ComplaintsforVermont Construction Company

• Initial Complaint

  05/12/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Vermont Construction Company (VCC) and I agreed to a proposal for several renovation projects around our home. Here is a quick overview of the work:12/14/2021 -- Work Start (Addition Reframing)12/17/2021 -- Work End (Addition Reframing)12/17/2021 -- Work Start (Basement Post)12/17/2021 -- Work End (Basement Post)6/7/2022 -- Work Start (Window)6/13/2022 -- Work End(Window)Note that the "Window" work included a change order for "rot repair, roof rebuild, door swap."Immediately after the work ended for the "Window" I notified VCC that one of the two casement windows in the bay window wouldn't open. The told me that it was likely a manufacturer issue -- which I followed up with. When the manufacturer stated it was unlikely, I reached back out to VCC who agreed to come and adjust it. When the left, the window was functional, however within a day it wouldn't open again. We had an ongoing disagreement about this with them again shifting the blame on my ************* (which I ordered according to the specs they gave me). We had multiple disputes about them charging for services that weren't complete and never got around to addressing the window issue.Eventually neither casement window would open.Over the coming months, my family and I got distracted by other things, including the birth of our child, and didn't follow up until 3/9/2023 when I notified VCC that I discovered that they had attached our ~260 sqft living space (addition) to a completely compromised structure.VCC refused to take responsibility and only offered to give an estimate for them to replace the entire wall (i.e., remove the work they did, replace the wall, and then replace the work they did). I contracted with another company to perform that work, as I no longer trust VCC. We discovered that the addition and window were installed into a completely rotten structure, which is a major safety hazard.The basement post removal is also not structurally sound. VCC refuses to admit fault.

  Customer response

  05/23/2023

  I have reached out to the business multiple times with further evidence of their breach of contract. They have chose to ignore. 

  

  Business response

  06/20/2023

  We take all issues that *** arise during and after projects in regards to defects, warranty, or workmanship very seriously and work to resolve them to satisfaction. The issue with the bay window that the homeowner supplied is a design and application problem. Our team made the homeowner aware of the issue with the nailing ****** configuration of the window and how it was designed to attach to his exterior wall, and the issues it would pose. The homeowner elected to continue with the installation. When the window operation began seizing, we were advised by the homeowner that the window was sagging and a cable system needed to be tightened. However, the homeowner did not supply a bay window with a cable system, and the support of the window was to be achieved by the platform. We agreed to come and shore up the existing platform that the bay window was resting on and re-leveled it to un seize the operable window panels. Within days, the window continued to sag and seize the windows again. We determined that the existing platform failed to support the oversized bay window and agreed on a solution to install support posts below the bay window to support the weight and prevent the sagging from continuing. However, the homeowner did not allow us to return to the site to complete this.
  
  
  
  Meanwhile, the homeowner contacted our finance manager to request to pay off his balance in full without notifying the project manager or other parties involved in the resolution. After paying his balance in full, we did not hear from the homeowner for nearly half a year. We didn't fall short of our promise and commitment to this. We agreed on corrective repairs to assist the homeowner for no charge and were ghosted by the homeowner for half a year.
  
  
  
  The homeowner had been very involved in providing guidance and direction throughout the project. He was made aware of all visible rot in the areas of impact we worked in and could repair at the time. When our lead ********* made the homeowner aware of the rot around the bay window beyond our area of impact, we let the homeowner know that this could go on for a while and asked him what he wanted to do and where he wanted to stop, the homeowner elected to worry about it another time because of the impact it would create on the bedroom and the implications it would cause with a baby on the way.
  
  
  
  While the addition was being shored ** structurally, we found rot in the sheathing where the ledger that supports a portion of the floor to the addition is fastened. The area of concern and the view of the rot was limited by the small window we were working with. The homeowner was made aware of this rot and suggested that he could address it when he remodeled the basement and the weather was warmer, as it did not make sense to open his house ** in the middle of the winter. We patched some of the rot in the sheathing and confirmed that the double-rim joist could accept the bolts for the ledger. At the time, this rot seemed to be external as we could not see any rot on the interior of the rim-joist in the ceiling, which made us comfortable knowing that the material would be able to accept the lags. A year later, when the homeowner decided to remodel the basement and remove the sheetrock, he opened the view into the wall below and confirmed the extent of the existing wall rot. The repairs would only require removing and reinstalling the ledger, less than 3% of the work involved in the addition remodel. All repairs needed moving forward were outside of the area of impact from our work and would be additional work outside our scope.
  
