Statewide Roofing of Texas

The complaint now over five years later, is concerning a WPI-certificate that was not issued at the time of reroof.In 2011, we were contacted to reroof their house due to damage caused by a recent storm in the areaAt the time of the complaint the homeowner had been grandfathered in with their insurance company, State Farm, so the insurance agency did not require their customer to obtain a WPI-Certificate This is known because if you do not get the required WPI-Certificate, your insurance company will NOT renew your insurance policy once that policy period has ended It’s been five years since the roof was put on of which their insurance policy has been renewed several times since.At the time of the incident we did offer to obtain a WPI-Certificate for them at an additional cost of $for which their response was “Do we need one?” After discussions with their insurance, State Farm informed them they had been grandfathered in and did not require the homeowner to obtain a WPI-Certificate Knowing this information the homeowner decided not to move forward with the certification It’s since been brought to our attention that the homeowner is now trying to sell their property and would be required to obtain a WPI-in order to sell their house which is cause for the complaint

We're not sure we follow...are you saying the material sat up on your mother's roof for three months waiting to be completed because during that time the next door neighbor happened to see the work done to the roof He stated to us that we did a much better job than the contractors he hired to complete his roof so he hired us to re-roof his daughter's house down the street.We would love to see emails stating we were still working on the actual roof three months after the material had been delivered Like we mentioned in the initial response to the complaint, everything regarding this complaint has to do with the patio and only the patio Which we happily reimbursed the homeowner for that portion of the contract Regarding the gutters, please check the front of the house What was contracted was to put helmets on the section of gutters located at the front of the house only because of an overhanging tree And to be fair, that item wasn't even originally contracted, it was an item discussed after the fact which we agreed to take care of at no additional chargeWe are NOT arguing the patio which is why the homeowner was reimbursed that portion of the contract The insurance gave the homeowner over $1,to fix the patio, of which we're not charging anything, so the homeowner still has $1,to spend correcting the engineering issue with the patio

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The statements made are again false.We will provide the neccesary documents as proof of our emails to the vendor regarding the unfinished roof.
Regards,
[redacted]

The complaint now over five years later, is concerning a WPI-8 certificate that was not issued at the time of reroof.In 2011, we were contacted to reroof their house due to damage caused by a recent storm in the area. At the time of the complaint the homeowner had been grandfathered in with their...

insurance company, State Farm, so the insurance agency did not require their customer to obtain a WPI-8 Certificate.  This is known because if you do not get the required WPI-8 Certificate, your insurance company will NOT renew your insurance policy once that policy period has ended.  It’s been five years since the roof was put on of which their insurance policy has been renewed several times since.At the time of the incident we did offer to obtain a WPI-8 Certificate for them at an additional cost of $300 for which their response was “Do we need one?”.  After discussions with their insurance, State Farm informed them they had been grandfathered in and did not require the homeowner to obtain a WPI-8 Certificate.  Knowing this information the homeowner decided not to move forward with the certification.  It’s since been brought to our attention that the homeowner is now trying to sell their property and would be required to obtain a WPI-8 in order to sell their house which is cause for the complaint.

