How to resolve a roofing contractor issue

Parent Cafe
21

@igloo:
It is why it is important to get the breakdown, then. I don’t agree with the people who say “well, you negotiated the price before the contract was executed”, that price was based on the original expectations of what the job would take, not what actually happened. As others have pointed out, in construction there are plenty of cases where a contractor can charge you more for things they couldn’t forsee, for example if they pulled off the shingles and found the sub roofing was rotted, they had no way of knowing that. I once had a driveway done that was concrete that we wanted to be turned into an asphault driveway, and when they broke up the slab they found that half the driveway was poured to 8" depth (standard slab is 4"), and in good faith I negotiated payment for that extra cost.

It should be the same way the other way, if the contractor finds the job was less than he thought, in good faith charging the original price would be both unethical and also a good way not to get many more jobs. It is one thing if you change the nature of the contract (known as a change order), contractors charge a lot for those, make a lot of money out of them, but this was a case where the contract was negotiated in good faith based on services rendered, and you have every right to question the bill. I don’t think the 1/3rd reduction was necessarily too little (I couldn’t tell you that even if I looked at your roof), but asking him to itemize how it comes down to price X is not an unusual request. He should be able to break that down, like as originally spec’ed it was a 4 man day job (2 men 2 days), and it turned into 1, and show you the cost differential (ie if they bill each person for a day at 200 dollars, the savings would be 400 bucks).

With insurance, it could be that because he originally billed it at 2 days, he had to pay for 2 days insurance, but he should be willing to show you that, explain it. If he bought 30 rows of shingles, and only used 7,he might say “I can’t return the shingles”, but the other 23 rows could well be used on another job where they use a similar type, so you at least know what to argue. Estimates are not done out of the sky, contractors looking at a job know how many square feet of shingles they will need, the ice dam material, nails, they know how long it should take and believe me, unless the guy just decided to hang out a shingle, they know, and if the job took significantly less time they know how to bill that out. I have seen situations like yours where the contractor pulled one of the older cop outs in the book, that the sub contractor was responsible for what happened and would have to give you a breakdown, but that is BS, in a job like that that is the main contractor’s job to break it down for you and also be willing to negotiate on the price, and if he doesn’t, then to me he is dishonest (and I am not speaking out of not knowing, 2 of my uncle’s were GC’s so I know how the business works, plus have dealt with it as a customer). If he can show you that at your price he was able to save 1/3rd by the job being smaller, fine, but you have a right to an explanation.If the guy resists, tell him your next step will be to call the state agency responsible for licensing contractors and file a formal complaint, it may miraculously open the doors, contractors hate when complaints are filed because it goes on their record and potential clients check that (or should).

22

perhaps musicprnt has negotiated contracts differently than I. When I have contractors negotiating, they typically allow in their contract for unexpected troubles such as sheeting. But if there is any chance it might be easier than expected I allow for that. And that is why I say (my Dad) felt the time for negotiating is before the job is done.
A part of negotiating is allowing for possible changes. Agree with msprnt though, a 1/3 reduction does not seem unfair based on what we know.

And if I understood the OP correctly, the contractor did in fact lower his price when he sent the bill, without even being asked. The Op just hoped for a greater reduction. A part of the difficulty here as I see it for the Op is that this job wasn’t paid “by the hour” it was “by the job”.

23

When I used to d.j. in clubs and private parties years ago, I had a base price for the first 2 hours at a party, then additional $ per hour after that. Some thought the base price too high- Just to play records? they might ask.
No. To buy the equipment with the quality and size to play their venue, to try to have with me all the songs your party might want, a van to transport the equipment, my knowledge of music in general, and the expertise to provide entertainment to people I probably have never met. While I featured the dance music of the day, I had a broad selection of music dating back to the 1940’s.
So it’s all that, in addition to my playing records.

24

@younghoss:
Most contractors I have dealt with come up with the price, and that is it, but in most jobs the estimate is pretty accurate (I am talking jobs like this one, a roofing job, rather than a big project like a home renovation). Technically in a contract like this if it turns out to be an easier job than they thought or cost less they don’t have an obligation to pass the difference on to the consumer unless that is specified, so you are correct, @younghoss, but many contractors will in something like this to maintain good customer relations. On the other hand, if a contractor bids a job where they estimate the cost of the shingles and suddenly the price of shingles goes through the roof, the contractor generally eats that unless they have it in the contract to be able to change the price if materials cost goes up, so it does work both ways and for every job a contractor makes extra money they also likely have jobs where their profit is less because of extra costs they can’t pass on.

