The House Designers Reviews (20)
View Photos
The House Designers Rating
Description: Home Design & Planning, Architects
Address: 53 Quarter Horse Dr, Monroe, Connecticut, United States, 06468-1085
Phone: |
Show more...
|
Web: |
|
Add contact information for The House Designers
Add new contacts
ADVERTISEMENT
TO: CT Revdex.com Please note that all of the concerns from the [redacted] s were reviewed in-depth by The House Designers’ management team, the architect of House Plan [redacted] and the modification department and a detailed response was emailed on 6/26/(see below) The liability to review the house plans prior to construction, understand and work in accordance with local building codes, obtain proper permits, select materials (which may alter the original dimensions and details) and ensure proper plan updates to construct the home is the responsibility of the builderIn this case, the builder made recommendations that were not part of the initial plan purchase and as such, are his responsibility to facilitate and to notify the client Example: This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC codeThe builder selected to have this converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturerChanges like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which the builder should have explained to the client, especially since changes of this nature can mean additional costs to the client The House Designers is not responsible for the advice or assistance that a client receives from their local builder, architect, engineer or other construction professional for the methods that they use to build the home or the quality of their work, especially when changes to the original plan are recommended and implemented Compensation for their added expenses should be credited by their builder whose continual changes in construction methods and suggestions delayed the project and were never discussed prior to purchase The House Designers provided construction drawings to build a home that has been built hundreds of times throughout the countryThe qualifications of the builder to manage this home building project from beginning to end is the responsibility of the client who contracted with him The modification department ( [redacted] ) admitted a minor error in calculation on their part and reimbursed the [redacted] ’s for their modification fees on 7/9/in the amount of $and the [redacted] s signed a release (see attached) Also, the following letter was sent to the [redacted] s which resolved the issues on The House Designers’ part From: John L [redacted] < [redacted] > Date: Friday, June 26, at 11:PM To: [redacted] < [redacted] > Subject: [redacted] House Plan Purchase Hello Mr& Mrs [redacted] , Our team has taken great care in reviewing all of the documentation that you provided in regards to your modifications for House Plan ***We’ve also taken into consideration and documented all of our conversations After consulting with [redacted] and having House Plan [redacted] thoroughly reviewed by our in-house architectural team we have concluded that the majority of your claims are due to alterations you had made to the plan at the recommendation of your builder Throughout your list of notes about House Plan ***, you refer to the plan as “unskillfully designed” (we are q**ting your builder [redacted] ***)This same house has been built over a hundred times from these precise plansThis plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC codeYou selected to have them converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturerChanges like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which your builder should have made you aware of.Furthermore apparently your builder suggested further changes which may have compromised the integrity of the original plans I would also like to address your notes on the floor joist not spanning the 16-0’ as indicatedUpon review, no floor joists were discovered that are spanning the stated 16’However, there are 2’ x 10’ ceiling joists that span 16’ which is well within code In regards to the plans scale, the original house plan files were correct, however the modified version of ONLY the foundation page was skewed in the “Y” coordinate onlyThe “X” coordinate scales fineIn other words, while reviewing the scale, the dimensions running right to left are fineHowever, the dimensions running up and down the foundation plan are skewed and scale much longer than they actually show for a length approximately a 12” to 18” varianceThe scaling issue was caused by the PDF conversion and was related to how the mod team had prepared the PDF of the foundation page for the final drawingsThe distance stated at each dimension appear accurate and add up correctlyPlease note most builders typically work off of the actual numbers rather than scale and those numbers were correct It is imprecise to scale drawings and most experienced builders know this In regards to the lead time and delays: Upon review of the project notes and dates, we have put together the following timeline: aContract executed with [redacted] (**) on 1/13/ b [redacted] agreed to weeks to provide a review set and business days for finals upon acceptance of review setDate of [redacted] executed mod contract was Friday, 2/6/Review set was delivered on 2/11/at noon cOn 2/12/15, at the request of the clients builder [redacted] ***, the client called [redacted] asking for changes in the roof design [redacted] offered to create alternatives to choose from and delivered them on-time on 2/13/ dClient and builder confirmed new roofline on 2/16/and final drawings were sent on 2/19/ e We are not certain whether this was your first experience in building a home, but delays due the inability of a general contractor to garner his subcontractors precisely when needed is well documented Making changes midstream also hinders proper schedulingWe cannot be held responsible for such delays We are certainly not happy that you were disappointed with your building experience, however as for the requested compensation for the plans we will not reimburse you for these nor pay for any delays, or reimburse for hiring a local designer to do the truss and porch changes that were inspired by your builderPlease give me a call on Monday and I will be happy to go through any details or questions you haveI look forward to speaking with you soon Sincerely, John L [redacted] VP of Sales & Customer Service |t###-###-#### |d###-###-#### |c###-###-#### | The House Designers | Monroe Turnpike, Suite | Monroe, Connecticut | [redacted] To summarize, every action was taken to assist and help rectify the [redacted] ’s problems although The House Designers was not at fault and delivered a quality house plan that has been built all over the US without issue If you have further questions, please contact me directly, Very Kind Regards Tammy C [redacted] Chief Operating Officer The House Designers [redacted] c ###-###-#### f ###-###-####
Dear Revdex.com Mr [redacted] is now embarking on harassment; you need to be aware that aside from him already being refunded for the modifications he had made to the plan he is separately now demanding from the architect a refund of what he paid for the plans themselves I guess he hopes to win something, somewhere, if he keeps sending complaintsA copy of that complaint and the architects reply is also enclosed His accusations about improper plans and the entire nature of his complaint to the Revdex.com is designed simply to discredit The House Designers It has zero basis in fact If it continues it may be necessary for us to seek legal remedy We already replied to his initial complaint in detail and provided a copy of Mr [redacted] ’s signed license agreement Another copy is attached for your records with items highlighted We will not attempt again to address his letter point by point but in general Mr [redacted] , unfortunately did not understand that to adapt a pre-drawn stock house plan to local requirements and local building customs requires cost on his part It also requires him to speak to local building officials, which to our knowledge, he never did prior to undertaking this project The fact that he can realistically demand cost overruns in the amount of $4481??from a company he simply purchased the plans from in the amount of $is illogical The House Designers has no legal contract with him regarding the building of his home In the license he signed he is made to understand that The House Designers has no involvement whatsoever in the construction of his home We simply provided plans This complaint can be likened to someone buying a dress online for an affair they planned to attend but when the dress arrived they decided to make alterations; the alteration company took longer than they expected and they couldn’t wear the dress to the affair so they then decide that they want a refund for the altered dress plus substantial personal damages It is patently absurd and we would hope that the Revdex.com can see through this ugly effort to embarrass and harass a reputable company The time has come to put this to bed.If you have further questions, please contact me directly,Very Kind RegardsTammy C***Chief Operating OfficerThe House Designers [redacted] c ###-###-#### f ###-###-####TO: CT Revdex.com Please note that all of the concerns from the [redacted] s were reviewed in-depth by The House Designers’ management team, the architect of House Plan [redacted] and the modification department and a detailed response was emailed on 6/26/(see below)The liability to review the house plans prior to construction, understand and work in accordance with local building codes, obtain proper permits, select materials (which may alter the original dimensions and details) and ensure proper plan updates to construct the home