  
  
  The homeowner was also very involved with the guidance and decisions in the beam and post scope. Our team recommended sistering 12 tall ***s on each side of the existing beam. He elected not to pay to relocate the existing plumbing installed against the existing beams to create the space for the *** and sister beams on one side of the existing beam instead. He also elected not to go with the taller beams we recommended to avoid losing head space. Our team proceeded with this plan and agreed that the homeowner and the project manager would test the deflection on the floor and inspect if it felt too bouncy during regular foot traffic. If it were not satisfactory, we would have to add additional support. At this time, the homeowner did not have any issues with the floor and did not consult with an engineer. The homeowner has recently obtained an inspection report of the beam, which summarized that the initial approach to sister ***s on both sides of the existing beam would be sufficient and that the current configuration would be sufficient but depends on the fasteners used to sister the two ***s on one side of the beam.
  
  
  
  In addition to financing the project with the homeowner to assist with the costs of the work associate, we have granted several deductions in the pricing for some scopes to make the customer happy. We have remained committed to resolving any standing issues and have been ignored by the homeowner when attempting to schedule a visit. Our view of this matter is that we have gone above and beyond to assist the homeowner with these issues and that he has failed to accept our assistance.

  Customer response

  06/26/2023

  Firstly, Id like to address the BBB:
  
  Thank you for facilitating this dispute. Without your support, Im quite confident that Vermont Construction would have continued to ignore my request betting that I wont file a law suit.
  
  Its hard to verbalize the amount of stress this situation has brought to my family, our finances, and my career. All of which is because of the absolute mess that Vermont Construction has caused in our lives.
  
  To be *****, this nearly **** words and 3 hours I committed to addressing the false assertions made by the company was exhausting to assemble. Particularly because the text its self, absence of any photos or videos, fails to convey the ridiculousness of the situation. For that I would encourage you to watch the content that has already been shared with the company:
               - ****************************
               - ****************************
               - Complaints Against Vermont Construction Company v2.pdf
               - Structural Engineering Assessment.pdf
  
  The Complaints Against Vermont Construction Company PDF contains a detailed timeline with photos,screenshots, etc. showing exactly whats going on. Please note, that its a bit out of date as the engineers report wasnt yet finalized and I havent included photos showing all the other structural problems with the framing job.
  
  With that said, I hope that you will consider further reducing Vermont Construction Companies grade. I noticed that their failure to respond caused their rating to go form NR to A-. Now I see that since they responded (albeit very late), that it has returned to a NR with 0 complaints.
  
  I hope that you will recognize that this company has not only been deceptive, but also knowingly performed substandard work that can lead to the injury or death of its customers. Im fortunate that I was able to catch these problems before our house collapsed, Im afraid that others may be out there that wont be so lucky.
  
  ---------
  
  To Vermont Construction:
  1. "We take all issues that arise [...] seriously"
                - When I discovered the full extent of the rot that Vermont Construction concealed, I sent an email directly to co-owners ***************************, *************************, and project manager *********************** titled Major Problems at ************************** on 4 May 2023.The email outlined the completely unacceptable and unsafe work done by Vermont Construction and requested a response within 4 days. I sent another email 5 days later. Two days after that, an Operations Manager, emailed and asked me to call ****************************
  - I called ***** who seemed disinterested and denied that anything major was done wrong and that its unlikely because ****** the most brilliant ********* in the state.  At one point, I mentioned that if we couldnt come to an agreement, that I would pursue legal action because of the principle of the matter. He seem to find that funny, asking something to the effect of, *************** even if youd lose money? He said hed catch up with ******, who he referred to as and call back. He never did.
  - Since our phone call, I sent 3 more emails on 10, 12, and 23 May providing more detailed information including an structural engineering report that included the statement,  "it is my opinion that the work performed was poorly executed, sub-standard and out of sync with normal construction standards in use today.
  - I also sent a personal email to ***** on 30 May, explaining to him how much of strain this has been on my family emotionally and financially and pleading with him to set up a 1 on 1 call so we could come to some sort of settlement. I sent a follow up text soon after to reiterate that Im trying to find an off ramp. He responded, Love off ramps.
  - This BBB response, submitted 21 June is the first Ive heard from anyone from Vermont Construction on this matter since the Love off ramps text message from a month earlier.
  - I think a company who took these kinds of issues serious would have responded within the prescribed 10 days after a complaint is filed.
  
  2. "Our team made the homeowner of aware of [a problem with the window nailing ****** and installation]"
                - This is false. I was told of no issues with the window.
                - In fact, this window was a custom order made to the parameters told to me by the lead, *************
                - I confirmed the window design with ****** before ordering
                - The nailing ****** exists, is present in the photos I've shared, and it is a manufacturer approved method of installation without the cable system.
                - You also state that "we were advised by the homeowner that the cable system needs to be tightened." This did indeed happen, which further buttresses my point that I was never told about a "nailing flange" concern at the time of installation.
                - The window is clearly sagging because your crew intentionally nailed the window into severely rotten framing members, even though I was charged for "extensive rot repair."
  
