Complaints

This profile includes complaints for CSL Construction's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

CSL Construction has 2 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  CSL Construction

  212 Camelot Loop, Clermont, FL 34711

  
• 

  CSL Construction

  400 S Seminole Ave Clermont, FL 34715

  

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:10/31/2024

  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.

  Complaint against CSL Construction due to their unethical practices and unjustified demand for a cancellation fee after no work was completed for my property at *****************************************. On August 13, 2024, our tenant reported that carpet in the bedroom was wet, and there seemed to be a leak. *********** was contacted to identify the source of the leak, and a claim filed with the insurance company. On August 19, 2024, Roto Rooter visited the property. Instead of pinpointing the problem, the plumber from Roto Rooter conducted unnecessary demolition work, removing walls and carpeting, and disposing of materials, though never identified the source of the leak. Shortly after, *** reached out to discuss repair work. However, neither the property owner nor the property manager requested **** involvement. CSL appeared to have received the property details directly from Roto Rooter without permission, suggesting an unsolicited, possibly coordinated arrangement between CSL and Roto Rooter. **** representative led the property manager to believe they were working directly with the insurance company. *** provided a repair estimate ($23868) significantly above industry standards and far beyond what the insurance company eventually approved. Under the impression that *** was coordinating with the insurance company, the homeowner signed a contract with ***. Later, the insurance company dispatched a leak detector, we also sent an independent plumber, both quickly identified the actual issue as a leaking shower pan and a far simpler repair than indicated by CSLs scope. The ***'s estimate did not even involve with the true leaking area. Upon learning that ***'s estimate was rejected by the insurance company and that *** was not associated with the insurer, the homeowner opted to cancel. *** then demanded a 10% cancellation fee, and interest if not paid promptly, despite no work or materials being ordered. We view this cancellation fee was unjustified.

  Business Response

  Date: 11/04/2024

  Thank you for the opportunity to address the recent complaint regarding CSL Constructions services for the property located at ************************************
  
  At CSL Construction, we prioritize transparency, ethics, and professionalism in every project. We have served the community with integrity for over 15 years, assisting hundreds of clients through the challenging process of property restoration and reconstruction. We have extensive documentation, including signed agreements, emails, and text communications, that clearly outline our role and communications throughout the project.
  
  From the very beginning, we maintained clear and open communication with the property manager regarding our company, the process, and the timeline. This was to ensure complete transparency and alignment with the property manager and homeowner. *** was introduced to the property through industry-standard networking, which includes communication with parties such as ***********. However, our engagement was always independent and aimed solely at offering reconstruction services once an initial assessment of the damage was completed. We are contracted by the homeowner to help facilitate the process with the insurance company and advocate on their behalf to get their property put back together. Not once did we ever solicit or mislead them to think we worked with the insurance company. If the property manager came to that assumption that is solely based on her.  
  
  The signed contract that the complainant referenced was entered into willingly by the homeowner, following thorough discussion with the property manager and her urging *** to send it over to expedite the process. . The cancellation fee, which the complainant has raised concerns about, was clearly outlined within the terms of the signed contract. This fee helps cover the administrative, logistical, and time-based costs involved when a project is canceled after substantial planning and correspondence. We find this fee is justifiable, particularly as it adheres to industry standards and contractual agreements made with the homeowner.
  
  The claim that our estimate exceeded the insurance companys coverage is unrelated to our contractual obligations with the client. We provided an accurate, industry-standard estimate for the proposed work, which was based on the initial inspection and information provided at that time.  Estimates may vary from what insurance companies ultimately approve, as insurers often have specific guidelines or limitations in assessing repair needs and costs. Nevertheless, we adhered strictly to industry protocols and provided a scope that matched our initial assessment of the required work. 

  
  We are confident that, in all actions taken, CSL Construction has acted ethically and with the homeowners best interests in mind.

  
  Below is a timeline of our communications:
  
  August 27: A Roto Rooter representative contacted ******* to inform him that our business card had been left with *****, and she was advised we would reach out to offer assistance with the reconstruction aspect of the project.
  
  August 28, 9:28 AM: ******* called ***** for a discussion lasting 3 minutes and 45 seconds.
  
  August 28, 9:47 AM: ******* sent a text to ***** outlining who we are and explaining the steps involved in the insurance process.
  
  August 28: ***** provided ******* with the adjuster's contact information and asked him to send an estimate to the adjuster; ******* informed her that we could only engage with the insurance process upon being formally contracted. ***** requested that he send the digital contract for the homeowner's signature, and our office promptly sent it to her email as requested.
  
