Response from Add A Deck Inc.
Since Ms [Member Name Removed] also complained to the Better Business Bureau about this project I am attaching the same response that I sent to the BBB. The BBB dropped the complaint as Ms [Member Name Removed]'s complaint was somewhat exaggerated and in places, totally inaccurate. Our letter to the BBB follows: AS MS [Member Name Removed]'S COMPLAINT IS RATHER LENGTHY WE WILL BREAK IT DOWN AND TRY TO RESPOND TO IT IN PARTS. "They did not get the deck inspected per Henrico code while building." THIS IS STANDARD FOR DECKS THAT ARE SMALL AND BUILT IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME; AS TO NOT HALT THE CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS COMPLETELY WHILE WAITING FOR AN INSPECTION, THE INSPECTIONS ARE CALLED AT THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. THIS DECK WAS BUILT TO CODE PER 2012 VIRGINIA CONSTRUCTION CODE (THE CURRENT CODE VERSION), AND THE SUBMITTED BUILDING AND SITE PLANS THAT WERE APPROVED BY THE HENRICO OFFICE OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AND INSPECTIONS ON 5/25/2018. THE PROJECT WAS STARTED THE WEEK OF JULY 2 AND COMPLETED ON JULY 10. WHILE IT DID TAKE AN UNUSUAL AMOUNT OF EFFORT ON OUR PART, ALL INSPECTIONS WERE PASSED, AND THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION WAS PASSED ON 8/10/18. "The deck failed inspection 3 times. Massive fails - the footings failed because it was too shallow and the wood attachments to the house failed. - The company made the corrections, but only after hiring a private consultant to argue with Henrico on the points." DECK CONSTRUCTION WAS COMPLETED ON 7/10/2018 AND FOOTING, FRAMING, & FINAL INSPECTION WAS CALLED FOR 7/11/18. ON 7/11/18 AN INSPECTOR ARRIVED AND NO ONE WAS HOME. THE FOOTING, FRAMING, AND FINAL BUILDING INSPECTIONS WERE ALL FAILED BECAUSE THE INSPECTOR HAD NO ACCESS TO THE DECK. FOOTINGS WERE NOT TOO SHALLOW. THE FOOTING INSPECTION WAS FAILED BY HENRICO COUNTY BUILDING INSPECTOR, UPON RECALL, DUE TO COUNTY INSPECTORS INABILITY TO VISUALLY VERIFY THE DEPTH AND FOOTING BEARING SOIL CONDITIONS DUE TO WATER COLLECTING IN THE EXCAVATIONS AS A RESULT OF PRECIPITATION EVENTS THAT OCCURRED BEYOND OUR CONTROL. A CONSULTANT WAS NOT HIRED TO ARGUE WITH HENRICO ON THE POINTS, THE HENRICO COUNTY INSPECTOR REQUIRED WE BRING IN A THIRD-PARTY ENGINEERING CONSULTING COMPANY TO DO AN ASSESSMENT OF FOOTING CONDITIONS, WHICH WE DID, AND THE DECK FOOTING ASSESSMENT REPORT COMPLETED BY GEOTEX ENGINEERING WAS SUBMITTED TO HENRICO COUNTY ON 7/25/18. AFTER THE COUNTY'S REVIEW OF THE THIRD-PARTY ASSESSMENT REPORT, WHICH CONFIRMED THE DECK'S FOUNDATION WAS CONSTRUCTED AS SHOWN IN THE COUNTY APPROVED PLANS AND SOIL BEARING CAPACITIES CONFIRMED, THE COUNTY INSPECTOR PASSED THE FOOTING INSPECTION. WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE, IN MS. GORANSONS SIGNED CONTRACT, AND IN ALL ADD A DECK CONTRACTS, IT STATES "IF FOOTINGS ARE REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT, STANDARD FOOTINGS ARE INCLUDED. IF SHRINK SWELL SOIL OR POOR SOIL IS AN ISSUE AND A SOIL TEST AND/OR ENGINEERED OR DEEPER FOOTINGS ARE REQUIRED BY THE CITY OR COUNTY, HOMEOWNER WILL BE NOTIFIED, AND ADDITIONAL CHARGES WILL APPLY." WE DID NOTIFY THE HOMEOWNER OF THE COUNTY INSPECTOR REQUIRING THE FOOTING ASSESSMENT, ALTHOUGH ADDITIONAL CHARGES WERE INCURRED BY ADD A DECK AND COULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED TO THE CUSTOMER, WE DID NOT CHARGE FOR THOSE ADDITIONAL COSTS. THE FRAMING INSPECTION WAS FAILED DUE TO THE EXISTING BAND BOARD ON THE HOUSE THAT WAS INSTALLED BY THE HOME BUILDER NOT BY ADD A DECK. ADD A DECK CONFIRMED THE BAND BOARD WAS A PRESSURE TREATED BOARD; THE COUNTY INSPECTOR WANTED PROOF THAT IT WAS TREATED. WE ATTEMPTED TO CUT OUT FLASHING TO EXPOSE THE BAND BOARD TO THE INSPECTOR TO SHOW THE INSPECTOR THAT THE BOARD WAS INDEED PRESSURE TREATED HOWEVER, THE INSPECTOR WAS NOT COMFORTABLE VISUALLY CONFIRMING THAT THE BAND WAS PRESSURE TREATED. AS WE KNEW THE BAND BOARD WAS PRESSURE TREATED AND FELT WE WERE AT AN IMPASSE WITH THE INSPECTOR WE CONTACTED THE HENRICO COUNTY BUILDING INSPECTIONS OFFICE AND EXPLAINED THE SITUATION AND ASKED IF THEY COULD HAVE A SECOND INSPECTOR COME OUT TO REVIEW AND ASSIST IN RESOLUTION OF THIS ISSUE. THEY AGREED AND SENT OUT ANOTHER INSPECTOR TO RE-INSPECT. UPON RE-INSPECTION WE AGAIN CUT BACK THE FLASHING TO EXPOSE THE BOARD TO THE INSPECTOR AND THE INSPECTOR AGREED THAT IT WAS A PRESSURE TREATED BOARD AND HE PASSED THE FRAMING INSPECTION. "The deck was built going over the neighbor's