Complaints

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

close

Find a Location

E-Z Roofing & Construction, LLC 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

• 

  E-Z Roofing & Construction, LLC

  4199 Crosstowne Ct Ste 2 Evans, GA 30809-6139

  
• 

  E-Z Roofing & Construction, LLC

  3049 River Watch Pkwy Augusta, GA 30907-3247

  

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:05/12/2025

  Type:Product 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.

  Seeking help from BBB regarding shameful sales practices and refusal to refund monies paid for services NOT rendered. This complaint names Jeremy W*****, at EZ Roofing of Augusta GA. I am ** yrs old and was taken advantage of. $721 was paid 2 ½ months ago and no roof work done. Roof damage due to Hurricane Helene, requested estimates for roof replacement. Appointment set with Jeremy on 3/6/25 @ 9:30am. He came on 2/26/25. I did not understand technical terminology and could not read poor quality paperwork. Jeremy pressured me to sign and give deposit of $721 (check #****) for roofing repair. He did not go over the paperwork or explain I had 3 days to cancel – he said he would send better copy but didn't. Was told someone would call in March to schedule the work date. For two months, I called to speak with Jeremy asking to set up appointment for roof repairs, and readable copy of paperwork. Finally, after no response, called again on 4/21/25 and asked for full refund due to lack of communication, and no attempt by EZ Roofing to schedule roof repair appointment. Jeremy said refund was $432.60 – deducting 20% of the full amount ($1,442). Told him this not acceptable would pursue legal options. Jeremy hung up on me. My roof has not been repaired and I would like my full deposit of $721 back. On 5/6/25 and 5/7/25, EZ office staff contacted me. Without my permission, they called relative in ******. They wanted to send him the $432.60 check. This relative is not the owner of the home. No service, or attempts to make appointments have been made. I would like my full refund of $721.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/12/2025

  Timeline and Factual Summary:
  Initial Contract Agreement (February 26, 2025):
  On February 26, 2025, our technician met with *** ******** at her residence. Present at this meeting were *** ********, her daughter, and a third party. After reviewing the proposed scope of repair work, *** ******** signed a contract authorizing roof repairs. A carbon copy of this signed agreement was left in her possession at that time.
  Follow-Up Request and Site Visit (March 3–6, 2025):
  On March 3, 2025, at 3:42 PM, *** ********’s **********, *** ****, contacted our office requesting a roof replacement estimate and asked to be listed as the primary point of contact. The following day, March 4, 2025, *** ******** herself called our office at 9:37 AM requesting the same. We promptly scheduled a follow-up visit and returned to the property on March 6, 2025. At this visit, our technician again met with *** ********, her daughter, and a third party. During this meeting, *** ******** confirmed her decision to proceed with the originally contracted roof repair—not a replacement—and no changes were made to the existing agreement.
  Right to Cancel and Scope of Work Disclosure:
  As clearly stated in the written contract at the time of signing, *** ******** was provided with a 3-day right to cancel the contract. No notice of cancellation was received within that window. Additionally, the contract clearly stated that due to current workload, all repair work was scheduled approximately 2½ months from the date of agreement.
  Request for Cancellation (April 21, 2025):
  *** ******** contacted our office on April 21, 2025, to request cancellation of the contract. At the time, Jeremy from our office attempted to speak with her directly, witnessed by another staff member. *** ******** became irate, yelling and accusing Jeremy of misconduct, claiming the contract was invalid due to her age and inability to read it. Jeremy attempted to inform her that she was next in line for service and that we would prefer to complete the work rather than charge a cancellation fee. However, *** ******** was unresponsive to this offer and abruptly ended the call.
  Follow-Up with *** **** and Refund Procedure:
  After the call, Jeremy followed up with *** ****, who confirmed that *** ******** had elected to hire another contractor who could perform the work more quickly and at a lower cost. *** **** requested that the refund check be mailed to him directly. Due to legal and procedural requirements, and because *** ******** was the contract signatory and deposit provider, we reached out to her for confirmation. Our office texted *** ******** on May 5, 2025 (see attached screenshots) and also placed a call, which she did not take. Her daughter subsequently returned our call and was surprised by *** ****’s request. During this conversation, she further accused our company of taking advantage of her mother and demanded that we hold the refund check while they pursued “other avenues.”
  Refund Issued and Contract Closure:
  As per the terms of the signed agreement, which clearly outlines a 20% cancellation fee to cover administrative, scheduling, and labor preparation costs, we calculated the refund amount accordingly. The refund of $432.60 was mailed to *** ******** via certified mail, along with a formal cancellation notice and a copy of the contract (see both attached).
  Conclusion:
  We categorically deny any allegation that E-Z Roofing & Construction or any of its employees acted inappropriately or took advantage of *** ********. The contract was entered into with full disclosure, witnessed by multiple individuals, and all parties had ample opportunity to ask questions, review terms, or cancel within the legal timeframe. All communications, including follow-up requests and the refund process, were handled professionally and in good faith.
  It is deeply unfortunate that this matter has escalated to a formal complaint. We completely understand that her home experienced minor damage after the hurricane, as we have been working diligently to repair the homes of many individuals in the same boat. We understand the inconvenience of a 2½ month timeframe for repairs, but it is unfortunately unavoidable, given the extent of the hurricane damages all over the CSRA. That being said, we maintain that our actions have been both lawful and ethical, and that *** ******** and her family were treated with the same respect and transparency we extend to all of our clients.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/17/2025