  August 30, 4:54 PM: ***** texted ******* to confirm that the homeowner had signed the contract. ******* replied that he would review it upon returning to the office.
  
  August 31, 9:23 AM: ******* texted ***** to indicate that the information and signatures on the digital contract appeared correct and that he would like to schedule an inspection for Monday (Labor Day) to expedite the process.
  
  August 31: ***** noted that the property is tenant-occupied and provided ******* with ********** contact information. ******* confirmed he could conduct the inspection between 10 AM and Noon.
  
  August 31: ***** mentioned that the tenant would be present during the inspection and requested that ******* assess the carpet to determine if it needed replacement.
  
  September 2: ******* informed ***** that the inspection had been completed and that new carpet would be required. ***** expressed her appreciation for the update.
  
  Following this, our office commenced work on your project, with our estimator preparing a comprehensive estimate that took several days to complete and review for accuracy. We have since maintained regular follow-ups with your insurance carrier from September 2 to October 15 and have provided ***** with weekly progress updates.
  
  We have documentation of all correspondence. Please understand that we have been working diligently on your behalf with integrity, transparency and honesty, despite the picture ***** is trying to paint. She has been dishonest and misleading with you, and incredibly rude and unprofessional in her representation of you. I hope this clears up our involvement.

  Business Response

  Date: 11/04/2024

  Here are the text messages from the property manager and our client representative. The property manager has been misleading with the homeowner and trying to use slander and cyberbully CSL Construction. We have asked the property manager to seize emailing CSL Construction as she is NOT the homeowner and our contract is with the homeowner and she continued to send rude emails using false statements. 

  Business Response

  Date: 11/04/2024

  At CSL Construction, we prioritize transparency, ethics, and professionalism in every project. We have served the community with integrity for over 15 years, assisting hundreds of clients through the challenging process of property restoration and reconstruction. We have extensive documentation, including signed agreements, emails, and text communications, that clearly outline our role and communications throughout the project.
  
  From the very beginning, we maintained clear and open communication with the property manager regarding our company, the process, and the timeline. This was to ensure complete transparency and alignment with the property manager and homeowner. *** was introduced to the property through industry-standard networking, which includes communication with parties such as ***********. However, our engagement was always independent and aimed solely at offering reconstruction services once an initial assessment of the damage was completed. We are contracted by the homeowner to help facilitate the process with the insurance company and advocate on their behalf to get their property put back together. Not once did we ever solicit or mislead them to think we worked with the insurance company. If the property manager came to that assumption that is solely based on her.  
  
  The signed contract that the complainant referenced was entered into willingly by the homeowner, following thorough discussion with the property manager and her urging *** to send it over to expedite the process. . The cancellation fee, which the complainant has raised concerns about, was clearly outlined within the terms of the signed contract. This fee helps cover the administrative, logistical, and time-based costs involved when a project is canceled after substantial planning and correspondence. We find this fee is justifiable, particularly as it adheres to industry standards and contractual agreements made with the homeowner.
  
  The claim that our estimate exceeded the insurance companys coverage is unrelated to our contractual obligations with the client. We provided an accurate, industry-standard estimate for the proposed work, which was based on the initial inspection and information provided at that time.  Estimates may vary from what insurance companies ultimately approve, as insurers often have specific guidelines or limitations in assessing repair needs and costs. Nevertheless, we adhered strictly to industry protocols and provided a scope that matched our initial assessment of the required work. 
  
  We are confident that, in all actions taken, CSL Construction has acted ethically and with the homeowners best interests in mind.
  
  Below is a timeline of our communications:
  
  August 27: A Roto Rooter representative contacted ******* to inform him that our business card had been left with *****, and she was advised we would reach out to offer assistance with the reconstruction aspect of the project.
  
  August 28, 9:28 AM: ******* called ***** for a discussion lasting 3 minutes and 45 seconds.
  
  August 28, 9:47 AM: ******* sent a text to ***** outlining who we are and explaining the steps involved in the insurance process.
  
  August 28: ***** provided ******* with the adjuster's contact information and asked him to send an estimate to the adjuster; ******* informed her that we could only engage with the insurance process upon being formally contracted. ***** requested that he send the digital contract for the homeowner's signature, and our office promptly sent it to her email as requested.
  
