Schaaf Construction and Roofing

In November of 2008 Schaaf Construction (2526 Worthington Ave. Lincoln, NE 68502) installed a “Duro Last” brand flat roof on my condominium. Upon completion of the roof installation a representative for Duro-Last Roofing Inc. inspected the roof and approved it for a 15 warranty. In October of 2009 I noticed discoloration on some pictures hanging in my living room and found mold growing behind them on the wall. I called a mold inspection service who confirmed the drywall on two floors of my home were saturated with water from a roof leak. I called Schaaf Construction to check the roof for leaks. They reinforced the seam on the side of the house where there was water infiltration. Duro-Last was immediately contacted to report the incident of damage and open a folder on the case under my warranty number. After winter snow melt, we had a second moisture check of the wall in April to make sure the roof seam repair had held and that repairs to damage in my home could begin safely. The tests proved negative and that the moisture levels in all affected walls was significantly reduced. In the summer of 2010 I began repairs to the damaged rooms of my home for mold mitigation, dry wall replacement and painting. The cost for the repairs was $6,792.35 I applied to Duro-Last for reimbursement under the warranty. In August of 2010, after all repairs and painting had been completed mold reappeared in my home. The roof was still leaking. The repair work for the previous November had not held. I again contacted Shaaf Construction and Duro-Last. Schaaf Construction came out to look at the roof on 8/31/10. Dave from Schaaf Construction went up on the roof and came down to report to that “it was too hot to work on the roof” and he would return later that day and leave me a note if I was not around with his findings. Dave did not leave a note or contact me, and to my knowledge, never returned. This was the last I’d ever see or hear from Schaaf Construction. With inadequate response from Schaaf Construction in regards to repairing the roof and Duro-Last for honoring their warranty, I hired a structural engineer to inspect the roof and a lawyer for legal advice to my rights as a consumer. Structural Design Group (105 N.8th Street. Suite 100. Lincoln NE 68508) made an on sight inspection and filed a full report. The findings of their inspection was the installation did not appear to have a chance of performing properly due to the way Schaaf Construction tied the Duro-Last roof into a neighboring property whose roof was failing. My lawyer had A & M Contractors, Inc. (Progressive Ave # 5, Lincoln, NE 68504) also do a site inspection of my roof and they echoed Structural Design Groups finding that the obvious initial problem with the installation was that my Duro-Last roof was tied into a failing neighboring property with no attempt to build a roof curb onto which a solid anchor point could be made. So obvious was the mistake of trying to anchor a Duro-Last roof onto a failing property that a neighbor, who shares a wall with the same property as my roof was tied onto, and who is also a Duro-Last roofing contractor, said he would not install a new roof on his property until the adjoining property was repaired. He installed a Duro-Last roof himself on the neighboring property at cost so that he could install his own roof with confidence and thus my own roof was made reliable only through his competent installation. Schaaf Construction had long abandoned the project by this point. Duro-Last never did re reimburse me for any of the damages incurred in the two separate failures of the roof. Taking Schaaf Construction and Duro-Last to court was financially prohibitive. I’d spend more money in lawyer fees than I’d get back in damages Schaaf Construction did not install my roof in a workman-like manner. They did not meet the minimum level of competency expected of professional roofing contractors on the following aspects of the job. 1. Schaaf Construction failed either to recognize or inform me that the neighboring property was in roof failure making the installation of a Duro-Last roof system which requires a reliable anchor point, impossible. 2. Schaaf Construction should have informed me that the installation of a Duro-Last roof would not reach a standard level of reliability due to the neighboring properties condition at anytime during their work-a. In the biding process.b. During construction.c. At completion of the project. Duro-Last likewise should have informed me of the impossibility of warranting my roof due to the condition of the adjoining property. 3. Schaaf Construction did not take responsibility or ownership of the aspect of the installation that entailed anchoring the roof at the property line nor for subsequent failures related to their installation. Somehow, anchoring the roof securely was not part of their installation responsibilities. 4. Schaaf Construction abandoned their responsibility for making repairs to my roof to make it sound and took no responsibility for the damages resultant for their inadequate installation.As a conequence of Schaaf Construction’s unworkman-like installation I incurred damages to my home amounting to- $6,792.35 from the first round of water and mold damage in 2009. $3,681.90 from the second round of water and mold damage in 2010. $3,655 from legal fees in seaking reimbursement from Schaaf Construction and Duro-Last. $14,129.25 Total losses as a result of Schaaf Cosntruction’s unprofessional work.