Complaints

This profile includes complaints for TAMKO Building Products, LLC's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

TAMKO Building Products, LLC has 6 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

• 

  TAMKO Building Products, LLC

  198 Four States Dr Galena, KS 66739-4304

• 

  TAMKO Building Products, LLC

  7910 S Central Expy Dallas, TX 75216-4183

• 

  TAMKO Building Products LLC

  5300 E 43rd Ave Denver, CO 80216-4536

• 

  TAMKO Building Products, LLC

  4500 Tamko Dr Frederick, MD 21703-3001

• 

  TAMKO Building Products, LLC

  220 W 4th Street Joplin, MO 64801

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:06/25/2025

  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.

  I purchased my home as the first owner in August of 2017. Immediately upon moving into my home after each rain the driveway and gutter drains would be covered with excessive shingle granules. There are shingles on my roof that are warped and are showing signs of premature wear. I am writing to express my deep dissatisfaction with the repeated denial of warranty claims regarding the excessive granule loss on the shingles installed on my roof. I have now submitted three warranty claims, each supported by photographic evidence, documentation, and samples highlighting the premature deterioration of the shingles. Despite this, all three claims have been denied without what I consider a fair and reasonable explanation.
  The situation is especially concerning given that multiple neighbors with homes built at the same time using the same Tamko shingles have had their warranty claims approved, and full roof replacements provided. The contrast in outcomes is both frustrating and puzzling. We are all experiencing the same product issues - yet I have been singled out for denial while others have been granted relief.
  I respectfully request that Tamko reopen my case and conduct a thorough, impartial reassessment of my roof, taking into account the widespread pattern of failure observed in my neighborhood and the fact that my shingles are clearly exhibiting signs of premature failure.

  Business Response

  Date: 06/26/2025

  Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns. We appreciate the opportunity to provide additional context regarding your warranty claims.
  As shingles age, some granule loss is expected—particularly early in their lifespan—due to surplus granules intentionally added during manufacturing to ensure consistent surface coverage. In addition, environmental and situational factors such as foot traffic, hail, snow, high winds, or other storm events can accelerate granule loss. However, after reviewing the multiple samples submitted with your claims, our analysis found that the granule coverage on the shingles remains sufficient to protect the underlying asphalt layer, which is critical to the shingles' intended performance.
  We also want to clarify that each warranty claim is reviewed individually, based on the specific information, photographs, and physical samples provided. While we understand that similar shingles may have been installed in neighboring homes, factors such as ventilation, roof slope, proximity of trees, and other unique environmental conditions—as well as differing levels of roof maintenance—can lead to very different outcomes.
  TAMKO places a high priority on quality control. When issues occur during manufacturing, they are typically identified and addressed quickly by our internal quality assurance teams. Affected products are pulled from distribution to prevent installation. In the rare instance that a potential issue reaches the market, the number of affected shingles is typically quite small and will not likely impact every roof in a neighborhood. This is why the resolution of your neighbors’ claims may not reflect the findings in your specific case.
  Thank you again for your feedback. We hope this explanation provides a clearer understanding of the outcome of your warranty claims.
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/26/2025

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  My issue has not been resolved. I stay at *** **********. How is my neighbor to the left of me at *** ********** and my neighbor on the right at *** both approved and I am not  all three of our houses were built the same time frame by the same builder using the same materials. Countless people on my street have had their roofs replaced because of these same exact shingles. I would like to have Tamko honor their warranty process because this is more that normal degradation this is a defective product.

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

  Business Response

  Date: 07/07/2025

  Please know that TAMKO remains committed to honoring its limited warranty and to ensuring that all evaluations are conducted in strict accordance with its terms. Following a thorough analysis of the shingle samples you submitted in September 2024, May 2025 and June 2025,.as well as the photographs you provided, we found no evidence of any manufacturing-related issues.  Additionally, the granule coverage on the samples is sufficient to protect the underlying asphalt, as designed.  We understand this may not be the outcome you were hoping for, but we assure you that your concerns have been carefully reviewed. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/23/2025

  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.