  August 30, 4:54 PM: ***** texted ******* to confirm that the homeowner had signed the contract. ******* replied that he would review it upon returning to the office.
  
  August 31, 9:23 AM: ******* texted ***** to indicate that the information and signatures on the digital contract appeared correct and that he would like to schedule an inspection for Monday (Labor Day) to expedite the process.
  
  August 31: ***** noted that the property is tenant-occupied and provided ******* with ********** contact information. ******* confirmed he could conduct the inspection between 10 AM and Noon.
  
  August 31: ***** mentioned that the tenant would be present during the inspection and requested that ******* assess the carpet to determine if it needed replacement.
  
  September 2: ******* informed ***** that the inspection had been completed and that new carpet would be required. ***** expressed her appreciation for the update.
  
  Following this, our office commenced work on your project, with our estimator preparing a comprehensive estimate that took several days to complete and review for accuracy. We have since maintained regular follow-ups with your insurance carrier from September 2 to October 15 and have provided ***** with weekly progress updates.
  
  We have documentation of all correspondence. Please understand that we have been working diligently on your behalf with integrity, transparency and honesty, despite the picture ***** is trying to paint. She has been dishonest and misleading with you, and incredibly rude and unprofessional in her representation of you. I hope this clears up our involvement.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 11/07/2024

   
  Complaint: 22495856
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  The response provided by CSL contains multiple inaccuracies that do not align with the actual events experienced by both my property manager and myself.
  Firstly, CSL acknowledges that Roto Rooter initially contacted you, enabling CSL to reach out to our property manager with reconstruction services. This acknowledgment contradicts Roto Rooters statement denying any referral relationship between the two companies. We are concerned about how our contact and property details were shared without consent.
  In communications with my property manager, ******* implied that **** role was directly connected to the insurance process, creating a clear but mistaken impression that *** was collaborating with our insurer. The property manager had no prior contact with ******* nor knowledge of his business card.  The tenant at the property can confirm that the property manager was not aware of Brandons business card prior to this unsolicited outreach. This unsolicited contact,facilitated by Roto Rooter, combined with statements implying a relationship with the insurance company, caused confusion and misled us regarding ***'s role.
  Furthermore, **** estimate and contract were based on the extensive demolition performed by Roto Rooter before the actual leak source was identified. Later assessments revealed that the demolition did not even address the root cause, making the original scope questionable. Despite failing to identify the actual leak, CSLs estimate more than doubled the amount the insurance ultimately approved. This disparity, along with the demolition by Roto Rooter that proved unnecessary, raises concerns about whether the scope of work and its justification were handled appropriately.
  Lastly, regarding the cancellation fee: although CSL cites administrative expenses as justification, this fee seems unreasonable under the circumstances. No materials were ordered, and the insurance company did not approve ***'s estimate. Given the unsolicited involvement of *** and the confusion surrounding it, we find it unjustified to hold the property owner liable for a cancellation fee.
  We request a response that specifically addresses these concerns, particularly CSLs rationale for the cancellation fee under these circumstances, and whether this approach aligns with reasonable business practices.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  **** Ke

  Business Response

  Date: 11/19/2024

  Good Day,

  I would like to begin by addressing the circumstances under which *** became involved in this project, as referenced in Mrs. *** recent message. Initially, a representative from *********** left our business card at the property and subsequently contacted our client representative, ******* *., providing him with the property managers contact information. Following this, ******* reached out to the property manager to offer our reconstruction services. This process is entirely consistent with standard industry practices, as it is common for contractors to refer other service providers who may be able to assist with specific aspects of a project. It is important to note that there is nothing improper about contractor referrals, and the sharing of contact information, in this case, was done in accordance with industry norms.

  Regarding the relationship and communication with the property manager, I would like to clarify that we have clear documentation, including screenshots of text messages, where we explicitly communicated that we could not engage with the homeowner's insurance carrier without a signed contract granting us permission to do so. It was never stated or implied that we were working for the insurance carrier. If the property manager misinterpreted the information provided, this should be addressed directly with her. Our communications with the property manager were transparent, and ******* made it clear who we are, the services we offer, and the process we follow.

  The estimate we provided was based on the observed damages and what would be required to repair the property, not on the specific cause of loss. While it is unfortunate that Roto Rooter may have misdiagnosed the cause, this does not impact our scope of work or the repairs needed to restore the property. Regarding pricing, it is not unusual for insurance estimates to differ significantly from construction estimates, as explained in the contract signed by the homeowner. It is also important to recognize that when dealing with insurance claims, negotiations on certain line items are often necessary. As construction specialists, we are tasked with presenting the required documentation to the insurance carrier for approval, unfortunately were never allowed to do on behalf of the homeowner before they hired someone else.

