it professional in any manner.  He had intended to place the cabin on this structure, with all these flaws, without any walk-through or acceptance of the structure that was supposed to support this building.   Once the building had been placed on this structure (assuming that it could have been placed ********************************************************** level) all of the flaws and construction defects that he knew existed, would have been hidden and difficult, if not impossible to fix without taking the building back off this structure.  In his response, he referenced the skirting multiple times.  The skirting has nothing to do with his job of performing quality construction, although it definitely would have hidden the work he did.  Fortunately, we went on site before the building was placed and stopped any further work at that time.
  
  Lastly, this contractor stated Had we been allowed to finish the project you would have received exactly what you paid for. Which is structurally sound foundation for the building to sit on for years.   We did pay for the work we received, but we did not receive the professional work that we paid for.  An acknowledgement and apology from this contractor that the work was very clearly not professional or acceptable would have gone a long way in preventing this complaint, but he is obviously willing to stand by the poor quality of work that he and his crew provided.
  
  Regards,
  
  **** And *********************
  

  

  Business response

  05/10/2022

  
  The company's response to paragraph 1: we feel we are repeating ourselves with these responses. The client is complaining about the "workmanship" of an incomplete product. They state that portions of the product had been completed. However, in reality it had not been competed as we were not allowed to follow through with the project. It would be no different than pulling a car off the assembly line and then complaining that the lug nuts are not tight enough on the wheels for it to pass an inspection for it to sell on a car lot. obviously, the factory wasn't provided the opportunity to inspect and correct any issues with the vehicle before it went out the door and was put on the lot for sale. obviously, there will be issues with that vehicle due to those checks and balances not being allowed to be performed. We are not perfect. our employees are not perfect. we make mistakes. We always stand behind our work and correct any mistakes that are made when provided the opportunity to do so. In this case we were not provided the opportunity to even inspect the project to determine if a correction was needed.
  
  There are several items that the client is referencing that are Nonissues and do not require any correction. in fact, a majority of the complaints from this client have been exactly that. nonissues that they are just uneducated about the products and services to understand that these concerns of theirs are truly nonissues. Had we been allowed to talk with the client instead of being told that they dont care what we have to say and for us to stop talking because they are not listening to us. We might have been able to reason with them and explain to them why theses items are not issues of concerns. example being: the "concrete that was poured so sloppy that is literally looks like it was just dumped on the ground". That one made me laugh a little. because it was literally dumped out but not on the ground. It was dumped into the pier hole that was dug for it. this concrete is a footer for the structure to sit on. It was never intended or ask of us to trowel finish the top of the footer. it is designed to be hidden. unseen at the end of the project. so there is no need for it to be slicked down with are finish. It simply needed to serve its purpose which it does as a structural support of the building that sits on solid soil below the frost line so it will not move during the freeze thaw cycle of the seasons in Indiana. I have never in my 20+ years in the construction industry as a *********, building official, or contractor been asked to make the top of the footer look pretty or had a complaint from a client that it wasn't pretty enough for them. This is truly a nonissue. The product was poured out the same manner all footers across the country are poured out. They are dumped out in the size and shape they need to be then they are struck off level so the next product can be installed on top of it. Additionally, The client uploaded a photo and complained about some of the posts "literally look wavy from one end to the other" this is again a nonissue and has no relevant to the structural integrity of the project. nor does it matter to the aesthetic appeal of the final product. We took great care in ensuring that the lines running parallel to the structural beams were perfectly inline as that direction has significant relevant to the structural integrity of the building. we also insured that the layout of the perimeter of the building was perfectly inline as that has a great deal of importance with the aesthetics of the structure, the area this client is complaining about in the north/south direction of the interior post location while the beams are running east and west. It is completely ill relevant in any way to the integrity or appearance of the project. We did not spend any time dealing with this as it had no relevance on the end product. had the client allowed us to communicate with them about their project instead of telling us not to talk to them we would have been able to explain this to them. however, we were not awarded that opportunity. 
  
  Response to paragraph 2: We stand behind our original statement. The client is putting implied words in our mouth that were never said by us. Had we been allowed to finish the project The structure would have been structurally sound and aesthetically appealing.
  
  Response to paragraph 3: The complaint the client made to us on January 13th 2022 was not about poor quality as much as it was about their desire for us to lower the height of the structure. To which we notified them we could not do as it would have made the project in nonconformance with the building code. There were no complaints form the client about quality until after we refused to alter the structure in a nonconforming manner. We continue to stand behind the quality of our work as being structurally sound and aesthetically appealing based on the information we were provided from the client at the time it was installed. We cannot be expected to make alteration to a structure after work has been performed to meet each persons individual expectations when those expectations are not expressed to us before the work starts and is outside the normal practices of the industry. Especially in this case where we did not even know the wife *********************** was involved in the project until she was displeased. Every form of communication before that was with the husband ***************** and there was no mention to us of a spouse or other party to appease.
  