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because: EZ is not responding to the complaint. Why was there no
  communication with me and no attempts to make an appointment for the service? Why
  would Jeremy not respond to my many phone calls asking for a clear and more
  detailed breakdown of the job (roof repairs)? The problem is not that the work
  was to take place in two months, but that Jeremy did not have the courtesy to
  follow up or respond to my questions. Also, no where is it written on my copy about
  2 ½ months. Reference to Jeremy’s second visit to inspect and give full roof
  replacement is not part of this complaint. I am not satisfied with their response as they are not open
  to resolving the complaint. It is unfortunate that many untruths have been
  stated by EZ in order to justify unethical behavior. That being said, I have
  received the letter and check for $432.60 in the mail. I hope others will view
  this complaint against Jeremy and EZ. Maybe they will think twice about taking
  advantage of the elderly in the future.

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

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/19/2025

  First and foremost, we are deeply distressed and disappointed that such
  serious accusations have been made against our company. E-Z Roofing &
  Construction is committed to ethical business practices and transparent
  communication. We take claims of misconduct very seriously, and we firmly
  refute the suggestion that any member of our team acted unethically or
  attempted to take advantage of **. ********.

  Timeline of Communication and Events:

  02/26/2025,
  10:13 AM – **. ******** spoke with our office for 6 minutes regarding job
  details and repair timelines.

  02/26/2025,
  4:00 PM – **. ******** signed a repair contract during an in-person
  appointment, where her daughter (***** ******) and a third party were also
  present. A carbon copy of the signed contract was left in her possession.

  03/03/2025,
  3:26 PM – **. ********’s **********, *** ****, contacted us requesting a
  roof replacement quote and asked to be the primary point of contact. This
  call lasted 8 minutes, 54 seconds.

  03/04/2025,
  9:01 AM – Our technician, Jeremy, followed up with *** **** and advised a
  family discussion regarding the project direction.

  03/04/2025,
  9:12 AM – **. ******** herself called to request a roof replacement
  estimate, and we scheduled a follow-up appointment for 03/06/2025.

  03/04/2025,
  11:47 AM – We received a missed call from **. ********’s number.

  03/05/2025,
  11:50 AM – We sent a reminder text for the upcoming appointment.

  03/06/2025,
  9:30 AM – Technician Jeremy met again with **. ********, her daughter, and
  a third party. At this meeting, **. ******** confirmed she wished to
  proceed with the original repair contract.

  03/06/2025,
  2:06 PM – A hard copy of the roof estimate was mailed to **. ******** per
  her request.

  03/06/2025,
  3:16 PM – Technician Jeremy called *** **** to provide updates. No answer;
  voicemail left.

  03/14/2025,
  5:31 PM – **. ******** told Jeremy by phone that she had not received the
  mailed estimate.

  03/14/2025,
  5:33 PM – Another call was made to **. ********, and a new copy of the
  estimate was promised. Duration: 3 minutes, 32 seconds.

  03/17/2025,
  12:03 PM – Our office mailed another copy of the estimate to **. ********.

  04/21/2025,
  1:47 AM – **. ******** called to cancel the job and demanded a full refund,
  denying receipt of the mailed estimates. We informed her Jeremy would
  return her call.

  04/21/2025,
  2:15 PM – Jeremy spoke with **. ********, who was highly emotional and
  accused our company of wrongdoing. We reiterated that she was next on the
  schedule and that our intent was to fulfill the contract.

  04/21/2025,
  2:33 PM – Jeremy contacted *** ****, who stated that **. ******** had
  secured another contractor offering lower cost and faster turnaround. He
  requested that the refund be mailed to him. We explained that **.
  ********, as the signatory and depositor, needed to approve that
  arrangement.