  Finally, the homeowners complaint appears to stem from a misunderstanding of the process by the property manager, as well as a change of direction from the homeowner, who indicated in phone conversations that they had hired another contractor for repairs. In our weekly updates to the property manager, which are documented in our customer portal, we were never informed of change in the cause of loss. It certainly appears the homeowners complaint with ************ service is valid, but that has no bearing on our agreement with the homeowner. Our cancellation fee, as outlined in the signed contract, is entirely within the terms agreed upon by the homeowner.

  In conclusion, *** has acted in full compliance with industry standards and contractual obligations. We have documented all communications, including text messages, weekly updates to the property manager in our customer portal, and a legally binding signed contract with the homeowner. We believe this complaint is a result of buyers remorse rather than any improper business practices on our part.

  
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 11/20/2024

   
  Complaint: 22495856
  
  Thank you for your response. However, I must express my continued disagreement with several points and provide clarification on the matters raised in your correspondence.
  While you assert that Roto Rooters referral of CSL was consistent with standard industry practices, the sharing of my property information and my property manager's contact information without consent remains concerning. Moreover, your acknowledgment of being contacted by Roto Rooter contradicts their denial of any referral relationship, leaving critical questions about the integrity of this referral process.
  Your claim that your communication with the property manager was clear does not align with her statements or the circumstances that followed. ********* assertions led the property manager to believe *** was directly affiliated with the insurance process, a misunderstanding that could have been avoided with precise clarification. While you have documentation of text messages, these alone do not absolve CSL of contributing to this misunderstanding, as the context and verbal discussions also played a significant role. The property manager has testified to being misled, which casts doubt on the transparency you claim.
  The estimate provided by *** was based on extensive demolition initiated by *********** before the actual source of the leak was identified. This raises concerns about whether the proposed scope of work was justified. While you state that differing insurance and construction estimates are common, CSL's estimate was more than double the insurance adjusters final approval. This excessive discrepancy adds to concerns about the accuracy and fairness of your scope and pricing.
  The assertion that the cancellation fee is entirely justified under the terms of the signed contract fails to consider the circumstances under which the contract was signed. The property manager, operating under the impression that *** was connected to the insurance process, urged its signing to expedite repairs. There were no materials ordered, no actual work initiated, and your estimate was rejected by the insurance provider. Under these conditions, enforcing the cancellation fee is unreasonable.
  Your suggestion that this complaint stems from buyers remorse is dismissive of the legitimate grievances raised regarding CSLs unsolicited involvement,misleading communication, and the excessive estimate provided. These issues are not a matter of hindsight but rather reflect genuine concerns about **** business practices.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  **** Ke

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/30/2024

  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.

  This company started reconstruction right around July 1st after water loss related demolition. They have replaced the tile on all the rooms of the house with the exception of the master bedroom and closet. Both other bedrooms had installation flaws on the tile work, one rooms issues have been fully addressed, the second room remains to have mis-leveled tiled and at least one hollow tile, the company has performed 2 repairs on this room after the initial installation. The main floor continues to have around 7 hollow tiles that I'm aware off at this time, mis-leveled tiles, uneven grout joints and several tiles with cosmetic damages. All of which the company has been aware off following the initial installation and they have now performed 7 repair attempts on the main floor for it to be in the current state with hollow tiles which I reported to them as repairs took place and they failed to correct the issue at that time. They have had a total lack of supervision of the work performed and continue to propose that they correct the issues they consider to be an issue when they consider them to be an issue, but their current track records proves that every time they do a repair. more issues arise from it. I have countless text messages and pictures that support my reasoning that they have been negligent in performing the repairs properly, they have been negligent to take the right course of action to rectify the situation and they have dismissed my concerns when they are presented and have proven to be very reactive and not proactive at all. After this many failed attempts they still haven't had any supervision on site or quality assurance methods and simply keep wanting to replace piece by piece as I watch my home get filled with dust even inside kitchen cabinets each time they attempt a repair and they have a complete disregard for my time and no consideration that this is an occupied home and they seem to simply see it as a job site that is being a nuisance.

