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:25/06/2023

  Type:Service or Repair 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.

  Century installed new shingles & materials July 2017 - with a 10 yr workmanship warranty plus GAF manufacturers warranty. (House built Dec. 2001)
  April 2023 - roof leaked and damaged my dining hardwood floor, and a small area of interior ceiling - I contacted my insurance company, since I did not know the cause of water entry.
  April 28 2023 - contacted Century re: roofing concerns. May 1st ***** said they would be in touch; May 17th - still no response, until I stated by e-mail that my insurance roofers were coming next day - then **** called and sent **** next morning.
  May 18 2023 - Roof was inspected by independent roofing company (via my insurance company) and they showed me defective step-flashing workmanship that caused leaks; no evidence of window or siding water entry (I have report, but have not had an opportunity to share details with Century, because they are not responding to my requests). Century’s inspector on same date did not lift/inspect step-flashing - unfortunately, he was very quick to blame anything else: windows & siding.
  May 19th - left **** ******* voice mail requesting him to personally come inspect my roof and get in touch with me - no response
  May 24th e-mail to office ***** and **** (May 29th ***** responsed that **** would be in touch)
  June 19th ‘frustrated’ email - since still no response/action since May 19th!
  June 23rd 8:05am voice mail to **** cell phone + voice mail to office ***** “baffled that I haven’t heard back from them!”
  June 25th still no response/action from Century to inspect/correct workmanship, not to mention my floor damage.
  I do not want, nor should I need, to complete an insurance claim as a result of Century’s poor workmanship. But I need my roof and floor fixed ASAP.
  I am so very surprised at the lack of response/action - I trusted that my roof investment with a reputable company would result in great customer service - I’m disappointed that I need to reach out to *** in the hopes as resolving the issue.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 02/08/2023

  The claims brought forward by ******* against Century Roofing Ltd. are unwarranted and inaccurate.
  When ******* reached out to Century Roofing at toward the end of April 2023, it was unusual since we had performed her roof replacement in the summer of 2017.  Up until that point, she had not expressed any concerns whatsoever with the workmanship.
  
  Contrary to her claim that the first correspondence we had was on May 18, 2023, I contacted her by phone in the early part of May while she was on vacation to obtain a sense of what was going on with her roof. This is when she informed me that she had excessive water damage.  At this point, I informed her that it is quite unusual to  experience water damage and attribute it to the work that had been carried out six years prior.  Again, up until this point she had not experienced any issues with the roof we had replaced.
  
  In early April 2023, we had a significant weather event and an ice storm occurred in the Ottawa area.  The result was widespread and significant damage to trees, and houses and buildings were covered in sheets of ice.  In speaking with the client, I inquired if she had experienced the issues only after the ice storm, which she confirmed to be the case. Up until the time of this storm, she had no issues with our workmanship. Regardless, I told her that I would send my service technician (****) to assess the situation.
  
  Once ******* returned from her vacation and called me, I followed through and sent the technician to inspect the roof. At which point, he conducted a thorough review and was unable to find or identify any issues.
  
  Following that, her insurance company sent their preferred roofer who is a direct competitor and the individual who perform the inspection (*** ******) is a former employee of ours. This is not an independent nor neutral contractor and as such, his assessment should not be taking into consideration. It is clear, this is a case of ******* and her insurance company trying to pass the buck on to someone else.
  
  At Century Roofing Ltd, we pride ourselves on customer service.  I responded to the customer’s concerns and followed up by sending my service team to further investigate. It is most unfortunate that she experienced issues, but I am confident it was a result of the ice storm, and not with our workmanship. If it would please the complainant, Century Roofing Ltd. is willing to return to the property in question to perform a water test to substantiate this claim.
  
  
  Thank you,
  **** ******* 
  Century Roofing & Siding 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 14/08/2023

  I REJECT Century’s resolution plan as follows:

   

  There are so many issues with Century’s response and proposed resolution that it’s difficult to know where to start.

   

  Let’s go right to the resolution proposal: “If it would please the complainant, Century Roofing Ltd. is willing to return to the property in question to perform a water test to substantiate this claim.”

   

  It is absolutely premature to do a water test on my roof – a roof where I have received reliable information identifying workmanship/leak issues = a compromised roof.  While it is obvious that Century doesn’t believe there is a problem, as an experienced roofing company, they should know better than to suggest a water test to prove/disprove a leak claim.  Do they really want to risk causing more water damage which will increase the scope of their repairs?

   

  The steps I expect from Century are as follows:

  1. Century (**** or ******* must be present, since ****’s inspection was not sufficient) to return to my house and do a more comprehensive and detailed inspection of the wall flashing and step flashing, along with valley area.
  2. Have an experienced roofer repair the problem areas, upon which I will inspect and possibly have an independent roofer of my choice verify the repair workmanship.
  3. Pay all inspection costs which have been incurred as a result of Century’s delay to inspect, and Century’s failure to resolve.

  1. On April 28^th, Century received my request for inspection by phone (*****) and by e-mail with photos to ***** & ****, along with my husband’s cell phone number.  “Contrary” to ****’s claim that he contacted me while I was on vacation and that I ‘then’ informed him of the damage, this was not possible – since I was in Europe without access to my Canadian Cell phone service.  I also have an e-mail from May 17^th (at which time I was not escalating the lack of communication/response) where I was simply asking ***** for assistance in reaching ****, since neither I nor my husband had heard from **** after my April 28^th e-mail - I’d only ever received *****’s May 1^st response stating that “we”/Century would be in touch.
  2. The only communication I received after my May 19^th request for a 2^nd inspection was an e-mail on May 29^th from ***** stating that “**** will reach out to me as soon as possible” (responding to my May 24^th e-mail regarding no response from May 19^th).  Subsequent voice mails and e-mails were all ignored.
  3. FEES incurred as a direct result of Century’s delay/failure to respond:

  3.3.1       **********/****** Inspection fees – waiting for direct pay-out invoice, since this does not warrant an insurance claim.