  05/05/2025,
  2:43 PM – A text was sent to **. ******** to clarify her refund delivery
  preference. (Screenshots previously submitted.)

  05/06/2025,
  5:27 PM – We called **. ******** again to follow up; the call was
  disconnected.

  05/06/2025,
  5:32 PM – 5:34 PM – Multiple call attempts were
  made and either disconnected or briefly connected with **. ******, who
  accused us again of wrongdoing and stated they would not accept the
  partial refund.

  05/07/2025,
  11:30 AM – **. ******** responded via text, instructing us not to send the
  refund to *** ****.

  05/07/2025,
  3:35 PM – Refund check (less the 20% cancellation fee as outlined in the
  signed contract) and cancellation notice were sent to **. ******** via
  certified mail.

  05/10/2025,
  4:02 PM – Certified mail was confirmed delivered.

  We have addressed each claim made by **. ******** thoroughly and provided
  documentation throughout this process. **. ******** was informed of the 3-day
  cancellation policy at the time of contract signing and was verbally reminded
  of the projected repair schedule due to weather-related workload. At no point did we deny her the right to cancel. However, per the signed
  agreement and legal standards, cancellation after the grace period incurs a 20%
  fee to cover administrative and labor-related costs incurred in the process of
  preparing for her project. Furthermore, as previously expressed, all parties had ample time to ask questions, review terms and cancel within the legal timeframe. This
  documented and consistent timeline of events provides clear and irrefutable
  evidence that **. ******** was never ignored at any point. In fact, we
  maintained frequent and transparent communication with her and multiple family
  members across various platforms—including in-person meetings, mailed
  documents, phone calls, voicemails, and text messages. **. ********'s claim that we contacted a relative in ****** without her
  consent is demonstrably false; *** **** voluntarily provided his contact
  details and requested that the refund be sent to him. We declined to do so
  until we received her confirmation, which is fully documented via text and call
  records. Despite
  our efforts, we were met with shifting information and hostile accusations that
  our technician “took advantage” of **. ********—allegations which are entirely
  without merit and contradicted by the presence of multiple family members
  during key appointments, as well as the consistent documentation of her
  informed participation. We find it both deeply regrettable and unjust that our team — including
  Jeremy, who has conducted himself professionally throughout — has been subject
  to false and disparaging accusations. E-Z Roofing & Construction stands by
  our record of ethical business conduct, transparent communication, and
  commitment to honoring our contractual obligations. We respectfully request
  that this complaint be considered in light of the factual and detailed timeline
  presented, which demonstrates our professionalism and responsiveness. Attached to this and previous responses, you will find the supporting
  documentation referenced above, including call logs, text messages, and a copy
  of the signed contract.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/19/2025

  Thank you for taking the time to assist in this matter and for your efforts to mediate the situation. I want to be clear and respectful in stating that I am not willing to change my position regarding the complaint submitted by **. ***** ********. I have been told that **. ******** does not have email nor communicates effectively via text; I am therefore assuming that the BBB complaint correspondence we’ve received is actually coming from her daughter, ***** ******. Regardless, we have made every effort to communicate clearly and consistently with **. ******** and her family from the beginning. Our team has been professional, courteous, and responsive throughout the entire process—even during interactions where members of her family raised their voices or spoke to our staff in a hostile manner. We take great pride in how we treat our clients and their families, and we have documentation to support that we acted with integrity at every step. It is clear that the BBB complaint process is being used as a means to pressure us into issuing a full refund. While we did offer to complete the work, and **. ******** was very close to the top of our production list at the time of her cancellation, they were unwilling to proceed. According to *** ****’s own admission, they found another contractor who could do the job faster and for less—something we completely understand. However, to then demand a full refund and support that demand with inaccurate claim about our conduct is simply unfair. I cannot, in good conscience, reward this behavior by issuing a full refund based on false accusations. I must stand behind what is right, even if it means this matter becomes public on our BBB profile. We will continue to maintain professionalism and transparency, and we are confident that the full context and supporting evidence speak for themselves. Again, I appreciate your time and your role in this process. Unfortunately, it appears that **. ****** will only be satisfied with an admission of wrongdoing in the form of a full refund—something we cannot provide in good faith. However, with all that being said, should she wish for us to complete the contracted work, we will absolutely be willing to do that. 