  Business Response

  Date: 10/07/2024

  Mr. *******,

  I am not sure why we ended up here on BBB trying to resolve this, as my team has been in contact with you regularly on the small issues remaining on your project and have not been 

  We are eager to resolve the ongoing issues regarding your project as promptly as possible. Given the complexity of your remodel, which included two full bathroom renovations, layout changes, extensive tile flooring replacement, painting, and baseboard work, we anticipated a punch-out list of touch-*** and repairs as we approached completion.

  To ensure transparency, I would like to provide you with a timeline of the tile-related concerns. During the initial installation, we addressed several issues before entering the punch-out phase. In early September, as we neared project completion, our project manager, ******, met with our field supervisor, *****, on-site and identified six tiles that required replacement due to installation quality issues. We also removed the original flooring installer as his work did not meet our standards. 
  

  On September 10th, those tiles were replaced. Subsequently, on September 14th, you reached out to discuss additional tile concerns. In response, our General Manager, ***, visited the site to address your feedback and ensure we were meeting your expectations. During this visit, *** noted approximately 10 full tiles and 11 partial tiles in the main area of the home that needed replacement, as well as the installation of a closet organizer system.
  On September 25th and 26th, the tile installer returned to replace the identified tiles. Following this, you informed ****** and *** of additional issues that required correction. Due to the recent hurricane, our resources were temporarily stretched, but ****** communicated that we would review a plan for further corrections the following Monday.
  On September 30th, you communicated with *** via text. He suggested having the tile installer return in the afternoon to address the hollow tiles. However, you indicated that you were considering a refund instead of continuing with the replacements. *** inquired if you had a specific value in mind for the refund, and you expressed the need for time to consider it. *** then proposed sending ***** to handle the necessary touch-*** to the drywall and baseboards resulting from the tile replacements. When asked if there was a deadline for your decision, *** confirmed there was none. You mentioned a refund value of $8,797, and while we are unsure how this figure was calculated, *** suggested that $700 for the seven hollow tiles would be a more reasonable amount. Ultimately, the conversation led to *** offering a reduction of $2,093 if you preferred not to have us return to your home.

  We genuinely would prefer the opportunity to correct the remaining issues. Our contract includes a clause that grants us the right to repair and mitigate any damages. We understand that a project of this scale can be stressful, and we sincerely hope you will allow us the chance to send the tile installer back to replace the unsatisfactory tiles and our touch-up crew to address any resulting damage.

  If you would rather not have anyone return, we believe that the $2,093 reduction is a fair offer, especially considering that over 95% of your project was completed to your satisfaction. We truly appreciate the opportunity to resolve the remaining concerns.

  Thank you for your understanding, and we look forward to your response.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 10/07/2024

   
  Complaint: 22361559
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  To ensure transparency. Can you please list the number of times after the initial installation that you have had staff come out and perform repairs following the poor-quality installation performed by the original installer that was ultimately "removed" from the project? Can you list the number of tiles that have already been replaced after the initial installation?
  I have a minimum count of 7 different occasion and a rough count of around 50% of the tiles after the initial installation where you performed repairs on the poorly installed floor and to this date I still have inconsistent grout lines across the entire main floor, I have tiles with jagged edges, tiles with chipped/ missing corners, tiles that are not cut straight, tiles that are not level to one another, tiles that are hollow, tiles that don't line up correctly and tiles that have scratches all expanding through the entire main floor. I also discovered by accident that one of the bedrooms has at least one hollow tile as well. None of that is a reflection of a quality installation or a professional job which you have charged me for. I suggest you look at your installation fees and perhaps I you would know where my value comes from. 95% of the job as you claim is not the issue, the main floor installation is and I'm requesting the value you placed on it for a quality installation which you have not delivered.
  Each time you have performed repairs it has also led to other issues created by the repair attempt itself or reveled other workmanship issues and please keep in mind, you "removed" the original installer from the project because you recognized that their work was not good and their work extends across the entire floor, not just the 7 tiles that are hollow following the last "repair" session. I am not interested in having more repair attempts completed by your staff as your track records proves that there will be issues that come from it and you will not respond at the appropriate time to correct the issue nor will it be done correctly. I notified *** and ****** of additional issues that came up during the repairs while the repairs where still taking place and the decision made by your staff was for the installer to complete the installation you had tasked him to do instead of addressing those additional issues at the same time to minimize the overall chaos that my home turns into each time you send staff out to complete repairs that ultimately have led to more and more workmanship issues. I quote "I really need to discuss this further with our team as to a solution, I they remove these and replace we may continue to have the same issue". Only to the suggest I allow you to come back and fix what I told needed to be fixed while the fixing was actively taking place. 
  While you sit comfortably in your office or home, you are asking that I expose myself, my pregnant wife and two dogs to another round of tile being demolished and our entire home being covered by dust which has impacted our health, impacted my work and has costed us invaluable time and effort cleaning everything there is in the house time after time from dust especially given the fact that your staff hasn't covered as much a single couch while repeating repair again and again. 
  I simply have no confidence in your quality of work and you have your track record to thank for that and your decision making to support it.
  I stand firm in my decision and request and am more than happy to provide as many pictures or videos as I have already done numerous times.
  "Our contract includes a clause that grants us the right to repair and mitigate any damages". How many times and opportunities do you need? 
  