is the responsibility of the builderIn this case, the builder made recommendations that were not part of the initial plan purchase and as such, are his responsibility to facilitate and to notify the clientExample: This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC codeThe builder selected to have this converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturerChanges like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which the builder should have explained to the client, especially since changes of this nature can mean additional costs to the clientThe House Designers is not responsible for the advice or assistance that a client receives from their local builder, architect, engineer or other construction professional for the methods that they use to build the home or the quality of their work, especially when changes to the original plan are recommended and implementedCompensation for their added expenses should be credited by their builder whose continual changes in construction methods and suggestions delayed the project and were never discussed prior to purchaseThe House Designers provided construction drawings to build a home that has been built hundreds of times throughout the countryThe qualifications of the builder to manage this home building project from beginning to end is the responsibility of the client who contracted with himThe modification department ( [redacted] ) admitted a minor error in calculation on their part and reimbursed the [redacted] ’s for their modification fees on 7/9/in the amount of $and the [redacted] s signed a release (see attached) Also, the following letter was sent to the [redacted] s which resolved the issues on The House Designers’ partFrom: John L [redacted] < [redacted] >Date: Friday, June 26, at 11:PMTo: [redacted] < [redacted] >Subject: [redacted] House Plan Purchase Hello Mr& Mrs [redacted] , Our team has taken great care in reviewing all of the documentation that you provided in regards to your modifications for House Plan ***We’ve also taken into consideration and documented all of our conversationsAfter consulting with [redacted] and having House Plan [redacted] thoroughly reviewed by our in-house architectural team we have concluded that the majority of your claims are due to alterations you had made to the plan at the recommendation of your builderThroughout your list of notes about House Plan ***, you refer to the plan as “unskillfully designed” (we are q**ting your builder [redacted] ***)This same house has been built over a hundred times from these precise plansThis plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC codeYou selected to have them converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturerChanges like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which your builder should have made you aware of.Furthermore apparently your builder suggested further changes which may have compromised the integrity of the original plansI would also like to address your notes on the floor joist not spanning the 16-0’ as indicatedUpon review, no floor joists were discovered that are spanning the stated 16’However, there are 2’ x 10’ ceiling joists that span 16’ which is well within codeIn regards to the plans scale, the original house plan files were correct, however the modified version of ONLY the foundation page was skewed in the “Y” coordinate onlyThe “X” coordinate scales fineIn other words, while reviewing the scale, the dimensions running right to left are fineHowever, the dimensions running up and down the foundation plan are skewed and scale much longer than they actually show for a length approximately a 12” to 18” varianceThe scaling issue was caused by the PDF conversion and was related to how the mod team had prepared the PDF of the foundation page for the final drawingsThe distance stated at each dimension appear accurate and add up correctlyPlease note most builders typically work off of the actual numbers rather than scale and those numbers were correct It is imprecise to scale drawings and most experienced builders know thisIn regards to the lead time and delays: Upon review of the project notes and dates, we have put together the following timeline: aContract executed with [redacted] (**) on 1/13/ b [redacted] agreed to weeks to provide a review set and business days for finals upon acceptance of review setDate of [redacted] executed mod contract was Friday, 2/6/Review set was delivered on 2/11/at noon cOn 2/12/15, at the request of the clients builder [redacted] ***, the client called [redacted] asking for changes in the roof design [redacted] offered to create alternatives to choose from and delivered them on-time on 2/13/ dClient and builder confirmed new roofline on 2/16/and final drawings were sent on 2/19/ e We are not certain whether this was your first experience in building a home, but delays due the inability of a general contractor to garner his subcontractors precisely when needed is well documented Making changes midstream also hinders proper schedulingWe cannot be held responsible for such delays.We are certainly not happy that you were disappointed with your building experience, however as for the requested compensation for the plans we will not reimburse you for these nor pay for any delays, or reimburse for hiring a local designer to do the truss and porch changes that were inspired by your builderPlease give me a call on Monday and I will be happy to go through any details or questions you haveI look forward to speaking with you soonSincerely, John L [redacted] VP of Sales & Customer Service|t###-###-#### |d###-###-#### |c###-###-#### |The House Designers | [redacted] To summarize, every action was taken to assist and help rectify the [redacted] ’s problems although The House Designers was not at fault and delivered a quality house plan that has been built all over the US without issueIf you have further questions, please contact me directly, Very Kind RegardsTammy C***Chief Operating OfficerThe House Designers [redacted] c ###-###-#### f ###-###-####
TO: CT Revdex.com Please note that all of the concerns from the [redacted] s were reviewed in-depth by The House Designers’ management team, the architect of House Plan [redacted] and the modification department and a detailed response was emailed on 6/26/ (see below) The liability to review the house plans prior to construction, understand and work in accordance with local building codes, obtain proper permits, select materials (which may alter the original dimensions and details) and ensure proper plan updates to construct the home is the responsibility of the builderIn this case, the builder made recommendations that were not part of the initial plan purchase and as such, are his responsibility to facilitate and to notify the client Example: This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC codeThe builder selected to have this converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturerChanges like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which the builder should have explained to the client, especially since changes of this nature can mean additional costs to the client The House Designers is not responsible for the advice or assistance that a client receives from their local builder, architect, engineer or other construction professional for the methods that they use to build the home or the quality of their work, especially when changes to the original plan are recommended and implemented Compensation for their added expenses should be credited by their builder whose continual changes in construction methods and suggestions delayed the project and were never discussed prior to purchase The House Designers provided construction drawings to build a home that has been built hundreds of times throughout the countryThe qualifications of the builder to manage this home building project from beginning to end is the responsibility of the client who contracted with him The modification department ( [redacted] ) admitted a minor error in calculation on their part and reimbursed the [redacted] ’s for their modification fees on 7/9/in the amount of $and the [redacted] s signed a release (see attached) Also, the following letter was sent to the [redacted] s which resolved the issues on The House Designers’ part From: John L [redacted] < [redacted] > Date: Friday, June 26, at 11:PM To: [redacted] < [redacted] > Subject: [redacted] House Plan Purchase Hello Mr& Mrs [redacted] , Our team has taken great care in reviewing all of the documentation that you provided in regards to your modifications for House Plan ***We’ve also taken into consideration and documented all of our conversations After consulting with [redacted] and having House Plan [redacted] thoroughly reviewed by our in-house architectural team we have concluded that the majority of your claims are due to alterations you had made to the plan at the recommendation of your builder Throughout your list of notes about House Plan ***, you refer to the plan as “unskillfully designed” (we are q**ting your builder [redacted] ***)This same house has been built over a hundred times from these precise plansThis plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC codeYou selected to have them converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturerChanges like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which your builder should have made you aware of.Furthermore apparently your builder suggested further changes which may have compromised the integrity of the original plans I would also like to address your notes on the floor joist not spanning the 16-0’ as indicatedUpon review, no floor joists were discovered that are spanning the stated 16’However, there are 2’ x 10’ ceiling joists that span 16’ which is well within code In