  3. "Meanwhile, the homeowner contacted our finance manager to request to pay off his balance in full without notifying the project manager or other parties involved in the resolution"
                - This is completely false. The final payoff was negotiated in emails under the Subject "************************** Final Invoice" which had the project manager (***********************), the finance manager (*************************), and Co-owners ************************* and *************************** on copy.
                - Specifically on 03 August 2022 ***** said "I will wait for ****/****** to tell me what type of credit will be given and once I have that I will revise the invoice"
                - And on 26 September 2022 I responded to *****'s email under the subject "18 ******** Revised invoice per the deductions ****** emailed to me"confirming that I would be paying. Both co-owners and the project manager were included on that email as well.
  
  4. "After paying his balance in full, we did not hear from the homeowner for nearly half a year"
                - This is correct. After paying off the contract, I planned to just cut my losses and never do business with Vermont Construction again.
                - I contacted Vermont Construction again on March 9 (nearly have a year later)after discovering that the construction crew knowingly attached a *********************************************************************************
                - As I've stated numerous times -- this was extremely reckless and put my family at risk of injury or death.
                - This costed us $8174 to have a legitimate construction contracting company fix for us. The majority of the labor cost was in the labor involved in having to remove and rebuild the portion that Vermont Construction was contracted to perform.
  
  5. "The homeowner had been very involved in providing guidance and direction throughout the project"
                - I don't even know what this is supposed to mean. I greeted the workers in the morning and stopped by to chat between meetings on days when I happened to work from home.
  
  6. "When our lead ********* made the homeowner aware of the rot around the bay [...] the homeowner elected to worry about it another time because of the impact it would create on the bedroom and the implications it would cause with a baby on the way"
                - This false statement really upsets me. Not only did I agree to a change order for "rot repair" to address all the issues, the whole reason I hired your company was to perform the major renovations necessary to provide our daughter a safe and healthy home.
                - My wife was only 2 months pregnant at the time of this, we actually had a trip planned and were gone for a week when the "rot repair" activities were supposed to occur
                -Regarding disruptions, I'm preparing to say goodbye to my wife and 5 month old baby for 6 weeks to stay with her parents overseas so that I can demolish our bedroom and bathroom so that a legitimate construction contracting company can actually do the job that we paid Vermont Construction to perform.
                - Trying to use my then-pregnant wife as some fake cover for your company's fraud is absolutely disgusting.
  
  7.  "While the addition was being shored up structurally, we found rot in the sheathing where the ledger that supports a portion of the floor to the addition is fastened."
                - They knew the entire rim joist was rotted and fastened into it anyway.
                - They told me that some of the sheathing was rotted but could easily be fixed in the spring (i.e., the rot repair I paid for but didn't receive)
  
  8. On the stuff about the beam and post
                - The ** suggested two options for the beam. One was (2) 12" LVL, one was sistering (2) 9-1/4" to the existing members. I wasnt warned of any performance tradeoffs,so I elected for the latter to save headspace.
                - I immediately complained about the bounciness to the **, I was told that it was "within tolerance".
                - I complained again to one of the co-owners, *************************** who said that the problem was that the joists were undersized and that I should sister onto the joists
                - ****** disagreed and suggested I add blocking. I opted to add blocking as it was easier. It didn't do much.
                - I had an engineer friend run some quick numbers who informed me that it significantly undersized.
                - I informed Vermont Construction via email what the engineer said, and they said that they could give me a quote to address it. In other words, they refused to honor the contract to deliver a "properly sized beam according to span"
  
  9. "[the inspection report of the beam] summarized that the initial approach of sister LVLs on both sides of the existing beam would be sufficient"
                -Absolutely false.
                -According to structural engineer *************************, PE, "the original beam was poorly executed (i.e. LVL plies should have been installed with one ply on each side of the existing (3) 2x8 beam to pick up floor joist on both sides of the beam and laminated together with sufficient number and length screws to ensure full composite action between existing and new plies)  and that the amount of reinforcement was insufficient to meet current standards and/or Code requirements for beam strength and stiffness."
                - To be clear, the engineer was just criticizing the "poorly executed assembly"noting that even if it was done properly, it "was insufficient to meet current standards and/or Code requirements for beam strength and stiffness."
                - The engineer stated "[screws fastening the beam together] would, over time,fail as a result of bending, pull-over, tensile withdrawal or some combination of those failure mechanisms." Or in other words, cause our floor system to fail and potentially lead to serious bodily injury of death. Because of this,the engineer advised me to immediately install a center post.
                - For perspective, a legitimate construction contractor just completed the installation of a "properly sized beam according to span" that consisted of (4) 11-7/8" LVLs. It took nearly two weeks to properly install and includes a new 10" deep concrete footer into the slab, sistered joists, solid blocking, and many properly sized fasteners. It took nearly two weeks to complete as compared to the single afternoon it took for Vermont Construction it took to install their "poorly executed assembly."
  

  

  Business response

  07/12/2023

  ******************* is failing to accept responsibility for his role in this project and the issues that resulted from his role in this complaint. Our only option is to handle this matter with our legal department

*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. ↩