  Sincerely,
  
  ******* *******

  Business Response

  Date: 10/14/2024

  Mr *******,

  I understand your frustration and we are trying to make it right for you. I am fine with coming to some agreement here. However you are requesting pretty much the entire project to be returned to you over some repairs that need to be made. We offered $2500 refund and you rejected that as well. Where do we go from here? 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 10/24/2024

   
  Complaint: 22361559
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Reviewing our communications I could not find when and where you had offered 2.5k or where I have stated that I will reject that amount. That small increase from your previous offer is a step in the right direction but still a bit short from what would be reasonable compensation for the poor quality of work I have received given the fact that my request is for lesser amount that what you have charged me to install on the tile based on the only estimate you guys provided me with and what I paid for was a professional tile installation, the current state of the floor does not reflect a professional tile installation and that is after I requested that the entire floor be corrected due to the innumerable issues present, I have attached a picture to the response so you can see just how extensive the flaws in installation are. No matter where you look at the floor it becomes an eyesore due to how flawed the installation is. I told  ******, ***** and *** of my request to have the complete floor reinstalled and done correctly and have been very clear expressing my inconformity since the beginning with the quality of installation and you guys have continuously attempted to do patch work with has proven ineffective at least on 7 occasions. You have had several opportunities and I have granted you the "right to repair and mitigate any damages" on at leas t 7 occasions. Had I known this is the quality of work you guys do I would've gone elsewhere and I believe you guys misrepresented the quality of work you guys offer. My request remains at $8797.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ******* *******

  Customer Answer

  Date: 10/24/2024

  Hello,

  Are there any other resources you may be able to share with me that may help me in resolving this matter outside of a court or any advise/ guidance you may be able to share with me? I haven't had any luck getting quotes from contractors to repair the floor even through the use of your get a quote tool, only one business actually responded so far and I haven't received an estimate yet, and I haven't had luck finding legal consulting even trying to use the FL bar directory. Any information or insight of similar situations would be appreciated.

  Thank you

  Business Response

  Date: 10/29/2024

  Mr. *******,

  I am not sure where you are coming with 7 different times where we tried to fix tiles. I outlined the repairs that were made and communications about the repairs in a previous correspondence. I have offered a more then reasonable refund to you for repairs that need to be done on some of the flooring. As I mentioned previously we did a very large project for you and you were completely satisfied with all other aspects. It seems like at this point you are having buyers remorse about the additional money that you paid out of pocket to have betterment done. I say that because the amount you are requesting is almost the exact dollar amount that we charged you for these additional items which I have listed below.

  -Convert the guest bathroom tub surround to a walk in fiberglass shower unit

  -Delete your garden tub in the master bath and increase the vanity size while centering it on the wall

  -Replace Master shower with new tile shower and a new frameless shower door

  -Replace bathroom countertops with level 1 granite including top mount sinks(Customer to provide the sinks)

  I will come up to $3000 off total contract amount, this is my final offer on this. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 11/07/2024

   
  Complaint: 22361559
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  

  I'm not sure why you keep bringing things up that have nothing to do with the main floor tile installation. To be clear, my claim is that the quality of workmanship you have provided is poor and this is reflected by the current state of the floor and is supported by your work history and communications. 

  My request stands as $8797.00 and is more than reasonable given the fact that the entire floor needs to be removed and reinstalled by a professional to be able to correct the extensive deficiencies in the installation you guys performed and then declined to correct properly.

  Sincerely,
  
  ******* *******

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/06/2024

  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.