  Shingles are puckering up on the edges

  Business Response

  Date: 06/24/2025

  TAMKO provides a limited warranty with the original sale of its shingles, offering a remedy in the event of manufacturing defects that directly result in leaks. This limited warranty is printed on every package of TAMKO shingles, enabling homeowners—and their contractors—to review the terms as they consider which brand of shingles to purchase.
  A search of TAMKO’s records does not indicate that Mr. Kesterson has ever filed a warranty claim. If he believes the issue he is experiencing is the result of a manufacturing defect, he may submit a claim through the Warranty Center at TAMKO.com. Any claim submitted will be reviewed and processed in accordance with the limited warranty that was in effect at the time of purchase.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/11/2025

  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.

  In 2009 our new house was built and Tamko shingles were put on. From the very beginning the shingles would not stay down. Winds as low as 35mph would blow shingles off. Usually the shingles would blow off in big bunches such as 10x10 square feet. I had to have the contractor come back 3-4 times a year to replace the shingles that blow off. A Tamko representative came to the house and inspected the roof. He said that the shingles were installed correctly and that it was the manufactures defect that was the problem with the shingles. After hours of research, it has been found that Tamko has many complaints and lawsuits against defective shingles during the same time mine were installed.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/17/2025

  Can we please have some more time to get the required documents  for submission.  We have been out of town.

  Thanks

  ***** ******

  Business Response

  Date: 07/10/2025

  We appreciate the opportunity to respond to *** ******* concerns and clarify the basis for our decision.  TAMKO provides a limited warranty with the purchase of its shingles, which outlines the specific terms and conditions under which remedies may be available in the event of a manufacturing defect resulting in leaks. This limited warranty is included with every package of TAMKO shingles and is also available on our website, allowing homeowners, contractors, and retailers the opportunity to review and compare coverage before selecting a roofing product. As detailed in the enclosed copy of the applicable limited warranty, TAMKO shingles include a limited wind coverage that applies for a defined period following the date of retail purchase. In *** ******* case, the shingles were installed in 2009, and the limited wind warranty coverage extended for 60 months (5 years) from the purchase date. Based on the documentation provided in the claim, Mr. Nellis did not contact TAMKO regarding the wind-related issue until well beyond that coverage period.

  Because the wind-related claim falls outside the scope of the limited wind warranty term, we are unable to approve this claim. TAMKO strives to apply its limited warranty terms fairly and consistently to all customers and administers each claim in accordance with the applicable warranty provisions and our established claims process. We trust this response helps explain our position and the reason for the denial. Please be assured that this response does not waive or alter any of the terms or conditions of TAMKO’s limited warranty, all of which remain in full force and effect.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/23/2025

  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.

  We purchased our home at **** ********* ****, Valdosta, GA in June 2017. The home had TAMKO shingles installed in approximately 2011. At the time of purchase, the roof was in excellent condition, as confirmed by a certified home inspector, the seller’s disclosure form, and an independent appraisal (copies available upon request).
  
  Recently, we began experiencing issues with the shingles, including premature granule loss and deterioration. We had three independent roofing contractors inspect the roof in May 2025. All noted that the shingles appeared to be deteriorating well before the expected lifespan and likely had a material defect.
  
  We filed a warranty claim with TAMKO (Claim No. *******), requesting that they evaluate the shingles. TAMKO denied our claim, stating that the warranty could not be transferred because the transferability period (five years) had lapsed before we purchased the home. While we understand that we may not qualify for warranty coverage, we requested only an inspection to assess whether a defect was present, not a full warranty replacement. TAMKO refused this request as well, citing the transferability clause.
  
  As homeowners, we were not informed of any need for a warranty transfer at the time of purchase, and there was no visible issue with the roof. We acted in good faith and relied on professional assessments to confirm the roof’s condition.
  
  TAMKO’s refusal to even inspect the roof, despite multiple professional opinions pointing to a likely defect, reflects poor customer service and a disregard for product accountability.

