ComplaintsforEcoSmart Skylights

• Initial Complaint

  01/21/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Unresolved

  More info

  I entered into a contract on 3/21/2020 to complete a kitchen renovation project. The contractor had a delayed start, but did eventually begin the work later in the year and into the Spring/Summer of 2021. On October 8, 2021, I noticed that the contractor had come to my home and retrieved all of his tools that he had left on site. I had already sent a notice of default earlier in the summer and have since made at least 2 subsequent requests for the return of $20,000 which was advanced to him ahead of the work to be performed. I am still waiting for the refund.

  Business response

  03/04/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2022/02/09) */ We began this project by configuring a proposal and signed agreement. The deposit required deposit was 10,000.00 the agreement was that the homeowner would be responsible for permits required. I did all drawings and gathered all documentation and had National lumber engineer the LVL beams needed for soon tubes an wall supports needed to to submit for permit. The permit was approved and sent to Ms G**** .We then began removing everything from the existing 14x 22' back deck .We also removed the Sunsetter awning and stored in the homeowners desired location. At this point we began dismantling the 14x22' pressure treated deck with Trex type decking for the surface. As per the homeowners request we stockpiled all materials for possible later use. Also demoed second floor deck and roof above bulkhead to accommodate the new addition. Because of the location of the addition and the fact that we were using sono tube as supports, we weren't able to get a machine into the area. We hand Doug the 5 footing holes 2'x4' and had the homeowner call for inspection. At this point I felt that we had completed more than enough work to ask for the second check of 10,000.00 . The inspector came and said that we could not proceed as they would require a poured concrete wall with a 2' concrete footing. Now as I said we submitted all the engineering and the drawings showed 5 sono tubes with an LVL engineered by National Lumber wich was approved by the building department. We then had to try to work this out with the building department,for some reason the inspector did not want us to work with ( THESE PEOPLE) his words. I mentioned this to Ms G****s live in boyfriend and he said oh yes they hate her down there. He further explained that she had done many projects without permits and the neighbors complained. I found Ms G**** to be very nice and seemed like anything but a rule breaker. 2 months went by before the finally told Ms G**** that we could proceed with the project long as we poured a concrete foundation with footings. Now at this point 2 months had passed and our footings were pretty much caved in with dirt. So without any additional cost I agreed to continue as they recommended so that we could keep going. Even though the additional cost would be considerable roughly 4000.00 additional. I rented a small excavator and hired an operator to trench the area. The hole was completed and the homeowner again contacted the building department for hole inspection. The inspector approved the hole and we formed up the 2'x40' footings. Footings we're poured by hand again because there was no access for a concrete truck. Ms G**** again called for the footing inspection .The inspector gave a verbal approval fo the footings and we continued with the foundation as they outlined. We could not rent concrete forms for this small a job,so we had to buy all the materials to build our own concrete forms approximately ( 2000.00 additional) at the height of Covid and 3 men for 2 weeks = 9000.00 additional. We called fo another inspection before pouring concrete. The inspector said that we could not proceed until we procured architectural stamped drawings. The homeowner decided to hire an architect and try to appease the building department. Ive called the homeowner 3 times for an update with no return phone call Consumer Response /* (3000, 10, 2022/02/10) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Since entering into the contract, I have discovered that Mr. P******* was never properly licensed to enter into a contract of this work scope and is in violation of Massachusetts General Law Chapter 142A and other consumer laws for having done so. While I agree that there were issues with the building department, permit and construction process, I believe that much of these issues arose, were not resolved quickly, and/or could have been avoided if the contractor was properly licensed to perform the scope of work that was in the contract. The contractor also had transportation issues that left him off my job for several weeks. He only returned after I sent him a 93A Demand Letter. The last payment of $10,000 was meant to pay for materials needed following the completion of the foundation wall. Those materials were never delivered to the jobsite even though he received payment for them. He also failed to refund me for that payment after the materials were not delivered and after demands were made for refund. Those monies should not be in dispute for refund. I would agree to partial refund of the initial deposit of $10,000 but only for the reasonable cost of demo, excavation and the footing in the context of the total contract price and scope of work.

*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. ↩