  Work done was July-September 2023.We Paid CSL a total of $62,000 for a kitchen renovation due to mold. They did cabinets, dry wall, paint, electrical, flooring and all accompanying details. After they were finished, we started noticing the floor was buckling at places. They came in a replaced planks about 3 times and the problem continue to occur. In the original quote they provided us (this was a partial insurance claim due to the mold), they stated they would flatten the floors where needed so this issue wouldnt happen. However, after many attempts of emailing them to come out and resolve the other issues with the flooring they refused. We hired a floor inspector to come out to inspect and found that the floors were incorrectly installed as they did not follow the installation instructions from the manufacturer instructions (they installed cabinets directly on top of the flooring which we had asked about before they did that and they said it was fine but apparently it was not fine. They also put caulking all under the baseboards so it is basically glued to the floors). I then submitted a claim with the manufacturer including the floor inspection and they agreed with the floor inspection and stated it was the fault of the installer. At this point, I do not trust the company to make the proper changes as they did it incorrectly in the first place. We would like a payment made back to us to **** the flooring properly with a flooring professional. They continue to tell us that we are being difficult, and it is our fault. There were plenty of other things that went wrong, but this is a main issues as it was a big ticket item. We got a quote from a flooring company and it would be between 8,000-10,000 to redo the issues they are unwilling to resolve.

  Business Response

  Date: 09/11/2024

  Hello,

  Below is an email that was sent to Mrs. ****** in May of this year.

   We have reviewed your recent request regarding the replacement of all the flooring. After careful consideration, we must respectfully disagree with the request. Our team completed the scope of work as outlined in our agreement, which you confirmed as completed by signing a completion form. It appears that additional issues, not covered under our warranty, have since arisen. Our original scope of work included the application of a small amount of floor leveling cement as needed, but it did not encompass leveling the entire floor slab. 

  Your initial concerns about the flooring installation were communicated to us via email on August 25th, and we addressed these during the punch-out phase of the project. On September 10th, you sent additional concerns via email, mentioning that the original issues were resolved but noted a chipped piece in the corner next to the newly installed areas, as well as some glue spots and another chip in front of the dishwasher. We promptly addressed these items as well.

  On November 6th, you informed us of a cracked plank near the back door, and we immediately ordered additional flooring. When we returned in January, you confirmed on January 20th that the flooring looked good and met your expectations, although you had concerns about the trash can pull. We clarified that the damage to the trash can pull resulted from misuse after our installation.

  In March, further issues with the flooring were reported, leading to a warranty claim with the manufacturer. Both the manufacturer and our reports concluded that the damage resulted from misuse. Regarding the insurance claim and the removal of flooring. Our quoted work, as detailed in the signed contract and scope, was completed as agreed. We do not see how the tile removed by another company relates to our contracted scope of work. 

  Our goal is to ensure your satisfaction within reasonable expectations. It is not feasible for us to replace all of the flooring when it was installed as you requested. All your complaints and issues with the flooring that you reported to us are a result of misuse in our opinion. Thank you for your understanding. We value your business and are committed to resolving this matter amicably.

  End of email.

  As you can see we went back out numerous times to make repairs to areas of concern in the name of customer satisfaction. We even repaired the trash can pull out cabinet because the children were misusing it. We fixed some electrical issues that Mrs. ******* father had tried to repair but ended up making it worse. Things got to the point where it just seemed like we were never going to make Mrs. ****** happy. 

  I have attached the report that we received stating that the floor is/was being misused. The issues stated by the report that Mrs. ****** produced have to do with the flooring being installed under the cabinets and caulked to the floor which is not allowing for proper expansion/contraction. I must point out that we only did those installation methods because they were repeatedly requested by Mrs. ****** and her Father, even after we made it clear that its not common practice and that we recommended against it. We were told that they know better. So we did it the way they requested. 

  Based on those facts that I just outlined, including the report from our flooring supplier, *** does not believe this is workmanship issue.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 09/11/2024

   
  Complaint: 22248868
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  
  I would like to address several points raised in the contractor's recent response.