  Business Response

  Date: 06/05/2025

  Thank you for opportunity to clarify the transferability terms of the limited warranty and hope the following explanation is helpful.
  TAMKO provides a limited warranty with the original purchase of its shingles to offer protection against manufacturing defects that directly result in leaks. The limited warranty is clearly printed on every package of TAMKO shingles, ensuring that homeowners and contractors can review the terms when selecting roofing materials. Our goal is to treat all customers consistently and equitably by adhering strictly to the terms outlined in the limited warranty for all claims.
  As stated prominently at the top of the limited warranty, TAMKO includes specific restrictions regarding the transferability of the limited warranty. Notably, the period of time in which limited warranty may be transferred is limited.  In this case, the transferability period is during the first 5 years from the date of the installation.  Further, notice of the transfer must be sent to TAMKO by the seller or buyer within 30 days of the real estate closing date. This limitation is based on several important considerations.
  Unlike the original purchaser, subsequent homeowners typically have an opportunity to thoroughly inspect the home, including the roof, before completing the purchase. This due diligence period allows the buyer to assess the condition of the property, including any visible roofing issues, and to negotiate the purchase price accordingly. TAMKO is not involved in these transactions and is therefore unaware of whether or how the condition of the roof may have impacted the agreed-upon price.
  Given this dynamic, TAMKO, like many manufacturers who provide long-term warranties, has elected to limit the transferability of its limited warranty to ensure fairness and clarity in our limited warranty program. These limitations are consistent with industry practices and are intended to balance the rights and responsibilities of all parties involved in a property transfer.
  We hope this explanation provides clarity on the rationale behind our limited warranty transferability terms. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/05/2025

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Thank you for responding. However, TAMKO's reply does not address the actual concern we raised.
  

  We fully understand and acknowledge the limited warranty transfer conditions. We are not contesting TAMKO's right to deny warranty coverage based on those terms.
  

  What we are objecting to, and what TAMKO has refused to address, is the lack of any willingness to inspect the roof despite multiple licensed roofing contractors identifying what they believe is premature deterioration and granule loss. This may indicate a defective product, and we believe it is reasonable and responsible for the manufacturer to investigate such reports, regardless of warranty status.
  Our request is simple: have a TAMKO representative or inspector evaluate the roof to determine whether the product is performing as intended. This would be a customer service oriented response, particularly given that the shingles were only 6 years old at the time of our home purchase and have failed well before their expected lifespan.

  
  TAMKO’s rigid refusal to even consider a product evaluation, regardless of mounting evidence from independent professionals, reflects poorly on their customer care and raises questions about their confidence in their product’s quality.

  
  We respectfully request that TAMKO reconsider its position and agree to a basic inspection of the roof to determine whether a material issue exists.

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

  Business Response

  Date: 06/13/2025

  TAMKO has carefully reviewed the information you provided along with the terms of the applicable limited warranty. Based on this review, we have determined that the circumstances of your claim do not qualify for coverage under the limited warranty.  Because there is no applicable remedy under the limited warranty in this case, TAMKO is not obligated to conduct an inspection of your roof.
  We understand this may be disappointing, and we appreciate your understanding. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/17/2025

  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.

  On 11/2/2017, I hired a reputable local roofing company to perform repairs and replace the shingles on my roof. The roofer used Tamko Heritage shingles in the color "Weathered Wood." The total cost of the shingles was listed at $4,600, and they were installed on 11/18/2017.
  
  Over the past eight years, we’ve experienced multiple leaks that required attention. ****** the roofer, has consistently stepped in to help address the issues. By December 2023, however, we had reached our limit. ***** advised us to file a warranty claim with Tamko. Despite months of effort and numerous hurdles, Tamko ultimately offered only to pay for sealing the defective shingles, which their own lab had confirmed were raised and faulty. They declined to replace the roof as both we and the roofer had requested. Now, we are facing more shingles raising and allowing water to seep into the home.
  
