ARAC Roof it forward

ARAC Roof it forward

Reviews: 1

1 RATING
(1)

Total views: 4894

Published: 16 September 2020

Posted by: Anonymous

The highlight A quote from the roof inspection report: “In accordance to the manufactures warranty, items in Boldface appear to be conditions found on this home. Considering the conditions found on this home it is questioned if this roof would actually be covered under the warranty. ” Story:The ARAC sales person Mel Takekawa convinced me a defect of the roof–‘high nail’, which means the nails were not put in the right position of the shingle and therefore, the weight of the shingle could not be held by the nails properly and will fall over time under gravity. The new roof ARAC put on ended up having the same defect but to a more serious extent—the nails were not there! If the right number of nails needed to hold a shingle is 6, ARAC put on 3, 2, or 1. I have a professional inspector inspected the roof and a long list of other serious problems was found. ARAC failed to fix the problem after 2 attempts and 2 missed appointments. Moreover, the team head of the workers was rude and offensive when they were asked to come back, This team head apologized with Mel Takekawa with the explanation being his righthand guy just died the night before of kidney failure at a young age. No contractors around Atlanta was willing to fix it and they said it is better to just replace it. I eventually found someone from New York to fix only the part that showed up in the inspection report. Please note that not all the problems could be found in a roof inspection after the roof is already installed. The following is the list of problems copied-pasted from the inspection report: The inspection report found the following problems with the roof a) Missing Nails. several nails missing in various locations. Some shingles were secured with just two nails, one on each end of the shingle. Many of the shingles were not nailed on the ends. This is in direct violation of the manufactures printed installation instructions. b) Nails above the “nail line”, in direct violation of manufactures instructions; c) Nails installed crooked; Many of the nails found in the shingles were observed to have been installed crooked, they penetrated the surface of the shingle and were improperly installed per the manufactures instructions. d) Shingle torn or damaged. One of the shingles on the back valley had been torn or damaged and then field repaired and not replaced. This is a damaged shingle and it is questionable it would be covered as a part of the manufacture warranty. e) The new roof is in conditions specified by the manufacturer’s warranty that would void the warranty. Namely, the roof is in such poor condition that it will not be covered by the manufacturer’s warranty. f) Flashing and brick connection not properly secured. Flashings around the home at the roof and brick connection are currently secured and sealed in place utilizing just a caulking compound. This violates not only the Brick Institutes guidelines for proper brick and roof connections but also the American Roofing Institutes guidelines for proper brick and roof connections. g) Self adhered membrane missing. The plaintiff stated that there would be a self adhered membrane installed around every roof boot. It is nowhere to be found h) The plumbing roof boots on the back of the home were improperly installed. The shingles did not extend down over the side flanges of the boot past the roof cut out. Per manufacturers installation instructions for the plumbing boots states shingles should overlap the side flanges of the boot past the cut out in the roof sheathing, should be installed flush to roof deck and all exposed nail heads properly sealed.I ) Roof boots installed inappropriately. One of the roof boots was noted as having been installed with the back edge pushed down to catch the edge of the plumbing vent. Most jurisdictions in Georgia have this height listed to be a minimum of 12 inches above the roof surface to facilitate the installation of the boot. This should have been altered or corrected for proper application of the boot flange. Shingles cut so buckling did not show; j) Buckled chimney cap. The new chimney cap was noted as buckled and ponding water. This is supposed to be designed and installed to shed water and divert water over the edges of the chimney. This current condition the ponding water can develop a leak at the caulked joint around the flue or eventually deteriorate the metal and leak into the chimney chase,k) Improperly installed rain diverters and missing rain diverters Analysis and Conclusion:If you are to hire ARAC, you need to keep in mind that in Georgia, there is a legal loophole that a contractor can put a ‘mechanical lien’ on your house without any reason. The judge can rule against statute in favor of any side she feels fit. Namely, legal combat is not worth it in many cases and many clients just swallow the loss and pay to save the trouble. I wish you do not need to face that choice.

Rate and Write a Review on ARAC Roof it forward

Sending

Be an Informed Consumer

An informed consumer is capable of making sensible decisions, gains insight about a business prior to an interaction or transaction. Our newsletter provides resources and information that informs you, the consumer. of such things as consumer rights and protection.