Complaints

This profile includes complaints for American Custom Contractors Inc's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

American Custom Contractors Inc has 2 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  American Custom Contractors Inc

  15728 Crabbs Branch Way Rockville, MD 20855-2620

  
• 

  American Custom Contractors Inc

  2010 Corporate Rdg Ste 700 Mclean, VA 22102-7838

  

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. 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.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:11/09/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I am writing to file a formal complaint against American Custom Contractors (ACC) of Rockville, MD regarding a substandard roof replacement and gutter installation at my property and failure to honor representative total negotiated price. I believe it is essential to bring this matter to your attention due to the persistent issues I have encountered and the unsatisfactory attempts made by the company to address the problems. The roof replacement, conducted on May 19, 2023, has been marred by improper practices, including the economizing of underlayment and flashing. These shortcuts have manifested in a finished product that conceals the poor workmanship and compromises the structural integrity of the roofing system. Additionally, the company has failed to honor the negotiated total price of the agreement and pursued legal collection of supplemental insurance payments for substandard construction practices. Specifically, the issues I have encountered include: Underlayment and Flashing Practices: The installers employed by have cut corners by using inadequate underlayment and flashing materials. This has resulted in a roof that is susceptible to leaks and other structural issues. Exterior Property Damage: The installation process has led to noticeable damage to the exterior of my property. Scratches on aluminum trim caused by ladders and harm to landscaping vegetation have diminished the overall appearance and value of my home. Estimated repair costs exceed $3500. Unsuccessful Attempts to Correct Gutter System: Despite multiple attempts to address the issues with the gutter system, the company has been unsuccessful in providing a satisfactory resolution. The ongoing problems with improper pitch and appearance limit structural viability and reduce the value of the home. I have made four attempts to address these concerns with ACC by contacting the project manager and the sales representative and filing previous complaints on 6/6, 6/17, 7/14, and 7/20. Unfortunately, the proposed solutions and repairs have not adequately resolved the issues, and resulted in increasing property damage. As a result, I am seeking the assistance of the Better Business Bureau to mediate this matter and ensure a fair and just resolution. I am requesting the following actions be taken: Thorough Inspection: I request that an independent inspector, hired at the expense of ACC, conducts a comprehensive inspection of the roofing and gutter installation. Effective Repairs: Once the issues are identified by the inspector, I expect a qualified independent installer, hired at the expense of ACC, to carry out prompt and effective repairs to rectify all problems identified with the roofing system and gutter installation. Compensation for Damages: Given the property damage and the inconvenience caused by the ongoing issues, I am seeking compensation for loss of wages (16 hours to date) and any additional costs incurred. I appreciate the Better Business Bureau's assistance in facilitating communication between me and ACC. I trust that your intervention will help bring about awareness of the company's business practices to other consumer. Thank you for your attention to this complaint, and I look forward to a timely and fair resolution.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 12/08/2023

  In response to our client, our company can assure them and the BBB that we did not utilize substandard materials or installation practices for their project. In their complaint they speak to economizing of underlayment and flashing and using shortcuts by inadequate materials.  The roof installation was completed in accordance with the specifications outlined in the contract, including synthetic underlayments that were installed to code and to manufacturer requirements.  All flashings were replaced, in accordance with manufacturer requirements.  We are confident in the quality of the work completed, and just prior to having received notice of this complaint on November 22, our company had registered the roof replacement for a *** Golden Pledge warranty and sent him the corresponding paperwork.  This warranty was registered at no cost to the homeowner, and was done gratis, as it was not outlined in the initial contract with him.  With the *** Golden Pledge warranty, an independent inspection can be completed by the manufacturer to reconfirm that the roof system was installed according to proper standards.

  Our team made several efforts to address the homeowners concerns regarding the gutters, including three additional site visits to make adjustments to the homeowners specifications.  We communicated our standard practice for gutter pitching, and his gutters were installed to avoid standing water, but we addressed the re-pitching to his preference when requested. 

  Regarding the landscaping damage, we are able to review this if the insured submits photos of the damage and an estimate for the repairs that he states will be in excess of $3,500.  During our final inspection this was not documented in our final walkthrough photos or in communication with our Project Manager. 

  We have fulfilled the scope of work within our contract, including multiple site visits to complete the adjustments to the homeowners specifications.  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 01/14/2024

  Although request for response was supposedly solicited on 12/11/2023, actual message was not received until case closing message was delivered on 12/21/2023 via email. I am very disappointed by the breakdown in communication regarding this case.