  Then, on 4/11/2025, strong winds and rain led to yet another leak — the shingles lifted again, allowing water to enter and cause further interior damage. As of 4/16/2025, another leak has been identified.
  
  We have repeatedly complied with Tamko’s requests, jumping through every hoop they've put in front of us. Now, we’re being told it will take another 6–8 weeks before anyone can inspect the roof. They’ve requested even more photos and samples for testing. In the meantime, damage continues to occur in our recently renovated home — damage we are left to repair out-of-pocket — all due to a defective product and a manufacturer that shows no urgency or accountability in resolving the issue.

  Business Response

  Date: 04/25/2025

  TAMKO did issue a check for $2,340 to hand seal all of the shingles on the homeowner's roof in February 2024.  The check was cashed and the hand sealing of all the shingles should have prevented any blow off issues after the work was performed.  For this reason, TAMKO is having the roof inspected to determine why this is happening.  Unfortunately, it will take a few weeks for the inspector to travel to of the home and perform the inspection.  TAMKO will review the findings and will respond to the homeowner.  The shingles remain covered under the limited warranty in effect at the time of the shingle purchase and these claims remain open and ongoing.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/10/2025

  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.

  I am filing a formal complaint against TAMKO Building Products regarding their handling of two limited warranty claims — Claim No. ******* (first claim) and Claim No. ******* (second claim). I’ve had to replace my roof twice due to TAMKO product failure. In both cases, TAMKO issued settlements that fail to account for essential materials needed for a full, code-compliant replacement.
  
  In both claims, TAMKO reimbursed only 19 squares of field shingles and labor, excluding key materials that are not optional or accessory items. These include:
  
  Ridge Cap Shingles – Required and present on the original roof. TAMKO acknowledged coverage applies if they were TAMKO brand, which they were, yet they were not separately reimbursed nor itemized, as a flat fee per square was applied (Ridge Shingles are ~2x the cost)
  
  Starter Shingles – Also required, but not itemized.
  
  Roofing Nails, Underlayment, and Sales Tax – Critical to the replacement, but denied as “accessories,” even though they are not explicitly excluded in the warranty.
  
  The same omissions happened in the first claim (*******), forcing me to pay out-of-pocket. I will now incur similar costs again. TAMKO refused escalation or supplemental review.
  
  I am requesting review of TAMKO’s warranty practices and a supplemental reimbursement for claim ******* to cover missing materials. These repeated omissions result in unfair financial burden and potentially violate Colorado consumer protection standards.

  Business Response

  Date: 04/24/2025

  TAMKO has communicated with *** ******* further and have settled his claim.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:03/12/2025

  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.

  I had roofers fixing my roof and had to redo it because the products from Tamco was a bad batch. The roofers redid my roof a check came to me with my ex-husband‘s name and my name on it, but the last name was spelled wrong. I questioned Y my ex-husband on The check and if I would B able to cash it. A representative named *** from Tamko said that it shouldn’t be a problem. So since the roofers were already at my house and lived two hours away, I went ahead and them the personal check for that same amount that had to go inside of my bank account. I was supposed to put the $10,500 check in my bank account and write a personal check to the roofer. I don’t understand why Tamko just did not write a check to the roofer. I was not able to put the check in my account and I called Tamko to let them know this and call the roofer. The already put that personal check into his account. When Tamco got back with me, they told me that I would have to send that check back them and they would send me a new check with just my name on it. But then they voided that check out and still wanted to send a voided check to them. The check could not be used And they would not send me the right check until they got the voided check back. Needless to say that $10,500 bounced before I could get everything corrected so now there’s no money in my bank account and all of a sudden I can’t get in contact with Tamko! All they had to do was wire me the money since they already avoided out the other check or they could’ve overnighted the check to me. So i’m looking to press charges.

  Business Response

  Date: 03/25/2025

  *** ********** name was included on the check because he was listed as a co-owner by the individual who initiated the claim with TAMKO and the provided spelling of the last name when the claim was initiated was ******* *** ******** *********"  Until *** ******** made her complaint to TAMKO after the check was received by her, TAMKO was unaware that *** ******** was no longer an owner and that the spelling of the last name was incorrect.  Regardless on March 13, 2025. TAMKO overnighted another check to *** ******** as she directed. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:11/15/2024

  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.