  3.3.2       2^nd Roof inspection $250+HST

  4. Pay the repair costs to refinish my floor.
  1. Independent flooring contractor rough quote of $3,220 incl. HST

   

   

  My insurance company and their subsidiary ********** acted in good faith, and ********** uses ****** ******* for their inspections/repairs because of their roofing expertise and quality workmanship.  There is no reason for me to distrust their inspection; it is actually quite the opposite - there are many reasons why I trust their inspection: 1) I followed ****** *******’s inspector throughout his inspection, and he showed me exactly where the problem areas were, along with other areas that were in good condition and which did not need repair. 2) ****** and Century have both been in the roofing business for more than 40 years, and both have excellent reviews and A+ *** ratings – Century’s statement that ******’s inspection should not be taken into consideration because they are a direct competitor is ridiculous, and because the inspector is a previous employee, where the industry likely has previous employees at every roofing company in Ottawa is equally ridiculous.  3) ****** has no conflict of interest here, because I did not authorize them to do any repair work – because I had a 10 year warranty with Century and was confident they would respond to a follow-up request to do a more thorough inspection – ******’s only profit to this point may have been for the inspection which was coordinated through my insurance company.

   

  Century is assuming that ****’s inspection was truly “thorough” – and I can understand how a company’s first reaction/response would be to believe their employee - but this is where we clearly disagree.  I believe Century has made 2 critical errors: 1) improper step-flashing installation in 2017, as identified in ******’s inspection, and 2) a poor inspection that did not inspect the wall flashing and step flashing, and thus did not discover the real source of the leak.  Unfortunately, and to my regret after the fact, I did not follow **** as closely as ******’s inspector, but I am pretty sure that **** did not lift the metal wall flashing to inspect the step flashing – if he had, he would have discovered the problem areas.  ****’s assessment was that water must have entered via my windows/siding, since he could not see any obvious roof damage; yet when **** tried to show me where water could have entered my walls specifically between the window’s J-channel and the siding, he couldn’t separate the siding from the J-channel to prove his theory.  It was at that point that I was not confident in ****’s assessment, so was relieved that my insurance company was coordinating an independent inspection, and thus I asked very detailed questions to ******’s inspector.

   

  While it may be unusual to experience water damage related to work carried out 6 years prior, I submit that it is clearly not impossible as a direct result oF my situation.  This is supposed to be the benefit of contracting a reputable roofing company with a 10 year warranty.  Century clearly has an obligation to repair any areas of the roofing they installed that have workmanship issues, and the resulting interior damage. Century’s statement and information “that it is quite unusual to experience water damage and attribute it to work carried out 6 years prior” with the intent to discount my claim as false is truly disappointing.

   

  The April storm presented a unique situation that doesn’t happen often on Ottawa rooftops.  During this storm, the ice accumulation on the roof appears to have modified the rain waters “path of least resistance”, so instead of flowing in the typical direction immediately down the slope of the roof, the rain water seeped under the metal wall flashing where it was then able to penetrate the walls of the house because of gaps/workmanship issues in the underlying step-flashing.  As I’m sure Century is aware, the step-flashing is essentially the last layer of roofing protection at the interface between the roof and the wall.  Yes, this occurence may be unusual, but that doesn’t make it impossible, nor does it mean that the newly discovered workmanship defects because of an unusual event should be ignored at 6 years of a 10 year warranty!

   

  As per my voice mails to ***** and **** – it truly baffles me why Century has failed to respond to my requests for **** to do a 2^nd inspection.  People make mistakes: installers, inspectors, service technicians, humans.  A company who “prides themselves on customer service” within a customer’s 10 year warranty period should be open to the concept that perhaps mistake(s) did occur and re-visit the customer and listen to their very specific items of concern, and once they discover that the customer’s claim is valid, follow through on their claim of “taking pride on customer service” and repair the roof and the resulting damage to my floor.  The ceiling water damage is minimal and I will repair that area myself – I am not, however, skilled in hardwood floor refinishing, nor should it be my responsibility to repair it (personally or thru insurance), as it is a result of Century’s workmanship defects.

   

  Up until this *** complaint (25JUN2023), I had not shared the details of ******’s inspection with Century roofing, so **** didn’t even know what he was avoiding/ignoring, except me and my repeated requests for a 2^nd inspection.  I was waiting to have a conversation with **** expecting in good faith that he would return to address the issues.

   

  As a result of Century’s attempt to discount ******’s inspection, and my full faith that ******’s inspection is accurate, I have requested another inspection from a different company.  It is ridiculous that I have to spend time, energy and money further documenting Century’s poor workmanship, when they could have easily returned to my house to perform a 2^nd inspection, as originally requested in May 2023.

   

  Century’s statement/accusation that I and my insurance company are “passing the buck” to someone else (Century) is another interesting aspect – I would state that it is in fact Century that is “passing the buck” of their faulty workmanship onto me, the customer, because they can’t possibly imagine that there are workmanship issues that could be discovered at year 6 (with 10 year warranty), that their technician may not have done a truly thorough inspection, nor that ****** performed and independent, and thorough inspection.

   

  If Century would simply return to re-inspect my roof, they would see that ******’s inspection and my claims are valid.  This is what I’ve been requesting, along with the repairs, since May19th 2023.  It seems all too obvious that Century has chosen to deny my claims, because by denying the claim, they believe they can avoid the roof and interior repair costs.

   

   

   

   

  ******* ***
  
  ***********************
  
  ** ***** ********