We're not sure we follow...are you saying the material sat up on your mother's roof for three months waiting to be completed because during that time the next door neighbor happened to see the work done to the roof.  He stated to us that we did a much better job than the contractors he hired to complete his roof so he hired us to re-roof his daughter's house down the street.We would love to see emails stating we were still working on the actual roof three months after the material had been delivered.  Like we mentioned in the initial response to the complaint, everything regarding this complaint has to do with the patio and only the patio.  Which we happily reimbursed the homeowner for that portion of the contract.  Regarding the gutters, please check the front of the house.  What was contracted was to put helmets on the section of gutters located at the front of the house only because of an overhanging tree.  And to be fair, that item wasn't even originally contracted, it was an item discussed after the fact which we agreed to take care of at no additional charge. We are NOT arguing the patio which is why the homeowner was reimbursed that portion of the contract.  The insurance gave the homeowner over $1,300 to fix the patio, of which we're not charging anything, so the homeowner still has $1,300 to spend correcting the engineering issue with the patio.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
First of all we don't have, and didn't have State
Farm Insurance at the time. We have [redacted] and never did he offer to get us the inspection and windstorm we had to continue to call him and ask him for it and then eventually he didn't return any our calls and avoided us. the company then left Corpus Christi and couldn't find him we always knew we were going to sell our house in 5 years. and we asked him for it then . As a roofing company he should know that the inspections and windstorm is necessary on all roofs now done . My mother's roof was done by the same roofing company , with the same insurance company [redacted] and she has her windstorm certificate ( she was also grandfathered in) his contract proposal states: Statewide Roofing of Texas provides all labor, materials, insurance and permits and of which he did not I believe he owes us the $350.00 it cost us to get the roof inspected and windstorm certificate as stated in his contract, never mind the hassle of actually finding an inspector to agree to do it since it was done 5 years ago we are not even bringing up the fact he also owes us for several referrals we got him he is not a man of his word and has not abided to the contract
Regards,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The following comments from Statewide Rooding are false!The roof was not completed a few days after the material was delivered! It took 3 full months following the June 9th material delivery for the roof to be completed!We can provide emails that prove this fact!The gutters were not replaced by Statewide Roofing.They subcontracted the gutter provider and another company name and logo was on the trucks that came to replace the gutters.Regarding the "helmets" for the gutters, the gutter company never came back out to install the helmets and to this day, the gutters are open and already filled with debris and the old gutters that were removed from some of the areas were never replaced and my parents were told by someone with the gutter company that they must have been mistaken and that gutters were never there to begin with!In regard to the paragraph regarding the patio cover, Statewide replaced the patio cover with a cheaper version than the original and with the first rain, the entire patio roof leaked.My parents are in the process right now of having the patio cover properly replaced by another roofing company!We can provide proof of this as well if needed.
Regards,
[redacted]

This issue is not and has not been with the roof itself.  The issue in question is regarding the replacement of a patio cover that was previously installed with corrugated plastic as the roofing material.  After initiating a meeting through [redacted], Statewide Roofing went under...

contract in May with the homeowner to replace the roof, gutters, and damaged corrugated covering their patio area.  The roofing material was delivered on June 9th and the roof completed a few days later; taking no more than three weeks form the time we went under contract to completely replace the roof (to put in perspective, because the hail storm in San Antonio was so wide spread other roofing contractors were claiming it wouldn’t be until November before they could put on a roof.)  Attached with this response is an invoice from our supplier displaying the date the material was delivered.  The gutters were replaced the following week by another crew of Statewide.  The homeowner then asked for helmets to be put on the gutters in the front elevation of the house which were a custom order with a two week lead time.  Once the helmets for the gutters came in the crew was back out there to install them.Regarding the patio in question, there were many issues with the patio that all stem from the initial engineering of the patio.  Prior to Statewide Roofing performing the work the homeowner expressed issues with leaks around the patio.  After assessing the situation, it was determined that the contractors who installed the patio originally did not properly engineer the patio for runoff during rainfall.  No pitch exists (flat roof) therefore water cannot properly run off the patio roof.   Water will end up sitting there until it either dissipates or finds a way through the roofing material.  The insurance gave the homeowner around $1,300 on their claim to replace the damaged patio area of which Statewide said we would just replace the damaged corrugated for $400.  Our contract was simply to replace the corrugated that had holes due to the hail.  Maybe that’s our fault for not clearly identifying the scope of the work with the patio instead of assuming the difference between what the insurance paid and what we contracted would be understood.  After replacing the damaged corrugated and trying multiple methods to prevent leaks altogether, Statewide decided to try and appease the homeowner by eating the price of replacing the corrugated material and reimbursing the homeowner the $400 stated on the contract.The roof and gutters have been completed for almost six (6) months now, the price of replacing the patio has been reimbursed and the homeowner still owes Statewide $4,500.00.  As a business person, and someone responsible for their employees, large sums of money that go unpaid for well over ninety days have an affect on the business’ bottomline and can cause some tension.