regards to the plans scale, the original house plan files were correct, however the modified version of ONLY the foundation page was skewed in the “Y” coordinate onlyThe “X” coordinate scales fineIn other words, while reviewing the scale, the dimensions running right to left are fineHowever, the dimensions running up and down the foundation plan are skewed and scale much longer than they actually show for a length approximately a 12” to 18” varianceThe scaling issue was caused by the PDF conversion and was related to how the mod team had prepared the PDF of the foundation page for the final drawingsThe distance stated at each dimension appear accurate and add up correctlyPlease note most builders typically work off of the actual numbers rather than scale and those numbers were correct It is imprecise to scale drawings and most experienced builders know this In regards to the lead time and delays: Upon review of the project notes and dates, we have put together the following timeline: aContract executed with [redacted] (**) on 1/13/ b [redacted] agreed to weeks to provide a review set and business days for finals upon acceptance of review setDate of [redacted] executed mod contract was Friday, 2/6/Review set was delivered on 2/11/at noon cOn 2/12/15, at the request of the clients builder [redacted] ***, the client called [redacted] asking for changes in the roof design [redacted] offered to create alternatives to choose from and delivered them on-time on 2/13/ dClient and builder confirmed new roofline on 2/16/and final drawings were sent on 2/19/ e We are not certain whether this was your first experience in building a home, but delays due the inability of a general contractor to garner his subcontractors precisely when needed is well documented Making changes midstream also hinders proper schedulingWe cannot be held responsible for such delays We are certainly not happy that you were disappointed with your building experience, however as for the requested compensation for the plans we will not reimburse you for these nor pay for any delays, or reimburse for hiring a local designer to do the truss and porch changes that were inspired by your builderPlease give me a call on Monday and I will be happy to go through any details or questions you haveI look forward to speaking with you soon Sincerely, John L [redacted] VP of Sales & Customer Service |t###-###-#### |d###-###-#### |c###-###-#### | The House Designers | Monroe Turnpike, Suite | Monroe, Connecticut | [redacted] To summarize, every action was taken to assist and help rectify the [redacted] ’s problems although The House Designers was not at fault and delivered a quality house plan that has been built all over the US without issue If you have further questions, please contact me directly, Very Kind Regards Tammy C [redacted] Chief Operating Officer The House Designers [redacted] c ###-###-#### f ###-###-####
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me I have spoken to Tammy and she was more than helpful and has insured the are addressing this to prevent from happening again Sincerely, [redacted] ***
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Ms C***’s response continues the pattern of unsubstantiated statements that can also be misleading and fails to address the nature of our complaintIt is our opinion that her response is a smoke screen designed to obscure and confuse the issueThese issues have already been documented, detailed, defined or established in our initial complaint and previous replies to the Revdex.com As respects to her reply, it could be interpreted that we were fully refunded for the modifications made the plan – not true as the complaint indicatesShe goes on to mention local building customs, discussing with local building officials, etcwhich does not address our complaint A review of our complaint will indicate that MsC***’s “dress” analogy also does not reflect our complaint MsC***’s response includes Mr L [redacted] ’s 6/email but ignores our 6/rebuttal to him (see attachment to our rejection of THD’s first response to our Revdex.com complaint)Our file clearly indicates that we are not asking for a refund of the $paid for the Sabrina II plan However, our complaint includes a request for the $we spent to have their outsourced poorly drawn modified plan redrawnWe are again attaching “PLAN EXPENSES SABRINA II PLAN 4175”Finally, the plan license ignores that THD outsourced our modification request to a 3rd party selected by them Without again going over our complaint, a brief summary follows: THD’s website actively promotes free plan modification estimatesSee attached letter from THD stating “ you will join thousands of builder and homeowners who have trusted us to modify their house plans ”THD outsourced our modification request to their highly recommended 3rd party The modified plan was poorly drawn, THD agreed that the plan had issues and agreed to work with us to have the plan redrawn, most likely by another firmAfter days from when we first informed THD about issues with the poorly drawn modified plan, THD informed us that they were not going to do anything resulting in additional expenses to us as identified in our complaint If THD had lived up to its promise to have the poorly drawn plan corrected on a timely basis, there would have been no complaintIf THD immediately informed us of their no help position, our complaint would have been limited to the cost to have the modified plan redrawn Excerpts from THD’s website include: “optimum customer service”; “designs come with a 100% satisfaction guarantee”; “our commitment to honesty, responsiveness and customer support long after your purchase is made”; “THD will support you through the entire home building process whenever your builder needs assistance” After a review of our complaint, one can decide if THD lives up to its website statements It would appear from MsC***’s reply to the Revdex.com, that rather than negotiate a settlement, THD’s business model is to accuse a customer of harassment for a well documented complaint, threaten legal action and take no responsibility for their outsourced plan modificationsOur complaint continues to be unresolved Attachments: - PLAN EXPENSES SABRINA II PLAN - Letter from THD stating ”thousands have trusted us” Sincerely, [redacted]
Dear Revdex.com,I have been in contact with the client, and all issues have been resolved.Very Kind Regards, Tammy C***Chief Executive OfficerThe House Designers
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
It is our opinion that The House Designers response to the CT Revdex.com has unsubstantiated accusations, attempts to divert attention to issues not pertinent to our complaint and fails to address our complaint Their response includes statements that are or without merit as indicated in our attached rebuttalAs has been said to The House Designers numerous times, our complaint pertains primarily to the modified plan that they outsourced, their failure to live up to their agreement to correct this plan (as well as their responsibility to correct the plan at no additional cost to us) and notifying us almost months after our complaint that they will not do anything This failure to correct the plan and delay in informing us of their decision directly resulted in additional expense to us in the amount of $As such, we reject The House Designer’s response to the CT Revdex.com
Attached are the following documents:
- Rebuttal of The House Designers response to the CT Revdex.com
- Our 6/29/reply to John L***’s 6/26/email indicating that THD will not
reimburse us for the expenses incurred by us
Sincerely,
*** ***
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:It is our opinion that The House Designers response to the CT Revdex.com has unsubstantiated accusations, attempts to divert attention to issues not pertinent to our complaint and fails to address our complaint Their response includes statements that are or without merit as indicated in our attached rebuttal.As has been said to The House Designers numerous times, our complaint pertains primarily to the modified plan that they outsourced, their failure to live up to their agreement to correct this plan (as well as their responsibility to correct the plan at no additional cost to us) and notifying us almost months after our complaint that they will not do anything This failure to correct the plan and delay in informing us of their decision directly resulted in additional expense to us in the amount of $4481.As such, we reject The House Designer’s response to the CT Revdex.comAttached are the following documents: - Rebuttal of The House Designers response to the CT Revdex.com - Our 6/29/reply to John L***’s 6/26/email indicating that THD will not reimburse us for the expenses incurred by us
Sincerely,
*** ***
Dear Revdex.com,
I have been in contact with the client, and all issues have been resolved.
Very Kind Regards,
Tammy C[redacted]
Chief Executive Officer
The House Designers
Dear Revdex.com
Mr [redacted] is now embarking on harassment; you need to be aware that aside from him already being refunded for the modifications he had made to the plan he is separately now demanding from the architect a refund of what he paid for the plans themselves. I guess he hopes to win something, somewhere, if he keeps sending complaints. A copy of that complaint and the architects reply is also enclosed. His accusations about improper plans and the entire nature of his complaint to the Revdex.com is designed simply to discredit The House Designers. It has zero basis in fact. If it continues it may be necessary for us to seek legal remedy. We already replied to his initial complaint in detail and provided a copy of Mr. [redacted]’s signed license agreement. Another copy is attached for your records with items highlighted.