  Our response to paragraph 4: Again I have to chuckle a little at this complaint. The client is complaining that we never scheduled a final walk-though with them for a project they asked us not complete. I had to read this several time to make sure Im understanding it correctly. How do they expect us to schedule a final walk through for a project they asked us not to compete? The contract also states we would meet with the client at their request for a walk through of the project at any time during the process. this client never made such a request of us. but yet still wants to complain that one was not scheduled for them.  This is their own doing and not our responsibility. They made decisions that effected this project we simply complied with their wishes and ceased work. We cannot be expected, and we actually dont have any legal rights to forces them to allow us to complete the project. They asked us to leave the property and never return to the property. We complied with this wish. They never asked up to repair anything or come back and fix anything. They never gave us the opportunity to talk about or address their concerns or to ease their worries. They only want to complain on public forums to slander our name. They were mad we wouldnt lower the building (not that we didnt want to do that for them but that we could not legally do it for them under the current contract) and they gave up on the idea of working to resolve any other issues. They throw in the towel and asked us to leave. Again with my 20+ years of experience as a *********, building official, and contractor I attest that the work performed meet or exceed all building standards. As it has a structural sound concrete foundation that exceeds the frost depth requirements and complies with the standards for width. There are code compliant post to pier mechanical connections property installed and fully connected to the post and pier. Post size are per building codes, There are compliant post beam connector installed. We have properly sized and quantity beams (even though the client requested us to install under sized beams to lower the building height) for the span and loads that are applied. Are there minor adjustments that need to be made. Im sure there are. Does my crew do exactly as I intend 100% of the time without fail. Absolutely not. Do we work diligently with our crew and clients to attempt to ensure that all parties as appeased? Absolutely we do when we are provided the opportunity to do so.
  
  The client said that the skirting has nothing to do with his job. I differ from that option. The contractor needs to know the entire picture from start to finish. If the contractor knows what the finishes are then he or she can plan for them. example being: Some siding needs a nailing pattern of 8 oc others are ***** OC this matters what substrate we are installing and is very important information we must have to frame up a building. In this case we were told there would be a finish product of a skirting installed a round the building leading us to believe our product was not to be the proposed aesthetically appealing finished product and that our product would be covered with the skirting. This allowed us to not worry ourselves about the appearance of the top of the footing as it was not to be exposed. Or the placement of the post relevant to the nonstructural elements of the building as they to would not be exposed upon the finished product. This was also information we used to provide a cost competitive quote to the client. This was very important information we needed for that process and carried a lot of weight as to our intent to proceed with the scope of work. It affected everything. Which is why it was put into the contract with the owner that a skirting was to be installed upon completion. I repeat this because its so very important to every single one of the clients complaints outside of the height of the structure, this information affected everything else from a aesthetics point of view. Also from a pricing stand point.
  
  Response to paragraph 5:  The client is correct they did eventually pay for the work they received. Only after we paid an attorney to collect the funds from them. An attorney that cost us more than what we received from the client. They did not intent to pay for our services. In fact they requested us to pay them. It was only after they realized they were not going to win the legal battle and that we had complied with all of our obligations to them for services rendered that they finally reluctantly paid the final **** owed. We were not Ruthless in our request for payment. We did not apply legal fee on the client or late payment fee or cancelations fees. All of which we were contractually owed. We simply wished for the client to pay us for the materials and services they received. It is unfortunate that they required us to have to resort to hiring an attorney to collect such funds.
  
  We as always stand behind our services that we are allowed to provide under the circumstances we are allowed to provide them. Unfortunately, this project did not allow for favorable circumstances. Had Reasonable concerns been brought to our attention they would have been addressed and we would have been excited about the opportunity to resolve those concerns. However we know that we cannot be everything to everyone and there are some clients who simply do not wish to resolve issues and only want to complain and disassemble kind and hardworking people. Some people want fee hand outs and to take advantage of small business by not paying their portion for the services they receive. It is our intention to provide a service to people who wish to have a contractor they can trust and who has a full understanding of the building they are investing in. We are that contractor. We have a full comprehensive understanding of building laws and construction methods that you cant find elsewhere. We pride ourselves on our continued education and providing continued education to our crews to improve themselves. We strive for perfection but have not achieved it as it is an ever moving and evasive goal. This client wants to attempt to attack our character. By faulty accusing us of pour workmanship and threating us with poor reviews. But our will remains strong, and we will not be detoured from providing top of the line services to those who wish to seek it and those who are reasonable people. We literally have hundreds of clients in the area who appreciate what we do for them every day. This one past client who we will refuse to serve in the future will not prevent us from our goals.

*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. ↩