Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/06/2025

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Leduc Designs and ********** Contracting were engaged to complete a house renovation project, commencing in January 2025 with an agreed completion date of March 17, 2025. However, the contractors were unable to meet the deadline and subsequently requested an extension until April 1, 2025, citing their involvement in another project. During this extension period, their presence at the site was minimal, with only two recorded visits.On April 1, 2025, the renovations remained unfinished, prompting the contractors to request an additional two-week extension. During this timeframe, their visits to the site were infrequent, occurring approximately once or twice. At the conclusion of the two-week extension, a discussion regarding the completion timeline escalated into a heated exchange. The contractor indicated that an updated timeline would be provided the following week, but no further communication was received until I reached out on April 30, 2025.Leduc Designs responded, stating that work would resume between May 28 and June 2, but they were still unable to provide a definitive completion date. On May 31, 2025, I formally communicated that failure to complete the project by that date would result in legal action and a request for chargebacks on three payments made via credit card. Following this correspondence, the contractors terminated the contract.I also requested the delivery of materials that had already been paid for; however, only a limited portion of the materials was provided.I have all documentation of our interactions and well as video footage.

  Business Response

  Date: 18/06/2025

  Regarding the recent complaint received from the Better Business Bureau on June 9th, 2025, on behalf of Ms. Sheikh, we would like to address the issues raised by the client. 

  Before we begin, we would like to bring to your attention the fact that the work performed for this client was not done at the address provided on her complaint, but at the following: 809 Brissac Way, Orleans. 

  Also, to provide you with greater details, please find attached pdf copies of correspondence sent to the client addressing these specific issues. We believe you will find all the relevant clarifications needed in those documents as you review the file. 

  On May 20th, 2025, a contract termination email was sent to the client. In our final correspondence with the client, we responded to concerns raised regarding a residential renovation project. We clarified that our company had consistently operated in good faith and in accordance with the signed agreement, which included a defined scope, schedule, and payment terms.

  Throughout the project, the client initiated multiple changes to the original scope, which we accommodated despite resulting in delays and additional coordination. It had been clearly stated from the signing of the contract that any changes requested after the project was approved would create delays and pressure on the initial timeline. We documented all modifications and their impacts transparently. Delays were also caused by rescheduled site visits, changes in material selections after procurement, and approvals pending client input.

  We addressed the client’s accusations of poor workmanship and unprofessional conduct, which we firmly refuted, citing comprehensive documentation and project records. We also expressed concern over unfounded claims that could damage our reputation as the client threatened us with legal action and chargeback for work already performed and completed. 

  Given the cumulative complications and a breakdown in both communication and the working relationship, we formally terminated the contract, effective immediately (May 20th, 2025). As a gesture of goodwill, we waived the final outstanding payment. We also committed to delivering any paid-for materials in our possession and cancelling unpaid, unprocured or items not received.

  This action was taken to conclude the matter professionally and responsibly, in light of ongoing conflict and communication challenges. 

  In this final correspondence with the client, we also included the following itemized list to answer the clients’ concerns (you can also refer to this in the attached pdf): 

  
  Payment Timing
  Your statement that “All payments were made on time, with no delays” is inaccurate. Additional work was added to the project scope, which altered the original payment schedule. This was discussed and agreed upon via email. The final payment was due by March 20, 2025. Given the project's ongoing nature at the time, we mutually agreed to accept a partial payment to continue work.