We will not attempt again to address his letter point by point but in general. Mr. [redacted] , unfortunately did not understand that to adapt a pre-drawn stock house plan to local requirements and local building customs requires cost on his part. It also requires him to speak to local building officials, which to our knowledge, he never did prior to undertaking this project.
The fact that he can realistically demand cost overruns in the amount of $4481??from a company he simply purchased the plans from in the amount of $985 is illogical. The House Designers has no legal contract with him regarding the building of his home. In the license he signed he is made to understand that The House Designers has no involvement whatsoever in the construction of his home. We simply provided plans. This complaint can be likened to someone buying a dress online for an affair they planned to attend but when the dress arrived they decided to make alterations; the alteration company took longer than they expected and they couldn’t wear the dress to the affair so they then decide that they want a refund for the altered dress plus substantial personal damages. It is patently absurd and we would hope that the Revdex.com can see through this ugly effort to embarrass and harass a reputable company.
The time has come to put this to bed.If you have further questions, please contact me directly,Very Kind Regards. Tammy C[redacted]Chief Operating OfficerThe House Designers[redacted]c ###-###-####
f ###-###-####TO: CT Revdex.com Please note that all of the concerns from the [redacted]s were reviewed in-depth by The House Designers’ management team, the architect of House Plan [redacted] and the modification department and a detailed response was emailed on 6/26/15 (see below). The liability to review the house plans prior to construction, understand and work in accordance with local building codes, obtain proper permits, select materials (which may alter the original dimensions and details) and ensure proper plan updates to construct the home is the responsibility of the builder. In this case, the builder made recommendations that were not part of the initial plan purchase and as such, are his responsibility to facilitate and to notify the client. Example: This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC code. The builder selected to have this converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturer. Changes like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which the builder should have explained to the client, especially since changes of this nature can mean additional costs to the client. The House Designers is not responsible for the advice or assistance that a client receives from their local builder, architect, engineer or other construction professional for the methods that they use to build the home or the quality of their work, especially when changes to the original plan are recommended and implemented. Compensation for their added expenses should be credited by their builder whose continual changes in construction methods and suggestions delayed the project and were never discussed prior to purchase. The House Designers provided construction drawings to build a home that has been built hundreds of times throughout the country. The qualifications of the builder to manage this home building project from beginning to end is the responsibility of the client who contracted with him. The modification department ([redacted]) admitted a minor error in calculation on their part and reimbursed the [redacted]’s for their modification fees on 7/9/15 in the amount of $680 and the [redacted]s signed a release (see attached). Also, the following letter was sent to the [redacted]s which resolved the issues on The House Designers’ part. From: John L[redacted] <[redacted]>Date: Friday, June 26, 2015 at 11:38 PMTo: [redacted] <[redacted]>Subject: [redacted] House Plan Purchase Hello Mr. & Mrs. [redacted], Our team has taken great care in reviewing all of the documentation that you provided in regards to your modifications for House Plan [redacted]. We’ve also taken into consideration and documented all of our conversations. After consulting with [redacted] and having House Plan [redacted] thoroughly reviewed by our in-house architectural team we have concluded that the majority of your claims are due to alterations you had made to the plan at the recommendation of your builder. Throughout your list of notes about House Plan [redacted], you refer to the plan as “unskillfully designed” (we are q**ting your builder [redacted]). This same house has been built over a hundred times from these precise plans. This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC code. You selected to have them converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturer. Changes like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which your builder should have made you aware of.Furthermore apparently your builder suggested further changes which may have compromised the integrity of the original plans. I would also like to address your notes on the floor joist not spanning the 16-0’ as indicated. Upon review, no floor joists were discovered that are spanning the stated 16’. However, there are 2’ x 10’ ceiling joists that span 16’ which is well within code. In regards to the plans scale, the original house plan files were correct, however the modified version of ONLY the foundation page was skewed in the “Y” coordinate only. The “X” coordinate scales fine. In other words, while reviewing the scale, the dimensions running right to left are fine. However, the dimensions running up and down the foundation plan are skewed and scale much longer than they actually show for a length approximately a 12” to 18” variance. The scaling issue was caused by the PDF conversion and was related to how the mod team had prepared the PDF of the foundation page for the final drawings. The distance stated at each dimension appear accurate and add up correctly. Please note most builders typically work off of the actual numbers rather than scale and those numbers were correct. It is imprecise to scale drawings and most experienced builders know this. In regards to the lead time and delays: Upon review of the project notes and dates, we have put together the following timeline: a. Contract executed with [redacted] (**) on 1/13/15 b. ** agreed to 3.5 weeks to provide a review set and 3 business days for finals upon acceptance of review set. Date of ** executed mod contract was Friday, 2/6/15. Review set was delivered on 2/11/15 at noon. c. On 2/12/15, at the request of the clients builder [redacted], the client called ** asking for changes in the roof design. ** offered to create 2 alternatives to choose from and delivered them on-time on 2/13/15. d. Client and builder confirmed new roofline on 2/16/15 and final drawings were sent on 2/19/15. e. We are not certain whether this was your first experience in building a home, but delays due the inability of a general contractor to garner his subcontractors precisely when needed is well documented. Making changes midstream also hinders proper scheduling. We cannot be held responsible for such delays.We are certainly not happy that you were disappointed with your building experience, however as for the requested compensation for the plans we will not reimburse you for these nor pay for any delays, or reimburse for hiring a local designer to do the truss and porch changes that were inspired by your builder. Please give me a call on Monday and I will be happy to go through any details or questions you have. I look forward to speaking with you soon. Sincerely, John L[redacted]VP of Sales & Customer Service|t. ###-###-#### |d. ###-###-#### |c. ###-###-#### |The House Designers | [redacted] To summarize, every action was taken to assist and help rectify the [redacted]’s problems although The House Designers was not at fault and delivered a quality house plan that has been built all over the US without issue. If you have further questions, please contact me directly, Very Kind Regards. Tammy C[redacted]Chief Operating OfficerThe House Designers[redacted]c ###-###-####
f ###-###-####
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Normal
0
0
1
462
2637
21
5
3238
11.1539
0
0
0
Ms C[redacted]’s response continues the pattern of
unsubstantiated statements that can also be misleading and fails to address the
nature of our complaint. It is our opinion that her
response is a smoke screen designed to obscure and confuse the issue. These
issues have already been documented, detailed, defined or established in our
initial complaint and previous replies to the Revdex.com.
As respects to her reply, it could be interpreted that we
were fully refunded for the modifications made the plan – not true as the
complaint indicates. She goes on to mention local building customs, discussing
with local building officials, etc. which does not address our complaint. A review of our complaint will indicate
that Ms. C[redacted]’s “dress” analogy also does not reflect our complaint.
Ms. C[redacted]’s response includes Mr.
L[redacted]’s 6/26 email but ignores our 6/29 rebuttal to him (see attachment to
our rejection of THD’s first response to our Revdex.com complaint). Our file clearly
indicates that we are not asking for a refund of the $820 paid for the Sabrina
II plan. However, our
complaint includes a request for the $742 we spent to have their outsourced
poorly drawn modified plan redrawn. We are again attaching “PLAN
EXPENSES SABRINA II PLAN 4175”. Finally,
the plan license ignores that THD outsourced our modification request to a 3rd
party selected by them.