Unknown problems are another story, it has been a long time since I took contract law, but I seem to recall that if something comes up that couldn’t be anticipated or known by those who undertook the contract (not a lawyer, this was business law), for example the contractor finds out the roof underlayment is rotted that in effect voids or causes the original to be amended, whether or not there was a clause in the original contract that covered this, it would be an unfair contract since one of the parties had no way of knowing the scope of the problem (any lawyers on here care to comment? Given this was from over 20 years ago and I am not a lawyer, it could be wrong).

25

In this case, the contract was breached by the contractor not by me. The contract was for doing 30 rows of shingles and they completed 7 rows. The question is what is the right price to pay. I am willing to pay a little more than what 7 rows would have cost. That’s what I told him when I asked him for a breakdown. I told him I thought 35% should cover the job but since it started out bigger I’d add 5% to share some of the loss. It’s possible 2/3 is the right price. That’s what the breakdown will show, I hope. I still haven’t heard back from him although he said he would send it right over the other day.

26

Either that or based on the contract, demand he replace the 30 rows of shingles, I suspect the discount price is to keep from having to do this. To be honest, I would never use this contractor myself if they pulled this on me, the fact that he hired a subcontractor who ended up doing 7 rows means either a)he thought it should be 30 rows and the sub contractor knew better,which that huge a difference is weird b)he thought it should be 30 rows and the sub contractor only did 7 because he didn’t feel like doing the 30 (or was paid for 30, but only did 7), which raises questions about the quality of the job, whether it will fix the issue or c)he specified 30 rows knowing it was only a small number to be able to jack up the price. Knowing how subs usually operate, if the sub was asked to replace 30 rows and felt it should only be 7, it was his job to call the main contractor, he shouldn’t have gone ahead like that, the same way that the sub contractor had it been contracted for 7 rows, decided to put up 30 and left the homeowner paying the bill. My uncle was a GC doing relatively substantial jobs, and when they contracted with the subs there was no such kind of discrepency, a gc or subs who operated like your contractor would be out of business pretty fast, construction is literally a nickle and dime business, margins are always at risk and seemingly small things can be costly:)

I wish you well, I hope you get this settled to your satisfaction, went through this more than a few times and it is not easy. At least the guy was willing to offer you a reduction in the cost, that is a promising sign.

27

This brings back memories. We had a similar roof repair on our first house we lived in when we got married - we were renting, but since DH was a family friend of our landlord, he had asked us to meet with contractors to show them the job to get 3 quotes. For us, a tree limb had fallen and caused damage. Easier to quote when they could inspect it while we were home.

Two quotes wanted to fix the roof all the way to the top, and the low bidder was just fixing around the dormer, almost exactly what you described - although we also had some gutter/downspout repairs, as well as the dormer window screen and sill. The cheaper quote was only 1/4 less than the others, because they explained their cost included mostly time to get there, and labor - working around the dormer angles is more time consuming than the straight shot regular roof. All of the estimates anticipated a 1-day job at most.

I think the contractor is being fair with a 1/3 discount, and you should consider yourself lucky it came in under budget. But I think the contractor should have given you the breakdown when he gave you the lower bill.

It sounds like you are handling this the right way.

28

This part of the story is strange. You didn’t hire a general contractor who then subcontracted the roofing out; you hired a roofer who subbed the entire job out. If I hired a “well regarded roofer” to fix my roof, I’d expect him to do the job, not pawn it of on someone else for a cheaper price and keep the difference, which is most likely what he’s up to.

If it were me I’d start by reading the contract carefully and, depending on what I learned, prepare to aggressively dispute the bill.

My argument would be:

“I hired you based on two things, your reputation and your recommendation, and you under-delivered on both. Someone else did the job, so your reputation in nonapplicable, and you recommended 30 rows of shingles and delivered 7, meaning your recommendation wasn’t followed.”

I’d propose paying a proportional amount of the original bill based on square footage.

29

@Sherpa, the OP has read the contract and is disputing the bill - by not paying and asking for the breakdown. I don’t think at this stage the OP needs to be any more aggressive at all.

There is agreement that the original contract was not followed, and the GC recognized this when he submitted the lower invoice. OP has reasonable questions about the job, and has asked the GC, who is following up.

If there is still concern about whether the full 30 rows should replaced - which I doubt, perhaps OP would want to call the town building inspector. This depends on whether or not a permit was needed and applicable for the job. But the building inspector would have a fair idea as to whether the job is done right, and if the reduced invoice seems fair. Chances are, the building inspector does not charge homeowners for minor consultations like this - this is part of their job, why taxes and permit fees are paid, etc.