property line which was never fixed, he argued that point and refused to fix it." DECK PLANS, DECK PLACEMENT, & SET BACKS WERE ALL SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY HENRICO COUNTY OFFICE OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AND INSPECTIONS, AND A PERMIT TO BUILD IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUCH PLANS WAS ISSUED ON 5/25/18. ADD A DECK BUILT THE DECK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT AND ALL APPROVED PLANS. IT WAS OUR UNDERSTANDING FROM MS [Member Name Removed] THAT SHE RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE COUNTY INFORMING HER THAT HER NEIGHBOR HAD FILED A COMPLAINT THAT THE DECK ENCROACHED ON THEIR PROPERTY. WE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HER AT THAT TIME AND TOLD HER FROM THE INFORMATION WE HAD WE COULD NOT SEE HOW THAT WAS POSSIBLE. WE TOLD HER WE CONFIRMED THE DECK WAS BUILT AS PER APPROVED PLANS AND NOTHING WAS ATTACHED TO THE NEIGHBORS BUILDING. THAT WAS THE LAST WE HEARD OF IT, WE WERE NEVER TOLD WHAT THE ENCROACHMENT ENDED UP BEING AND WERE NOT ASKED TO FIX ANYTHING. "After a several phone conversations and emails back and forth during the ordeal, as soon as the deck passed inspection a month or so later, I was sent a stern "where's my money" collection email for full and final payment by the owner of the company, followed by a collection notice by the office manager." NEITHER OWNERS OF THE COMPANY EVER SENT MS. [Member Name Removed] ANY "WHERE'S MY MONEY" EMAIL. SHE WAS ONLY SENT HER FINAL INVOICE AFTER DECK CONSTRUCTION WAS COMPLETED ON 7/10/18. WHICH WAS FROM THE OFFICE MANAGER AND STATED: "On Jul 10, 2018, at 3:47 PM, Cindy Aikins wrote: Good Afternoon, Please see attached invoice 1707, for your review and payment. Please feel free to contact us should you have any questions or need any additional information. Thanks, Cindy Aikins Office Manager ADD A DECK, Inc. (804) 285-4239 Phone (804) 285-6565 Fax TO WHICH SHE RESPONDED ON 7/11/18: "On Jul 11, 2018, at 8:36 AM, [Information Removed] wrote: Hi Cindy, Thanks so much for the invoice. My tenant sent over pictures of the work, and it looks great. Is there anyway that I can pay electronically or would you like a check for the balance? Thanks, [Member Name Removed] SHE THEN RESPONDED AGAIN, LATER THAT DAY STATING: From: [Information Removed] -gmail.com To: Cindy Aikins Cc: [Information Removed] ; [Information Removed] Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2018 12:46 PM Subject: Re: Add A Deck Invoice 1707 Taking the final inspection into account, I'll hold off on the payment until all is settled with the county. THE ONLY OTHER REQUEST FOR PAYMENT FROM OUR OFFICE WAS SENT ON 8/23/18, 13 DAYS AFTER HER FINAL INSPECTION WAS PASSED, OF WHICH SHE WAS AWARE, STATING: On Aug 23, 2018, at 3:49 PM, Cindy Aikins wrote: Good Afternoon, I have confirmed with the county, as I am sure you are aware, your final building inspection was passed by the county on 8/10/18. Therefore, as contractually agreed and obligated, we are requesting your immediate attention and payment of the attached final invoice 1707, previously invoiced 7/10/18. Thank you. Cindy Aikins Office Manager ADD A DECK, Inc. (804) 285-4239 Phone (804) 285-6565 Fax www.addadeck.com "Since then, I've had to hire another contractor to fix the companies work." WE NEVER RECEIVED ANY COMPLAINTS FROM MS. [Member Name Removed] ABOUT OUR WORK, ONLY HER COMMENT ABOVE THAT THE DECK LOOKED GREAT. SHE NEVER CONTACTED US TO ASK US TO FIX ANYTHING AND SINCE THE PROJECT WAS BUILT AND COMPLETED AS AGREED AND APPROVED WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANYTHING THAT WAS IN NEED OF FIXING. "In hiring another contractor, I found out that Add A Deck skimped on material and I overpaid for the product based on the material used." ADD A DECK, AS PER THE CONTRACT AND APPROVED PLANS, PROVIDED AND USED SELECT PRESSURE TREATED DECKING, WHICH HAS VERY FEW TO NO KNOTS, AND SCREWED DOWN THE DECKING WITH STAINLESS STEEL SCREWS, WHICH WAS PART OF THE PRICING PROGRAM SHE REQUESTED FOR THIS JOB. NO COMPLAINTS OR CONCERNS WERE EVER RAISED BEFORE, OR DURING DECK BUILDING. IN FACT, AS DETAILED ABOVE IN MS. [Member Name Removed]'S EMAIL DATED 7/11/18 MS. [Member Name Removed] COMPLIMENTED THE WORK STATING THE DECK LOOKED GREAT. WHILE WE DID, IN ERROR, SEND THE FINAL PAYMENT INVOICE PRIOR TO THE FINAL INSPECTION BEING APPROVED AND THUS MAY HAVE CAUSED SOME CONFUSION, WE SEE NO MERIT TO THIS COMPLAINT... AND THE BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU AGREED.