Without again going over our complaint, a brief summary
follows: THD’s website actively promotes free plan modification estimates. See attached letter from THD stating “…you will
join thousands of builder and homeowners who have trusted us to modify their
house plans…”. THD outsourced our modification request to their highly
recommended 3rd party.
The modified plan was poorly drawn, THD agreed that the plan had issues
and agreed to work with us to have the plan redrawn, most likely by another
firm. After 52 days from when we first informed THD about issues with the
poorly drawn modified plan, THD informed us that they were not going to
do anything resulting in additional expenses to us as identified in our
complaint.
If THD had lived up to its promise to have the poorly
drawn plan corrected on a timely basis, there would have been no complaint. If
THD immediately informed us of their no help position, our complaint would have
been limited to the cost to have the modified plan redrawn
Excerpts from THD’s website include: “optimum customer
service”; “designs come with a 100% satisfaction guarantee”; “our commitment to
honesty, responsiveness and customer support long after your purchase is made”;
“THD will support you through the entire home building process whenever your
builder needs assistance”. After a
review of our complaint, one can decide if THD lives up to its website
statements.
It would appear from Ms. C[redacted]’s reply to the Revdex.com, that
rather than negotiate a settlement, THD’s business model is to accuse a
customer of harassment for a well documented complaint, threaten legal action
and take no responsibility for their outsourced plan modifications. Our
complaint continues to be unresolved.
Attachments:
- PLAN EXPENSES SABRINA II PLAN 4175
- Letter from THD stating …”thousands have trusted us”
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Settlement has been reached with our complaint against The House Designers, LLC and all issues have been resolved to our satisfaction. It is our understanding that you will be in contact with The House Designers, LLC. Communication should be directed to Tammy C[redacted], Chief Operating Officer. Sincerely, [redacted]
Dear Revdex.com
Mr [redacted] is now embarking on harassment; you need to be aware that aside from him already being refunded for the modifications he had made to the plan he is separately now demanding from the architect a refund of what he paid for the plans themselves. I guess he hopes to win something, somewhere, if he keeps sending complaints. A copy of that complaint and the architects reply is also enclosed. His accusations about improper plans and the entire nature of his complaint to the Revdex.com is designed simply to discredit The House Designers. It has zero basis in fact. If it continues it may be necessary for us to seek legal remedy. We already replied to his initial complaint in detail and provided a copy of Mr. [redacted]’s signed license agreement. Another copy is attached for your records with items highlighted.
We will not attempt again to address his letter point by point but in general. Mr. [redacted] , unfortunately did not understand that to adapt a pre-drawn stock house plan to local requirements and local building customs requires cost on his part. It also requires him to speak to local building officials, which to our knowledge, he never did prior to undertaking this project.
The fact that he can realistically demand cost overruns in the amount of $4481??from a company he simply purchased the plans from in the amount of $985 is illogical. The House Designers has no legal contract with him regarding the building of his home. In the license he signed he is made to understand that The House Designers has no involvement whatsoever in the construction of his home. We simply provided plans. This complaint can be likened to someone buying a dress online for an affair they planned to attend but when the dress arrived they decided to make alterations; the alteration company took longer than they expected and they couldn’t wear the dress to the affair so they then decide that they want a refund for the altered dress plus substantial personal damages. It is patently absurd and we would hope that the Revdex.com can see through this ugly effort to embarrass and harass a reputable company.
The time has come to put this to bed.
If you have further questions, please contact me directly,
Very Kind Regards.
Tammy C[redacted]
Chief Operating Officer
The House Designers
[redacted]
c ###-###-####
f ###-###-####
TO: CT Revdex.com
Please note that all of the concerns from the [redacted]s were reviewed in-depth by The House Designers’ management team, the architect of House Plan [redacted] and the modification department and a detailed response was emailed on 6/26/15 (see below).
The liability to review the house plans prior to construction, understand and work in accordance with local building codes, obtain proper permits, select materials (which may alter the original dimensions and details) and ensure proper plan updates to construct the home is the responsibility of the builder. In this case, the builder made recommendations that were not part of the initial plan purchase and as such, are his responsibility to facilitate and to notify the client.
Example: This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC code. The builder selected to have this converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturer. Changes like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which the builder should have explained to the client, especially since changes of this nature can mean additional costs to the client.
The House Designers is not responsible for the advice or assistance that a client receives from their local builder, architect, engineer or other construction professional for the methods that they use to build the home or the quality of their work, especially when changes to the original plan are recommended and implemented.
Compensation for their added expenses should be credited by their builder whose continual changes in construction methods and suggestions delayed the project and were never discussed prior to purchase.
The House Designers provided construction drawings to build a home that has been built hundreds of times throughout the country. The qualifications of the builder to manage this home building project from beginning to end is the responsibility of the client who contracted with him.
The modification department ([redacted]) admitted a minor error in calculation on their part and reimbursed the [redacted]’s for their modification fees on 7/9/15 in the amount of $680 and the [redacted]s signed a release (see attached).
Also, the following letter was sent to the [redacted]s which resolved the issues on The House Designers’ part.
From: John L[redacted] <[redacted]>
Date: Friday, June 26, 2015 at 11:38 PM
To: [redacted] <[redacted]>
Subject: [redacted] House Plan Purchase
Hello Mr. & Mrs. [redacted],
Our team has taken great care in reviewing all of the documentation that you provided in regards to your modifications for House Plan [redacted]. We’ve also taken into consideration and documented all of our conversations.
After consulting with [redacted] and having House Plan [redacted] thoroughly reviewed by our in-house architectural team we have concluded that the majority of your claims are due to alterations you had made to the plan at the recommendation of your builder.
Throughout your list of notes about House Plan [redacted], you refer to the plan as “unskillfully designed” (we are q**ting your builder [redacted]). This same house has been built over a hundred times from these precise plans. This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC code. You selected to have them converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturer. Changes like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which your builder should have made you aware of.Furthermore apparently your builder suggested further changes which may have compromised the integrity of the original plans.
I would also like to address your notes on the floor joist not spanning the 16-0’ as indicated. Upon review, no floor joists were discovered that are spanning the stated 16’. However, there are 2’ x 10’ ceiling joists that span 16’ which is well within code.
In regards to the plans scale, the original house plan files were correct, however the modified version of ONLY the foundation page was skewed in the “Y” coordinate only. The “X” coordinate scales fine. In other words, while reviewing the scale, the dimensions running right to left are fine. However, the dimensions running up and down the foundation plan are skewed and scale much longer than they actually show for a length approximately a 12” to 18” variance. The scaling issue was caused by the PDF conversion and was related to how the mod team had prepared the PDF of the foundation page for the final drawings. The distance stated at each dimension appear accurate and add up correctly. Please note most builders typically work off of the actual numbers rather than scale and those numbers were correct. It is imprecise to scale drawings and most experienced builders know this.