  I am filing this complaint to address my dissatisfaction with TAMKO’s handling of warranty claims for my defective shingles. Despite following the warranty process and providing all required documentation, TAMKO has denied my claims without explanation. My house was built in 2017, and I am the original owner. The entire subdivision, built around the same time, has experienced issues with defective shingles. Many homes have already had their roofs replaced due to premature deterioration. Concerned, I had my roof inspected by two roofing companies who confirmed that my shingles are losing granules at an excessive rate, and the material is visibly accumulating in my gutters and downspouts. Both recommended a roof replacement, given how prematurely these shingles have failed.
  On May 7, 2023, I filed a claim (Claim #*******) for my TAMKO Heritage Weather Wood 30-Year Shingles, providing all requested documentation. TAMKO denied the claim but did not explain the decision. After consulting a third roofing company in September 2024, I filed a second claim (Claim #*******), again providing all necessary documentation. Unfortunately, this claim was also denied with a generic statement and no detailed reasoning.
  
  I have carefully reviewed TAMKO’s warranty requirements and am confident I meet all criteria. TAMKO’s refusal to stand behind its product and provide clarity on its decisions is deeply disappointing, especially considering the widespread issues with these shingles in my neighborhood. I am currently consulting with an attorney specializing in Consumer Protection Law to explore my options. While I prefer to resolve this matter amicably, I am prepared to escalate if necessary. I request that TAMKO reevaluate my claims, provide a detailed explanation for any decisions, and take appropriate action to replace my defective shingles or offer a fair settlement.
  I hope TAMKO will take this opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to product quality and customer satisfaction.

  Business Response

  Date: 11/25/2024

  TAMKO
  provides a limited warranty to purchasers of TAMKO shingles as part of the
  original sales transaction which provides a remedy to the purchaser in the
  event TAMKO shingles have a manufacturing defect directly resulting in leaks. The limited
  warranty is available online at tamko.com and is printed on every package of TAMKO shingles so homeowners (as well
  as retailers and contractors) have the opportunity to read and compare our
  limited warranty to others as they consider which brand of shingles to buy.
  
  Mr. ******* has indicated that the shingles have granule loss.  However, the photographs and shingle samples submitted by Mr. ******* show the 7-year-old shingles are weathering as expected and have sufficient granules that continue to protect the shingles as the roof continues to shed precipitation.   If Mr. ******* believes the photographs and/or shingle samples are not representative of the issue, he is welcomed to submit more samples and/or photographs to TAMKO for consideration as his limited warranty remains in full force and effect.

  When administering claims, TAMKO looks at each individual roof and it is not unusual that some roofs in a neighborhood may have an issue while neighboring roofs do not.  This is because shingles used in a neighborhood or subdivision are likely manufactured over several days, weeks, months or even years apart and TAMKO's robust quality control usually catches and corrects issues that may inadvertently arise, so such events are usually very limited in duration and scope due to these QC programs.  Those who have TAMKO shingles with manufacturing issues leading to leaks are covered under the terms of the applicable limited warranty and TAMKO honors its obligations under the limited warranty but does not re-roof one's house simply because their neighbors received new roofs. 

  I hope this is helpful in explaining TAMKO's rationale behind the determination of this claim.

  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:10/09/2024

  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.

  The shingle installed is a TAMKO Heritage Weathered Wood, Date of Installation July 20, 2016,  by a certified installer.
  
  The issue is, I have excessive granule loss as noted by the large amounts of granules in the gutters, as well as wind damaged shingles that were damaged within the 110mph wind rating.
  
  TAMKO offers a 10-year limited warranty - "Full Start Period",  my roof is right around 8-9 years old right now.   I can only assume they are trying to stall us until we are over the 20 year mark which will put us in - "After Full Start Period" meaning labor would NOT be covered, only the cost of materials.  
  