  The business response did not provide any relevant information or evidence to refute the property damages incurred or the substandard building practices employed.  All engagements to resolve the poor craftsmanship were initiated by the homeowner, even though the response seems to imply otherwise.  Unsurprisingly, the business did not even try to address their refusal to honor their representatives re-negotiated price.  Although specified in in the response, the contractor never performed a final inspection or extended any offer for a manufacture's evaluation of the installation. All the issues outlined in the original submission still remain unresolved at the property.  These damages were communicated through multiple emails and text/phone messages with the contractor and their legal representative. Consequently, homeowner has requested mediation through MHIC (Maryland Home Improvement Commission) before pursuing civil action. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/18/2023

  Type:Customer Service Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  This company continues to repeatedly illegally trespass (No Trespassing, Private Property signage is clearly posted in several locations including the main property entrance) to solicit. Furthermore, they are in violation of Maryland law by failing to include their **** license number on solicitation materials and having unlicensed salespersons. These lawbreakers need to permanently stop their illegal activities and cease and desist from any further illegal trespassing on this property.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/08/2023

  This complaint was submitted as Contract Dispute, however our company does not have a contract with this homeowner and we will ask for it to be removed from our profile on the basis of an inaccurate submittal.  In the meantime, our field outreach team has taken steps in our internal database systems to omit this homeowner from any outreach attempts.  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/16/2023

  We are in receipt of the complaint issued by the homeowner regarding our field teams prior attempt to communicate with them during our outreach in their community.  We have updated our teams records to indicate that the property in question has no solicitation signage,which appears to have been overlooked by staff members during a prior visit to the property.  We do not have a record of an interaction or communication attempt at this particular address, but do see that we spoke with a neighbor in the past.  Our outreach team is not soliciting sales of services, but merely distributing fliers, and is not required to have an **** Salesperson license.  Our sales staff (who engage in negotiation or sales activities) all have Salesperson licenses issued by the ****.  If a business card was left at the door, it would have a QR Code that links to our website, including licensing information.  We have communicated with the ************************************ regarding this issue.  Given that we are licensed in multiple jurisdictions we have found this to be the most effective way to list our many credentials for homeowners.  We have notified the homeowner directly with our apologies and to be assured that our company will not attempt any further communication with them regarding our services.

  We want to reiterate that this was issued as a customer complaint, and we do not have a contract with this client for any services.  This is not being reflected accurately on our profile as it is indicating a contract dispute when there is no provider-client relationship.  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/18/2023

  [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
  
   Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  In addition to No Soliciting signage, the property in question has MULTIPLE very prominent Private Property, No Trespassing signs, including one on raised on metal posts to sit at eye level for any driver entering the property (yes, quite impossible to miss).  Given that the home is a good quarter mile from the primary driveway entrance, it is unreasonable to say that the salesperson did not see the multiple No Trespassing signs before traversing the entire property. 

  Either this company does not know Maryland law about criminal trespassing, or simply chooses to ignore it both of which are unacceptable for a supposedly professional business.  If they disrespect both a commonly known law and the property owners expressly stated wishes against trespassing, why would anyone ever entrust them further given their attitude of complete disregard? 

  
  Additionally, leaving paper debris sitting outside a home where it can easily blow away is littering yes, also against the law.  Furthermore, Maryland law is specific about the requirement to clearly indicate the **** license number on printed materials,and that does not include the requirement of any additional steps of scanning a QR code, viewing a website, or taking additional investigative action.

  Finally, this was not one single instance of criminal trespassing, but *multiple* instances over a period of several months.  Furthermore, the company has called my private cell phone with hang up which is distinctly annoying and unwelcome as well.
  
  Regards,
  
  ***********************
  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/23/2023

  In response to the homeowner, we would like to reiterate that we have taken steps to update our records regarding their property, that we will cease any further attempts to communicate with them or access their property, which was the initially requested resolution submitted regarding our company. Unfortunately, without being able to identify which staff member overlooked the signage on their property, we have been unable to directly address the concern with the individual that crossed the property borders.  Our company relies on community outreach to discuss our services and offer complimentary inspections to clients, but do train our team to be observant and mindful of property signage, which clearly did not occur in this instance, and we apologize for this.  Since we have not been able to identify the team member specifically, we have continued with team/group training regarding this circumstance to be sure our company is not intentionally or inadvertently overlooking such signage and respecting the requests of property owners. We believe we have taken the necessary and requested steps to resolve this matter within our team, to the best of our ability.  We again, offer our apologies for any distress caused by our team's actions, and can assure the homeowner that we will not attempt further communications with them.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/01/2023

  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Just stop with lame excuses and insincere apology. REPEATEDLY and intentionally illegally trespassing cannot reasonably be considered “community outreach” so this company’s claim that their illegal and annoying marketing methods are intelligent or effective is unacceptable.
  
  Wasn’t it in grade school that we all learned to respect the property of others? Furthermore, if their employees are too ignorant to have the common sense to understand privacy and property rights, then certainly a supposedly professional company would train them properly in advance of sending them out to represent their brand.  Clearly the company is inept if this substandard result is the “best of our ability.”

  And why is this company so completely disorganized as to not understand exactly which employee is in a specific area soliciting business?  Which manager is not properly monitoring their employees' locations and activities? 

  A better response would be to state – in writing – exactly how they are going to stop illegal and annoying activities in future, including trespassing, taking photos/videos while trespassing, leaving hang up calls, etc – all recent activities by their employees which are easily provable through home security surveillance and phone records.  
  

  This BBB claim is not the first regarding these illegal and annoying activities, so why is this nonsense continuing unabated?
  
  Regards,
  
  ***********************