In regards to the lead time and delays: Upon review of the project notes and dates, we have put together the following timeline:
a. Contract executed with [redacted] (**) on 1/13/15
b. ** agreed to 3.5 weeks to provide a review set and 3 business days for finals upon acceptance of review set. Date of ** executed mod contract was Friday, 2/6/15. Review set was delivered on 2/11/15 at noon.
c. On 2/12/15, at the request of the clients builder [redacted], the client called ** asking for changes in the roof design. ** offered to create 2 alternatives to choose from and delivered them on-time on 2/13/15.
d. Client and builder confirmed new roofline on 2/16/15 and final drawings were sent on 2/19/15.
e. We are not certain whether this was your first experience in building a home, but delays due the inability of a general contractor to garner his subcontractors precisely when needed is well documented. Making changes midstream also hinders proper scheduling. We cannot be held responsible for such delays.
We are certainly not happy that you were disappointed with your building experience, however as for the requested compensation for the plans we will not reimburse you for these nor pay for any delays, or reimburse for hiring a local designer to do the truss and porch changes that were inspired by your builder. Please give me a call on Monday and I will be happy to go through any details or questions you have. I look forward to speaking with you soon.
Sincerely,
John L[redacted]
VP of Sales & Customer Service
|t. ###-###-#### |d. ###-###-#### |c. ###-###-#### |
The House Designers | [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
To summarize, every action was taken to assist and help rectify the [redacted]’s problems although The House Designers was not at fault and delivered a quality house plan that has been built all over the US without issue.
If you have further questions, please contact me directly,
Very Kind Regards.
Tammy C[redacted]
Chief Operating Officer
The House Designers
[redacted]
[redacted]
c ###-###-####
f ###-###-####
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID...
[redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
I have spoken to Tammy and she was more than helpful and has insured the are addressing this to prevent from happening again.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
TO: CT Revdex.com
Please note that all of the concerns from the [redacted]s were reviewed in-depth by The House Designers’ management team, the architect of House Plan [redacted] and the modification department and a detailed response was emailed on 6/26/15 (see below).
The...
liability to review the house plans prior to construction, understand and work in accordance with local building codes, obtain proper permits, select materials (which may alter the original dimensions and details) and ensure proper plan updates to construct the home is the responsibility of the builder. In this case, the builder made recommendations that were not part of the initial plan purchase and as such, are his responsibility to facilitate and to notify the client.
Example: This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC code. The builder selected to have this converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturer. Changes like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which the builder should have explained to the client, especially since changes of this nature can mean additional costs to the client.
The House Designers is not responsible for the advice or assistance that a client receives from their local builder, architect, engineer or other construction professional for the methods that they use to build the home or the quality of their work, especially when changes to the original plan are recommended and implemented.
Compensation for their added expenses should be credited by their builder whose continual changes in construction methods and suggestions delayed the project and were never discussed prior to purchase.
The House Designers provided construction drawings to build a home that has been built hundreds of times throughout the country. The qualifications of the builder to manage this home building project from beginning to end is the responsibility of the client who contracted with him.
The modification department ([redacted]) admitted a minor error in calculation on their part and reimbursed the [redacted]’s for their modification fees on 7/9/15 in the amount of $680 and the [redacted]s signed a release (see attached).
Also, the following letter was sent to the [redacted]s which resolved the issues on The House Designers’ part.
From: John L[redacted] <[redacted]>
Date: Friday, June 26, 2015 at 11:38 PM
To: [redacted] <[redacted]>
Subject: [redacted] House Plan Purchase
Hello Mr. & Mrs. [redacted],
Our team has taken great care in reviewing all of the documentation that you provided in regards to your modifications for House Plan [redacted]. We’ve also taken into consideration and documented all of our conversations.
After consulting with [redacted] and having House Plan [redacted] thoroughly reviewed by our in-house architectural team we have concluded that the majority of your claims are due to alterations you had made to the plan at the recommendation of your builder.
Throughout your list of notes about House Plan [redacted], you refer to the plan as “unskillfully designed” (we are q**ting your builder [redacted]). This same house has been built over a hundred times from these precise plans. This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC code. You selected to have them converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturer. Changes like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which your builder should have made you aware of.Furthermore apparently your builder suggested further changes which may have compromised the integrity of the original plans.
I would also like to address your notes on the floor joist not spanning the 16-0’ as indicated. Upon review, no floor joists were discovered that are spanning the stated 16’. However, there are 2’ x 10’ ceiling joists that span 16’ which is well within code.
In regards to the plans scale, the original house plan files were correct, however the modified version of ONLY the foundation page was skewed in the “Y” coordinate only. The “X” coordinate scales fine. In other words, while reviewing the scale, the dimensions running right to left are fine. However, the dimensions running up and down the foundation plan are skewed and scale much longer than they actually show for a length approximately a 12” to 18” variance. The scaling issue was caused by the PDF conversion and was related to how the mod team had prepared the PDF of the foundation page for the final drawings. The distance stated at each dimension appear accurate and add up correctly. Please note most builders typically work off of the actual numbers rather than scale and those numbers were correct. It is imprecise to scale drawings and most experienced builders know this.
In regards to the lead time and delays: Upon review of the project notes and dates, we have put together the following timeline:
a. Contract executed with [redacted] (**) on 1/13/15
b. ** agreed to 3.5 weeks to provide a review set and 3 business days for finals upon acceptance of review set. Date of ** executed mod contract was Friday, 2/6/15. Review set was delivered on 2/11/15 at noon.
c. On 2/12/15, at the request of the clients builder [redacted], the client called ** asking for changes in the roof design. ** offered to create 2 alternatives to choose from and delivered them on-time on 2/13/15.
d. Client and builder confirmed new roofline on 2/16/15 and final drawings were sent on 2/19/15.
e. We are not certain whether this was your first experience in building a home, but delays due the inability of a general contractor to garner his subcontractors precisely when needed is well documented. Making changes midstream also hinders proper scheduling. We cannot be held responsible for such delays.
We are certainly not happy that you were disappointed with your building experience, however as for the requested compensation for the plans we will not reimburse you for these nor pay for any delays, or reimburse for hiring a local designer to do the truss and porch changes that were inspired by your builder. Please give me a call on Monday and I will be happy to go through any details or questions you have. I look forward to speaking with you soon.
Sincerely,
John L[redacted]
VP of Sales & Customer Service
|t. ###-###-#### |d. ###-###-#### |c. ###-###-#### |
The House Designers | 483 Monroe Turnpike, Suite 115 | Monroe, Connecticut | 06468
[redacted]
[redacted]
To summarize, every action was taken to assist and help rectify the [redacted]’s problems although The House Designers was not at fault and delivered a quality house plan that has been built all over the US without issue.
If you have further questions, please contact me directly,
Very Kind Regards.
Tammy C[redacted]
Chief Operating Officer
The House Designers
[redacted]
[redacted]
c ###-###-####
f ###-###-####
Revdex.com:
I have...
reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
I have spoken to Tammy and she was more than helpful and has insured the are addressing this to prevent from happening again.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Ms C[redacted]’s response continues the pattern of
unsubstantiated statements that can also be misleading and fails to address the
nature of our complaint. It is our opinion that her
response is a smoke screen designed to obscure and confuse the issue. These
issues have already been documented, detailed, defined or established in our
initial complaint and previous replies to the Revdex.com.