  1. 2D/3D Plans & Completion Date
     On January 2, 2025, it was verbally communicated that 2D/3D plans would not be necessary, as the layouts were not being changed. A kitchen plan was provided both to you and the electrician prior to installation. The March 16, 2025, deadline could not be met due to material delays and additional work requested by you. These changes impacted the timeline, and although a formal amendment was not signed, the extended timeline was discussed repeatedly via text and verbally.
     Refer to contract: p.17 (Tardiness), p.17 (Completion Schedule)

  2. Contractor Availability & Installation Delays
     As of March 17, 2025, the original schedule had projected project completion, and other client commitments were already booked. Our business must maintain scheduling to ensure continuity and responsibility to other clients and team members.
     While some materials were on-site, certain installations could not proceed until foundational elements were completed — for example, the kitchen backsplash could not be installed until upper cabinet modifications were done.
     Refer to contract: p.16 (Penalty Fees), p.4 (Material Breach, Section c), p.11 (Timing and Coverage, Section a)

  3. Request for Payment on March 22
     The communication on March 22, 2025, was not threatening. It was a professional notice that work would pause until the next agreed-upon payment was made. This date had been moved forward to March 20, 2025, following your request to expand the scope of work (e.g., stair renovations). A partial payment was made, and work resumed.
     Refer to contract: p.14 (Cooperation), p.17 (Tardiness and Completion Schedule)

  4. Allegations of Mismanagement
     All project hours, travel, and materials were tracked and documented. To date, no additional charges beyond the original scope have been invoiced. All received payments have gone directly to materials, labor, and subcontractors.
     Refer to contract: p.15 (Travel and Accommodation)

  5. Verbal Conversation on April 1
     On March 31, 2025, we communicated clearly via email that, moving forward, all correspondence would be in writing to protect both parties. Despite this, on April 1, 2025, a verbal conversation was initiated by you. At the time, we informed you that parts of the cabinets were scheduled to arrive, with an expected installation completion around April 15, 2025. However, this did not include the entire project, as other materials were still pending.
     Refer to contract: p.17 (Tardiness and Completion Schedule)

  6. Site Conditions on April 3
     When our team arrived on April 3, 2025, the site was congested with moving boxes and personal belongings, obstructing access to key areas. To ensure safety and proper work conditions, we allowed a week for the space to be cleared.
     Refer to contract: p.7 (Liability and Indemnity, Section e)

  7. April 16 Conversation and Allegations of Verbal Abuse
     On April 16, 2025, Alexis Désormeaux worked after hours (6:00–8:30 p.m.). From 6:00–7:00 p.m., a family member monitored him closely. Around 8:00 p.m., you initiated an in-person conversation, contrary to the March 31 written agreement. Alexis declined, stating clearly that he was there to work, not to engage in unscheduled discussions.No shouting or verbal abuse occurred, though voices were elevated by both parties at times due to the nature of the exchange. Alexis declined to give a fixed completion date based on prior negative reactions to previous estimates. The conversation ended when you mentioned legal action and refund disputes, prompting Alexis to respectfully gather his tools and leave the site.
     Refer to contract: p.20 (Force Majeure, Safe Environment clause)

  8. Disagreement with April 30 Work Summary
     The April 30 summary reflected the current understanding of the remaining work, based on updated assessments and site conditions. Delays and changes had been discussed with you multiple times.
     Refer to contract: p.11 (Timing and Coverage, Section a), p.17 (Tardiness and Completion Schedule)

  10. Impact of Project Changes on Timeline
      We repeatedly advised that additional scope items would extend the timeline. These discussions occurred verbally and in writing.

  11. Communication Regarding Electrician and Fixtures
      On January 31, 2025, Desormeaux Contracting sent a text message requesting that the electrician be scheduled as soon as possible. You responded with “I was speaking with him yesterday, he is not available until February 7th, but unfortunately, I am not available on that date, so he will be coming on February 14th.” This caused a 2 week delay in the project. When we initially requested their contact information to streamline communication, we were informed that they preferred to communicate exclusively with you rather than directly with us (the contractor and designer). Unfortunately, this arrangement led to some misunderstandings and contributed to delays in the project timeline. Regarding plumbing, when you were advised that new fixtures were required, you acted promptly, and Alexis confirmed their suitability. While the fixtures themselves were correct, the rough-in work did not align with the specifications required for proper installation. As a result, the plumbers had to custom-weld and adapt the existing piping to ensure a proper fit. This additional work introduced delays, as they needed to wait for specific parts necessary to complete the modifications.