When parties get too aggressive in disputes, IMHO everyone loses.

30

Let us know what happens! Roofers and plumbers!! Ugh. A good one is worth a Ton bc they are so rarely good AND honest!

31

I’m not sure the roofer has breached the contract, especially if he gave you an estimate for repair.
Obviously, he will claim the contract was to fix/replace/correct the damage and leak, and it took less repair than he estimated and offered you a reduced rate that reflected that. Do you dispute the leak is fixed? If you still have the leak you might be on more solid ground, but you have not told us it is still leaking.
I agree with musprnt that if you feel he has breached, you could call back and insist he do the last 23 rows, and insist on paying full price. Is that what you want, or is what you wanted to fix the leak? Is 30 rows the important part, or was fixing the leak? If he had found additional damage and replaced 34 rows, would you say he breached the contract and should only have done 30? Or what if he found 4 more rows damaged but stopped replacing at 30 because that’s what the contract said, would you then be Happy because he followed the contract? It works both ways if you want to claim a breach.
Op wants a greater discount than roofer has offered.

32

Some may disagree, but my position is that since there was no provision in advance anticipating the possibility of needing less repair than estimated, the Op should prob accept the discount freely offered by the contractor and be glad it took less repair and that a discount was offered. Looking at the other side of the coin, would the OP be happier if the damage had been more extensive, and at the maximum charge according to the estimate?

If the OP were to pay this bill as now presented, the Op then could complain to others: the Op could say the contractor was such a stinker! He was hired to come and fix the roof, they agreed on terms, he came in a timely manner and fixed the roof properly, but found he used some less material and time than expected, so the final bill included a reduction freely offered by the contractor. Wow! what a stinker! (Sarcasm). When a person words it that way, does it really sound so bad?

33

Igloo, technically, they only owe you the $ that they saved on not installing the other 23 rows, and that amount is not proportional to the number of rows of shingles. It costs them $ to send people out (gas, prorated insurance, etc.) - these costs are fixed no matter how big or small the job is. There is also this thing called “opportunity cost.” That’s why smaller jobs typically cost more per unit of material used than larger jobs.

If I were a juror deciding this “case,” I would side with the rooofer as don’t see a screaming breach of contract and agree with younghoss.

34

Thank you for re-stating that, Bunsen about the other fixed costs in addition to counting rows of shingles. I think that perspective has been largely overlooked.
Old Abe said : “A lawyer’s time and advice are his stock in trade.” and this principle factors into the roofers’ cost too, in addition to the costs Bunsen mentioned. The roofer may have used about 24% of the expected shingles, but shingles were not the only material, not the only labor, and not the only cost- so therefore not the only charge to the Op.

35

Younghoss, I think the estimate specified the exact repair: what was contracted was x # rows of shingles. If the did not do that, then the estimate was too high. Not proportionately (shingle by shingle), but overstated. They negotiated X and OP got X minus something. The roof is fixed, but not as agreed.

If I went to the dentist and he said I needed 7 crowns at $1k each, and then when he got I. There he decided I only needed 3, do I pay $7k? My teeth are fixed. Shouldn’t I be happy? No. You pay for work done. Had the contractor begun the work and found a rotted plywood base requiring a whole new roof to fix the problem, does he still have to stick to the estimate? No way.

36

But just like the dentist, you might not pay for one-seventh the cost of the anticipated 7 crowns.

37

@younghose, He gave an estimate for replacing 30 rows of shingles and capping the ridge, clearly stated in the contract. There was/is no leak. I just wanted installed ice shields over the dormers. That involved taking out shingles and replacing them.

BB, That’s why I offered to pay up to 40% for 25% job. Is that enough? We’ll find that out when I get the breakdown from the contractor who has gone silent for some reason.

I think my offer is fair. The contractor can counter propse if he doesn’t like it. I am open to hear his argument.

38

Sadly I don’t think you get bulk disbounts from dentists!! Lol!

39

@Iglooo - I agree that your offer is fair. For multiple reasons 25% payment for 25% the number of shingles is unreasonable. Still, as an opening offer, that’s what I would have proposed.

40

Probably I should have. I didn’t want to antagonize unnecessarily just as he upset me by offering 2/3. Had he offered 50%, I might have taken it just to avoid confrontation. I guess I deemed 2/3 was worthy of taking on.