As respects to her reply, it could be interpreted that we
were fully refunded for the modifications made the plan – not true as the
complaint indicates. She goes on to mention local building customs, discussing
with local building officials, etc. which does not address our complaint. A review of our complaint will indicate
that Ms. C[redacted]’s “dress” analogy also does not reflect our complaint.
Ms. C[redacted]’s response includes Mr.
L[redacted]’s 6/26 email but ignores our 6/29 rebuttal to him (see attachment to
our rejection of THD’s first response to our Revdex.com complaint). Our file clearly
indicates that we are not asking for a refund of the $820 paid for the Sabrina
II plan. However, our
complaint includes a request for the $742 we spent to have their outsourced
poorly drawn modified plan redrawn. We are again attaching “PLAN
EXPENSES SABRINA II PLAN 4175”. Finally,
the plan license ignores that THD outsourced our modification request to a 3rd
party selected by them.
Without again going over our complaint, a brief summary
follows: THD’s website actively promotes free plan modification estimates. See attached letter from THD stating “…you will
join thousands of builder and homeowners who have trusted us to modify their
house plans…”. THD outsourced our modification request to their highly
recommended 3rd party.
The modified plan was poorly drawn, THD agreed that the plan had issues
and agreed to work with us to have the plan redrawn, most likely by another
firm. After 52 days from when we first informed THD about issues with the
poorly drawn modified plan, THD informed us that they were not going to
do anything resulting in additional expenses to us as identified in our
complaint.
If THD had lived up to its promise to have the poorly
drawn plan corrected on a timely basis, there would have been no complaint. If
THD immediately informed us of their no help position, our complaint would have
been limited to the cost to have the modified plan redrawn
Excerpts from THD’s website include: “optimum customer
service”; “designs come with a 100% satisfaction guarantee”; “our commitment to
honesty, responsiveness and customer support long after your purchase is made”;
“THD will support you through the entire home building process whenever your
builder needs assistance”. After a
review of our complaint, one can decide if THD lives up to its website
statements.
It would appear from Ms. C[redacted]’s reply to the Revdex.com, that
rather than negotiate a settlement, THD’s business model is to accuse a
customer of harassment for a well documented complaint, threaten legal action
and take no responsibility for their outsourced plan modifications. Our
complaint continues to be unresolved.
Attachments:
- PLAN EXPENSES SABRINA II PLAN 4175
- Letter from THD stating …”thousands have trusted us”
Sincerely,
[redacted]
TO: CT Revdex.com
Please note that all of the concerns from the [redacted]s were reviewed in-depth by The House Designers’ management team, the architect of House Plan [redacted] and the modification department and a detailed response was emailed on 6/26/15...
(see below).
The liability to review the house plans prior to construction, understand and work in accordance with local building codes, obtain proper permits, select materials (which may alter the original dimensions and details) and ensure proper plan updates to construct the home is the responsibility of the builder. In this case, the builder made recommendations that were not part of the initial plan purchase and as such, are his responsibility to facilitate and to notify the client.
Example: This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC code. The builder selected to have this converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturer. Changes like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which the builder should have explained to the client, especially since changes of this nature can mean additional costs to the client.
The House Designers is not responsible for the advice or assistance that a client receives from their local builder, architect, engineer or other construction professional for the methods that they use to build the home or the quality of their work, especially when changes to the original plan are recommended and implemented.
Compensation for their added expenses should be credited by their builder whose continual changes in construction methods and suggestions delayed the project and were never discussed prior to purchase.
The House Designers provided construction drawings to build a home that has been built hundreds of times throughout the country. The qualifications of the builder to manage this home building project from beginning to end is the responsibility of the client who contracted with him.
The modification department ([redacted]) admitted a minor error in calculation on their part and reimbursed the [redacted]’s for their modification fees on 7/9/15 in the amount of $680 and the [redacted]s signed a release (see attached).
Also, the following letter was sent to the [redacted]s which resolved the issues on The House Designers’ part.
From: John L[redacted] <[redacted]>
Date: Friday, June 26, 2015 at 11:38 PM
To: [redacted] <[redacted]>
Subject: [redacted] House Plan Purchase
Hello Mr. & Mrs. [redacted],
Our team has taken great care in reviewing all of the documentation that you provided in regards to your modifications for House Plan [redacted]. We’ve also taken into consideration and documented all of our conversations.
After consulting with [redacted] and having House Plan [redacted] thoroughly reviewed by our in-house architectural team we have concluded that the majority of your claims are due to alterations you had made to the plan at the recommendation of your builder.
Throughout your list of notes about House Plan [redacted], you refer to the plan as “unskillfully designed” (we are q**ting your builder [redacted]). This same house has been built over a hundred times from these precise plans. This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC code. You selected to have them converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturer. Changes like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which your builder should have made you aware of.Furthermore apparently your builder suggested further changes which may have compromised the integrity of the original plans.
I would also like to address your notes on the floor joist not spanning the 16-0’ as indicated. Upon review, no floor joists were discovered that are spanning the stated 16’. However, there are 2’ x 10’ ceiling joists that span 16’ which is well within code.
In regards to the plans scale, the original house plan files were correct, however the modified version of ONLY the foundation page was skewed in the “Y” coordinate only. The “X” coordinate scales fine. In other words, while reviewing the scale, the dimensions running right to left are fine. However, the dimensions running up and down the foundation plan are skewed and scale much longer than they actually show for a length approximately a 12” to 18” variance. The scaling issue was caused by the PDF conversion and was related to how the mod team had prepared the PDF of the foundation page for the final drawings. The distance stated at each dimension appear accurate and add up correctly. Please note most builders typically work off of the actual numbers rather than scale and those numbers were correct. It is imprecise to scale drawings and most experienced builders know this.
In regards to the lead time and delays: Upon review of the project notes and dates, we have put together the following timeline:
a. Contract executed with [redacted] (**) on 1/13/15
b. ** agreed to 3.5 weeks to provide a review set and 3 business days for finals upon acceptance of review set. Date of ** executed mod contract was Friday, 2/6/15. Review set was delivered on 2/11/15 at noon.
c. On 2/12/15, at the request of the clients builder [redacted], the client called ** asking for changes in the roof design. ** offered to create 2 alternatives to choose from and delivered them on-time on 2/13/15.
d. Client and builder confirmed new roofline on 2/16/15 and final drawings were sent on 2/19/15.
e. We are not certain whether this was your first experience in building a home, but delays due the inability of a general contractor to garner his subcontractors precisely when needed is well documented. Making changes midstream also hinders proper scheduling. We cannot be held responsible for such delays.
We are certainly not happy that you were disappointed with your building experience, however as for the requested compensation for the plans we will not reimburse you for these nor pay for any delays, or reimburse for hiring a local designer to do the truss and porch changes that were inspired by your builder. Please give me a call on Monday and I will be happy to go through any details or questions you have. I look forward to speaking with you soon.
Sincerely,
John L[redacted]
VP of Sales & Customer Service
|t. ###-###-#### |d. ###-###-#### |c. ###-###-#### |
The House Designers | 483 Monroe Turnpike, Suite 115 | Monroe, Connecticut | 06468
[redacted]
[redacted]
To summarize, every action was taken to assist and help rectify the [redacted]’s problems although The House Designers was not at fault and delivered a quality house plan that has been built all over the US without issue.