  12. Staffing Expectations
      As communicated both in meetings and throughout the project, we are a small, growing business with limited resources. We do not maintain a large staff or carry additional payroll overhead. This was made clear from the start and has always been factored into our planning and timeline discussions.

  13. Third-Party Inspections and Permit Responsibility
      You referenced assessments by two independent contractors on April 16, 2025, claiming multiple building code violations and failure to obtain permits. Alexis was on-site that evening, and no such assessments, findings, or concerns were communicated to him at the time. This lack of transparency prevented us from responding appropriately and contradicts your contractual obligations. As outlined in the signed contract responsibility for securing all necessary permits rests with the client. Additionally, the introduction of third-party contractors without coordination or consent breaches the “Interference and Objection” clause on p.14, which exists to avoid exactly these kinds of miscommunications and disruptions.

  Refer to contract: p.10 (Client Obligations, Section b), p.14 (Interference and Objection)

  14.  Main Bathroom Leak and Water Damage
  You reported an unresolved leak in the main bathroom resulting in damage to the main floor ceiling. This issue was never brought to our attention prior to your written notice. Had we been informed, we would have responded accordingly. It is also important to note that you were made aware the bathroom was not yet fully completed at the time of your occupancy.

  15.  Kitchen Deficiencies

  Dishwasher: The quartz countertop was templated and installed by the contracted countertop company. Neither the countertop team nor the licensed plumber who installed the dishwasher reported any issues. This is the first instance we have been informed of a closure issue in your kitchen.

  Sink Installation: The apron-front sink was installed according to plan. If it had been incorrectly placed, neither the countertop nor the plumbing work could have been completed. The sink cabinet was modified accordingly, and new doors have been ordered as part of the finishing work.

  Refrigerator Cabinet: No specific dimensions or customization requests were made regarding the refrigerator opening. We informed you early on that we work with standard-sized cabinetry, and you accepted this condition. The cabinet has been in place since February 21, 2025, and no concerns were raised until now. There are also no specific code for a refrigerator opening.

  Cabinet Alignment: Cabinet adjustments were always intended to be part of the final installation stage. These are standard finishing tasks and were pending the arrival of the remaining components.

  Gas Stove: We did not handle or alter any gas lines during the renovation. The cabinet cutout mirrors the configuration of your previous kitchen. We were not notified of any gas-related issue or repair cost until we received your written summary.

  16.   Legal Threats and Chargeback Notices

  You indicated intent to pursue legal action and initiate a chargeback if work is not completed by May 31, 2025. In our May 9 email, we proposed returning to complete the outstanding work between May 26 and June 6, which you declined. You then issued a second ultimatum on May 16—outside business hours—setting a new deadline of May 18 and again threatening legal action and over $30,000 of chargeback. We responded on May 18, confirming receipt and stating that we would review your email by May 20 at 12:00 PM, following the long weekend. These repeated threats fall outside acceptable business conduct and violate our agreement. We take these matters seriously and will respond accordingly to ensure the integrity and safety of our team.

  Refer to contract: p.16 (Termination & Safety), p.20 (Final Paragraph)

  All outstanding paid-for materials have been delivered to the client as of June 3rd, 2025. An email confirming the delivery with picture proof was also sent to the client on June 4th, 2025.
  
  Based on all this information, the communication and relationship breakdown with the client and the attached documentation we are providing to you, we believe that we have tried all positive avenues to resolve this matter in a professional way. Before the final termination of the contract, we did provide the client with a timeframe that would allow us to finish the outstanding work. However, the client refused to work within our available time frame and countered with dates that were not open in our schedule.
  
  The client has been given options but chose to not work cooperatively to resolve this matter. In light of all of this, we still believe that terminating the contract was the best way forward. 

  Should you need further information, do not hesitate to contact us.