  This is a terrible way to do business, there is no reason to deny this claim other than Tamko not wanting to stand behind a known faulty product.

  Business Response

  Date: 10/15/2024

  TAMKO's claim system does not show that a claim has been initiated by the individual who initiated this complaint.  She should email ****************** to initiate a warranty claim. The date the claim is initiated by the original purchaser of the shingles is that date that determines whether a claim is within the Full Start Period. 

  Business Response

  Date: 10/21/2024

  This claim was initiated by an individual who was not the original purchaser of the shingles, and the limited warranty was not transferred by the seller or the buyer when the house was sold in 2019.  A letter was mailed on July 8, 2024, which stated the claim was denied as there is not a remedy available under the terms of the limited warranty.  As explained in the letter, the limitation of the transferability of the limited warranty is based, in part, on the fact that subsequent owners of a home have the opportunity to inspect the home, and its component parts (including the roof), negotiate the purchase price, and make subjective adjustments to the price prior to consummation of the sale based upon the home’s structural condition, market conditions, and various other factors. Specifically, a subsequent owner has the opportunity to inspect the roof and take any issues into account as part of the negotiation of the price of the home. It is part of the due diligence process in the purchase of a house that requires the purchaser to assume that responsibility and risk.  TAMKO is not a party to such negotiations, does not know whether any adjustments to the purchase price should have been made or were in fact made due to the condition of the roof, and cannot determine if the subsequent homeowner negotiated a fair and reasonable purchase price for the home based upon its structural condition and various other factors, including, but not limited to the condition
  of the roof. Taking all these issues into account, TAMKO made a decision to provide a limited warranty that includes a limited transferability period for subsequent homeowners.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 10/23/2024

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:  although the home was sold in 2019, it was sold to a family member (me) and my grandmother (former owner) still lives at the address.  She was also not made aware of any law suit for the faulty shingles sold by Tamko and used on our home at **** *********** **.  Smyrna TN, before the sale.  I can and did provide proof of prior owner still residing in the home.  Lastly, if the law suit Tamko settled included this shingle and they did not notify all users of that product then they are not released from doing the r ok ght thing.  If they are a reputable company then why would they not want to do the right thing by the consumer.  I have a faulty shingle on my home which is designating faster then its supposed to.  Please do not stick me with the coat of a complete replacement with not assistance.    
  
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  ********* *******

• Initial Complaint

  Date:10/01/2024

  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.

  Tamko Building Products LLC is now taken over two months to even approve the replacement of a roof that is less then 6 years old. I feel that Tamko Building Products LLC is taken so long is because I am a person of color and they think they just push this off and push it off and they will not have to honor the warranty on this 6 year old roof. If I was a white man this would have been done 2 months ago.

  Business Response

  Date: 10/09/2024

  This complainant had sold her home to a new buyer and therefore, does not have a remedy under the limited warranty.  It is the new owner of the roof who needs to pursue a warranty claim if warranted. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 10/10/2024

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because: I still owned the house for 3 weeks before the house sold and yet they would not get the claim done in that time. The new owners have started a new claim and it has been just about 2MONTHS and yet the warranty company has not gotten the claim done yet.... This roof was only 5YEARS OLD....The new owners are like me people of color and the warranty company is doing the same thing to them as they did to me. It is clear that this warranty company has it out for people of color.. One more thing I am a man nor a woman.... I have told them that some many times and yet they do not care and still call me a woman.... You see what I mean.... Just not right....
  
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  ******* ****

  Business Response

  Date: 10/15/2024

  TAMKO considers claims confidential between TAMKO and the homeowner.  Since you are no longer the homeowner and the limited warranty was transferred to the individual who purchased your home, you are no longer entitled to a remedy under the limited warranty and TAMKO will only discuss the particulars of a claim with the current owner who is working with TAMKO on their active claim.  TAMKO administers all claims in accordance with the terms and conditions of the limited warranty with all homeowners who are treated equally and equitably according to the limited warranty and the law.