  
  Warm regards,

  Katie W***
  Office Manager
  E-Z Roofing & Construction, LLC

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/22/2025

  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because: Interesting that the original issues stated in the complaint
  are still not being addressed. Why was there no communication with me and no
  attempts to make an appointment for the service in a timely manner? Why would
  Jeremy not respond to my many phone calls asking for a clear and more detailed
  breakdown of the job (roof repairs)?  It
  seems personal attacks on a ** year old woman are more important than addressing
  the customer’s issues in a respectful manner. It is obvious that EZ’s employee responses
  make no attempt to resolve this complaint. I am not satisfied with the business (EZ) response. I am
  considering other options for this complaint. While this complaint is not
  resolved, I thank BBB for make an effort to mediate.

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

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/22/2025

  We are submitting this response to address and clarify the ongoing complaint made by the customer, which has been rebutted in full in our previous communications. For the sake of transparency and accuracy, we are once again providing a detailed summary of the facts, timeline, and evidence previously submitted.

  Allegation of Exploitation: The customer's initial claim that our company took advantage of her has already been addressed in both our first and second responses. As previously documented, multiple appointments and phone conversations took place involving the customer and her family members - All parties had ample opportunity to ask questions or raise concerns. We reiterate that the contract provided clearly outlines a three-day legal right to cancel, which was not exercised during the applicable period.

  Timing of Work Completion: The claim that we failed to complete work within 2½ months is factually inaccurate. The contract was signed on February 26, 2024 and reaffirmed during a second appointment on March 6, 2024. The job was cancelled on April 21, 2024, which is less than two months from contract date. As stated in the signed agreement (previously submitted), our estimated project timeframe is approximately 2½ months. We remain willing to review the customer’s copy of the contract if needed.

  Contradictory Complaints Regarding Timeline: In her second complaint, the customer indicated that the 2½-month timeframe was not a concern. This directly contradicts her initial complaint and undermines the credibility of her claims.

  Understanding of Terminology and Contract Details: The customer also claimed confusion about technical terminology and lack of breakdown regarding the work. This too has been previously addressed. The contract, provided in our first response, specifies the nature of the work: replacement of 2 pipe boots and up to 2 bundles of shingles. It also clearly outlines the customer’s legal rights for cancelation.

  Communication Attempts Regarding Repair Scheduling: The customer stated that she repeatedly called to schedule the repair. However, both she and her family were advised multiple times of our 2½-month timeframe. We spoke to them many times, in person and via phone - This is documented through phone records and detailed notes submitted previously.

  Refund Miscommunication Claim: The customer claimed that we attempted to send her refund to a relative in ****** without permission - The customer's ********** called REQUESTING the refund and was designated by the family as a point of contact. We further confirmed refund preferences directly with the customer (see previously submitted text messages).

  Allegation of No Response: The assertion that we have not responded to her concerns is simply not factual. A thorough timeline of communication was provided, including numerous phone calls, appointments, and written correspondences. Our responses have been prompt, professional, and well-documented. Furthermore, we communicated the expected timeframe for repair work, with the customer and her family members many times - They were seemingly okay with it until the customer found someone to do the work for less, at which point she called in to cancel.

  Allegation That We Were Unwilling to Resolve: We attempted to resolve this matter at multiple points. When the customer requested to cancel the job, we explained that she was near the top of the production list and offered to proceed with the work. She declined.

  Repeated Allegations of Disregard and Unprofessionalism: Each of the customer's submissions has included accusations that our team acted unethically and personally targeted her. These are entirely unsubstantiated and refuted by factual timelines, phone logs, contract terms, and our documented interactions. At every step, we have conducted ourselves with integrity and professionalism, even in instances when our staff were subjected to hostile behavior.

  Efforts Toward Resolution: We respect the BBB’s mission to facilitate fair resolutions. However, it is apparent that the customer will only be satisfied with a full refund, regardless of the facts presented. As previously stated, the contract was lawfully executed, and cancellation occurred well after the legal grace period. We cannot, in good conscience, issue a full refund based on demonstrably false claims.
  Conclusion: We are committed to doing what is right. While we deeply regret that the customer feels dissatisfied, we cannot justify a full refund under these circumstances. The BBB process is not intended to be used as leverage in situations where a customer seeks to circumvent agreed-upon terms.

  That said, our standing offer remains: If the customer still wishes to allow us to complete the contracted work, we are ready and willing to do so - This remains the most equitable and good-faith resolution available.
  We thank the BBB for its ongoing efforts to mediate and provide clarity in this matter, and we respectfully submit this as our final position based on evidence and documentation.

  Sincerely,

  Katie

  Office Manager E-Z Roofing