  
  Unsubstantiated Claims: The contractor has made several accusations against me that are not only false but also unsupported by any evidence. To date, they have provided no documentation or proof to back up these claims. In contrast, I have submitted both an independent inspection report and a statement from the flooring manufacturer, which clearly attribute the issues to improper installation.
  -As an individual who is not a contractor and as someone who hired CSL construction to do work for us, we consulted with them at every step. The cabinets being installed on top of the flooring was brought up in discussion (not recored anywhere thus there are no official documented instances besides our word as the homeowner). *** said We see this all the time. Some people prefer it installed under cabinets, some of them like it installed around the cabinets. It is ok to do it either way. Thus they proceeded to do it with the cabinets on top. Which is ok to do, however they still did not install the cabinets in the proper fashion based on the manufacturer guidelines (wall install vs floor install). As for the caulking, this is false. As the homeowner, I came back to house every single day to check on the status of their work. When the caulking was put in, I called Hunter, the project manager, to come review. He said, Oh wow, they shouldnt have done that. There was never a response after this nor was it resolved. Again, I have no proof of this as it was phone calls however, this is our statement. 
  -Stating that Owners father was involved with electrical issues: false. Referred to father was not contracted to do any electrical work. The electrical work done by **** sourced out contractors was done per our need and we paid them for their work. I am unsure why this is included in this claim as this claim is for a flooring installation issue. 
  -Pull out cabinet issue: false. The CSL  work crew (sourced out work) as well as the project manager assessed the pull out hardware. The crew screwed temporary shims under the bracket that pulls out and said they would relay information to CSL mangers (photo included). Via phone call ******, the project manager, first denied that it was the wrong pull out hardware stating it is not soft close. Then later in a phone call, he confirmed it was the wrong one installed. As the homeowners, we stopped trying to ask them to fix this issue as it was clear they no longer wanted to assist. I am unsure why they are mentioning my children broke this. My children were all toddlers and couldnt even open it because it was installed improperly. 

  
  Professionalism: I have made every effort to handle this matter respectfully and in good faith. However, the contractors response has been unprofessional and includes unwarranted accusations, which detracts from the focus of resolving the actual issueincorrect installation of the flooring.
  
  Focusing on the Facts: I would like to reiterate that my concerns are based on documented facts, including the inspection report and the manufacturer's findings. I am simply requesting that the contractor take responsibility for the improper installation, as confirmed by third-party experts. They have shown no proof of us requesting nor stating how to do their job. Thats why we hired them. The facts are included in the inspection stating: 
  Close inspection showed lack/no expansion space which are contributing factors
  Ledging is consistent with damage made during replacements (done by CSL as shown in their email and shown in attached photo) 
  Please see attached inspection for all details. 

  
  I hope we can refocus the conversation on resolving this matter in a professional and fair manner, based on the documented facts.
  Thank you for your continued assistance.
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  **** ******

  Business Response

  Date: 09/19/2024

  Mrs. ****** you have your "facts" and we have ours. You stated everything in my previous response is hearsay, however everything in your latest response is the same. You have no evidence of what was said and what wasn't. We could go around and around forever. We have our report which we submitted, we do not feel we are responsible.

  With that being said, I will issue a refund of $1500 to you. The refund will be issued after we sign a documents that include a non-disparagement clause and releases CSL from all liabilities and any warranty. The non-disparagement clause includes removing previous negative reviews from ****** and other platforms. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 09/26/2024

   
  Complaint: 22248868
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  While I appreciate the offer of a partial refund, I believe the amount does not adequately cover the costs necessary to correct the flooring installation issues, as documented in both the independent inspection report and the manufacturer's findings.
  Additionally, I do not believe it is appropriate to request the removal of reviews in exchange for a refund. Reviews are meant to provide other customers with honest, factual accounts of work quality and service, and I have the right to share my experience.
  I am willing to discuss a reasonable refund that fully addresses the costs to repair the flooring, but this cannot be contingent upon the removal of reviews or a non-disparagement clause.
  
  Thank you for your time, and I hope we can resolve this matter fairly.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  **** ******

  Business Response

  Date: 10/02/2024

  Mrs. ******* I am not sure where to go from here. You have your opinion and we have ours. Nothing that we say, or that you say is going to change each others opinion at this point. We are working against our beliefs and trying to come to some sort of compromise here. We made an offer that we feel is fair and we are ready to put this behind us. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 10/04/2024

   
  Complaint: 22248868
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  
  CSL Construction, 
  Thank you for your response. I understand that we have differing perspectives on this matter, but my position is based on documented evidence, not opinion. The inspection report and the manufacturer's findings clearly show that the flooring issues are a result of improper installation.
  I am still open to reaching a resolution that fairly addresses the costs to repair the damage, without any requirement to remove honest reviews or sign a non-disparagement clause. If you're willing to reconsider, I would be happy to work toward an agreement that reflects the actual costs to rectify the problem.
  Thank you for your time, and I hope we can resolve this professionally.

  
  Sincerely,
  **** ******