If you have further questions, please contact me directly,
Very Kind Regards.
Tammy C[redacted]
Chief Operating Officer
The House Designers
[redacted]
[redacted]
c ###-###-####
f ###-###-####
Review: In good faith, we purchased from The House Designers, LLC Sabrina II house plan #[redacted] with a modification they subcontracted to [redacted], Inc. The modified plan as well as the original plan had several significant building flaw issues that required corrections prior to building our house. We contacted John L[redacted], VP of sales & customer service, at the House Designers to register our complaint about the plan issues and he agreed to work with us to resolve these issues. We emphasized that the construction of our house would be delayed until plan corrections were made and that any delay would involve extra expense to us for extending our house rental lease, furniture storage fees, etc. Between May 8, 2015 and June 22nd, we received no communications from Mr L[redacted] despite several follow up requests. Fifty two days from when we first contacted Mr. L[redacted], he replied to us that his firm was not going to do anything although he agreed that they neglected to respond on a timely basis.In consideration of the issues with the modified plan, [redacted] agreed to reimburse us for $680 (half the cost of the modified plan). We had to go to another firm to have the plan drawn in a buildable format at a cost to us of $752. As a result of the failure of The House Designers, LLC to take action on our complaint and delay in responding to us, we incurred an additional expense (documented) of $4,481.We filed a complaint with the Connecticut Dept. [redacted] who made 3 attempts to contact The House Designers for resolution. The House Designers failed to respond to these requests. On its website, The House Designers promotes "optimum customer service", "designs come with a 100% satisfaction guarantee", "be confident that you're purchasing from a trust-worthy company who has strict requirements for plans sold", etc. From our experience, it is our opinion that The House Designers, LLc has questionable business ethics, misleading ads & unacceptable customer service.Desired Settlement: Reimbursement of additional expenses of $4,481 incurred by us as a result of The House Designers, LLC failure to handle our complaint on a timely basis. Documentation of these expenses as well as documentation of complaint history can be submitted upon requested.
Business
Response:
TO: CT Revdex.com
Please note that all of the concerns from the [redacted]s were reviewed in-depth by The House Designers’ management team, the architect of House Plan [redacted] and the modification department and a detailed response was emailed on 6/26/15 (see below).
The liability to review the house plans prior to construction, understand and work in accordance with local building codes, obtain proper permits, select materials (which may alter the original dimensions and details) and ensure proper plan updates to construct the home is the responsibility of the builder. In this case, the builder made recommendations that were not part of the initial plan purchase and as such, are his responsibility to facilitate and to notify the client.
Example: This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC code. The builder selected to have this converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturer. Changes like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which the builder should have explained to the client, especially since changes of this nature can mean additional costs to the client.
The House Designers is not responsible for the advice or assistance that a client receives from their local builder, architect, engineer or other construction professional for the methods that they use to build the home or the quality of their work, especially when changes to the original plan are recommended and implemented.
Compensation for their added expenses should be credited by their builder whose continual changes in construction methods and suggestions delayed the project and were never discussed prior to purchase.
The House Designers provided construction drawings to build a home that has been built hundreds of times throughout the country. The qualifications of the builder to manage this home building project from beginning to end is the responsibility of the client who contracted with him.
The modification department ([redacted]) admitted a minor error in calculation on their part and reimbursed the [redacted]’s for their modification fees on 7/9/15 in the amount of $680 and the [redacted]s signed a release (see attached).
Also, the following letter was sent to the [redacted]s which resolved the issues on The House Designers’ part.
From: John L[redacted] <[redacted]>
Date: Friday, June 26, 2015 at 11:38 PM
To: [redacted] <[redacted]>
Subject: [redacted] House Plan Purchase
Hello Mr. & Mrs. [redacted],
Our team has taken great care in reviewing all of the documentation that you provided in regards to your modifications for House Plan [redacted]. We’ve also taken into consideration and documented all of our conversations.
After consulting with [redacted] and having House Plan [redacted] thoroughly reviewed by our in-house architectural team we have concluded that the majority of your claims are due to alterations you had made to the plan at the recommendation of your builder.
Throughout your list of notes about House Plan [redacted], you refer to the plan as “unskillfully designed” (we are q**ting your builder [redacted]). This same house has been built over a hundred times from these precise plans. This plan was purchased with a roofing system that was clearly designed for use with a rafter system of which it met IRC code. You selected to have them converted to a manufactured roof truss system, which puts the liability of the roofing system on the manufacturer. Changes like this can affect the structural integrity of the rest of the home and require additional adjustments, which your builder should have made you aware of.Furthermore apparently your builder suggested further changes which may have compromised the integrity of the original plans.
I would also like to address your notes on the floor joist not spanning the 16-0’ as indicated. Upon review, no floor joists were discovered that are spanning the stated 16’. However, there are 2’ x 10’ ceiling joists that span 16’ which is well within code.
In regards to the plans scale, the original house plan files were correct, however the modified version of ONLY the foundation page was skewed in the “Y” coordinate only. The “X” coordinate scales fine. In other words, while reviewing the scale, the dimensions running right to left are fine. However, the dimensions running up and down the foundation plan are skewed and scale much longer than they actually show for a length approximately a 12” to 18” variance. The scaling issue was caused by the PDF conversion and was related to how the mod team had prepared the PDF of the foundation page for the final drawings. The distance stated at each dimension appear accurate and add up correctly. Please note most builders typically work off of the actual numbers rather than scale and those numbers were correct. It is imprecise to scale drawings and most experienced builders know this.
In regards to the lead time and delays: Upon review of the project notes and dates, we have put together the following timeline:
a. Contract executed with [redacted] (**) on 1/13/15
b. ** agreed to 3.5 weeks to provide a review set and 3 business days for finals upon acceptance of review set. Date of ** executed mod contract was Friday, 2/6/15. Review set was delivered on 2/11/15 at noon.
c. On 2/12/15, at the request of the clients builder [redacted], the client called ** asking for changes in the roof design. ** offered to create 2 alternatives to choose from and delivered them on-time on 2/13/15.
d. Client and builder confirmed new roofline on 2/16/15 and final drawings were sent on 2/19/15.
e. We are not certain whether this was your first experience in building a home, but delays due the inability of a general contractor to garner his subcontractors precisely when needed is well documented. Making changes midstream also hinders proper scheduling. We cannot be held responsible for such delays.
We are certainly not happy that you were disappointed with your building experience, however as for the requested compensation for the plans we will not reimburse you for these nor pay for any delays, or reimburse for hiring a local designer to do the truss and porch changes that were inspired by your builder. Please give me a call on Monday and I will be happy to go through any details or questions you have. I look forward to speaking with you soon.
Sincerely,
John L[redacted]
VP of Sales & Customer Service
|t. ###-###-#### |d. ###-###-#### |c. ###-###-#### |
The House Designers | 483 Monroe Turnpike, Suite 115 | Monroe, Connecticut | 06468
To summarize, every action was taken to assist and help rectify the [redacted]’s problems although The House Designers was not at fault and delivered a quality house plan that has been built all over the US without issue.
If you have further questions, please contact me directly,
Very Kind Regards.
Tammy C[redacted]
Chief Operating Officer
The House Designers
c ###-###-####
f ###-###-####
Consumer
Response:
Review: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: