Housetop Roofing & Home Improvements

Housetop Home Improvement, Inc. improperly flashed the chimney which has caused water intrusion damage, rotting plywood and sheetrock damage. In late 2015, I noticed water leaking down through the chimney and the ceiling. Upon further inspection, I discovered water damage wood due to the water intrusion from the roof. I contacted Housetop Home Improvement, Inc. to inspect the roof who replaced the roof in 2006. When I first noticed the leak, I had a handy-man come to the house in an attempt to fix the leak. He attempted to put some tar up but that did not fix the leak. So when that did not fix the problem, I contact Housetop Home Improvement, Inc. and made an appointment. Mr. [redacted] showed up at my house late and then refused to go on top of the roof to inspect it. After I had two experts inspect the roof/chimney one from [redacted] and [redacted] and the other from [redacted] I have sent both experts reports to Mr. [redacted] indicating that the roof was improperly flashed and that the primary source of the water intrusion is inadequate flashing installed at the intersection of the asphalt shingle roof and the masonry chimney. The handyman's work just was unable to fix the problem caused by Housetop Home Improvement's deficient work in the original installation as noted in the experts reports. I have attempted to contact Housetop Home Improvement (Registered Agent Mr. [redacted]) to resolve this issue on three occasions with no resolution. Per my contract with Housetop Home Improvement dated November 13, 2006, "All workmanship is guaranteed for 10 years." Mr. [redacted] is failing to honor his expressly warranted workmanship and take responsibility for the defective installation work caused by his company.Desired SettlementI am seeking for Housetop Home Improvement, Inc. to honor their 10 year workmanship guarantee and properly flash the chimney, fix the rotting wood under the shingles, and the sheetrock in the house that has been damaged as a result of the water intrusion.Business Response [redacted] XXXXXDear Ms. [redacted]:Housetop Home Improvement, Inc. has retained our firm to respond to your letter of February 29, 2016. As you stated in your letter, Housetop replaced your roof in November of 2006. You discovered water leaking through your ceiling near the chimney area in 2015. Upon discovery of the leak, you hired a handyman who put up tar in the chimney area of your roof. Your documents also state that in 2007, lightning struck your house and shingles were replaced.Housetop denies emphatically that the flashing installed at the intersection of the asphalt shingle roof and masonry chimney is inadequate. Housetop denies your warranty claim on the grounds of intervening acts. First, your house was struck by lightning and another company was hired to repair the roof. Second, when you discovered the leaking near the chimney, you did not submit your warranty claim to Housetop but instead hired a third party to repair the roof. At the very least, Housetop was entitled to an opportunity to cure. Finally, when Mr. [redacted] inspected the property, he noticed the recent tar repairs to your roof. Because he was denied an opportunity to cure and a third party intervened by installing tar, he denied your warranty claim.Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,[redacted]cc: Housetop Home Improvement/[redacted]Consumer Response Housetop Home Improvement, Inc.c/o [redacted] Thomas, [redacted] XXXXXDear Mr. [redacted]I am in receipt of and write in response to your letter dated March 16, 2016 regarding the above-referenced claim and my letter of February 29, 2016. I write to clarify a few issues as you or your client seem to have misunderstood my prior letter and the experts' reports enclosed therewith. The long time water intrusion my house has been sustaining has not been due to any alleged intervening act; rather, according to multiple experts (and in fact every expert who has recently inspected the roof), the water intrusion is due to improper flashing by Housetop Home Improvement, Inc. ("HHI") when the roof was first installed.Your letter correctly notes, as I had explained in my prior letter, that my roof was struck by lightning. However, what your letter and position fails to recognize is that only an isolated portion of the roof was struck by lightning. As you can see by [redacted] Photograph 14 (another copy of which is enclosed) the area effected by the lightning and repaired subsequent to the original installation is both relatively small and nowhere near the chimney. Thus, it is my understanding that the repaired portion of the roof from the lightning strike could not have had any effect on the way the chimney to roof interface was originally improperly flashed.Similarly, the handyman's application of tar in a failed attempt to stop the water intrusion caused by HHI' s improper flashing also does not affect the validity of my claim. The handyman did not alter any of your HHI's work; he just tried to add tar. Your argument that your client's inability to inspect its faulty work due to the addition of tar is belied by the inspections and reports of both [redacted] & [redacted] and [redacted] Inc. Both of those experts first inspected the roof after the handyman's tar application and were clearly able to see HHI's work and determine the problem. If those two experts felt that they were able to adequately inspect the roof and render an opinion on the cause of the water intrusion, there is no reason HHI (or its insurer or expert) could not do the same. Accordingly, any argument of alleged prejudice will clearly fall flat. The chimney to roof interface flashing work by your client still remains and HHI has been given the opportunity to come inspect and conclude as have all of the experts who have inspected the roof. However, I cannot wait forever for HHI to inspect and remedy its defective work. I will allow HHI ten (10) additional days from the date of this letter to come inspect the roof and its improper flashing. However, if HHI chooses not to inspect within that time period, it does so at its own peril, and I will proceed to have the faulty work and damage repaired and will hold HHI responsible for all repair costs.Please also let me know if HHI had commercial general liability (CGL) coverage and if so, whether a claim has been initiated with HHI's insurer.I have been more than fair in giving HHI the opportunity to comply with its warranty and remedy the problem and damages short of litigation. If I do not hear from you within the next ten (10) days, I will proceed accordingly.Sincerely,[redacted]Final Business Response As stated in our previous response, Housetop has retained legal counselor and denies the allegations.