Complaints

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

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/17/2023

  Type:Billing 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 contracted AES to replace our existing deck in May 2023, and they started the project in June. The total contract amount was for $24,450, and we have paid them over $18,000 so far. The work that has been done is very poor and unsafe. We spoke with the project manager and owner for over two hours on site about our concerns, and they did not provide acceptable solutions to fix them. Here are some of the issues:
  
  • Almost all of the nails they used rusted within 2 weeks.
  • New deck boards are stained as a result of the rusty nails.
  • Deck boards are uneven, in some cases sticking up ½ inch, which is a tripping hazard.
  • Stairs are crooked and uneven.
  • There are uneven risers on steps.
  • 6x6 footers are not bolted onto or centered on the concrete supports. Some don’t even touch the concrete.
  • The brackets holding up the new joists aren’t the correct ones for boards that size.
  
  Safety issues are numerous, and we have lost all confidence in this contractor to complete the job in a safe manner with an acceptable level of workmanship.

  Business Response

  Date: 07/25/2023

  As a courtesy, around April 13th, we
  submitted a drawing of the existing conditions on how they were and engaged
  into a discussion on your vision of the needs for your project. There was a
  revision given on 4/13 and an additional revision on 4/24. The work was
  proposed on 4/26 and that was based on the last revised drawing and what you
  wanted to do with the deck. The proposal was revised on 5/5 and again on 5/11
  with additional changes that were not part of the last revised drawing on 4/26.
  The potential of rotten wood was discussed because of the ground contact of the
  lower deck and not having the ability to thoroughly inspect the underside, we
  would have to just replace the rotten wood and it was understood that would be
  a separate change order but also as to not delay, we would just invoice that
  work once all is completed. The rotten wood change order includes: removal of
  the rotten wood and further assessing the magnitude of the damage, labor to
  remove the rotten wood, there is a small portion of disposal cost there too,
  procuring the new materials and delivery, installing the new materials all of
  the associated fasteners, and of course Contract signing was on 5/16 based on
  the changes to the scope of work but were not included on the last revised
  drawing of 4/26.

  Shortly after the demolition was completed, it was determined the
  proposed 5/8”x6” deck boards could not be used because the lower deck framing
  was set at an elevation to make the old 2x6 deck boards flush the surrounding
  concrete. It was approved by ownership to use standard 2x6 pressure treated lumber
  for the decking material. As a result there was no Change in pricing since the
  material needed to cover the project in its entirety was similar in price and
  availability.

  Whether to be surface (face mounted) on the outside of the Rim Joist or
  inside. However, the inside was a challenge because of the construction of the
  old framework (that was to remain) and how to mount the posts for the railings.
  We met on site and discussed mounting options and the challenges to what which
  method the owners were wanting. Within a day it was decided that post mounting
  will be done on the inside of the deck flooring about 7’’ which would be out of
  the way of the 6x6 posts that were part of the ole framework that was to
  remain, this spacing also included the upper deck but not for the hand railings
  since they were able to be installed as the owners desired.

  About the 15th of June we had a conference
  call with the owners about placement of the stairs and the size of the upper
  deck. It was desired by the owners to have the upper deck bigger but move the
  stairs out to the edge of the old stairs’ foot-print to have this new extension
  conjoined to the stairs. This reduced the stairs to less than the 5’ width as
  per the last revised drawing from  4/26,
  then move the foot print of the stairs to the exterior most edge of the old
  foot print leaving about a 30-36” extension to the upper deck which needed to
  be field designed for the posts and their corresponding footings. Luckily we
  were able to use about 75% pf the footings that were poured that morning and
  only had to expand the footings on about 2 or 3 to accommodate this change.
  This deck extension was agreed it was not part of the original agreement
  because of the drawings. It was agreed this would be a change order for this
  extension and we would continue the construction process and submit an invoice
  for this work upon completion. This change was approved on or about 6/16.

  On or about 6/22, there was a discussion with
  management and ownership about adding an addition support beam under the upper
  deck for support at the ledger board of the house since there appears to be
  only face nailed in place, we quickly proposed to install a dual 2x10 beam the
  entire width of the deck, add additional lag screws into the old deck ledger
  board to help secure the old deck. That was approve via ownership on a text
  message.

  On June 27, as the production crews were installing
  the additional support beam under the upper deck, when were asked by ownership
  to hold up until the onsite meeting was had with ownership and management later
  that afternoon. As a result of that meeting, the upper deck surfacing boards were a
  concern because of the change in the surfacing boards,(too many knots) the deck
  extension support joists crooked, needing an additional support post for the
  upper landing and stair stringers (footing dug but not installed yet) If you recall they changed the surfacing boards in the early part of June.

  To date the posts and had railings need to be
  installed, the deck extension is not completed and is about 75% done, support
  beam under the deck is about 75% done, footers and  additional support 6x6 posts are about 75%
  done. Additional lighting (5 Lights) is not completed. With the punch list items and the completion of the
  deck, we would need 3-5 production days to complete. We need to be afforded opportunity to a quality control and punch list to achieve the results and standard they are seeing. To date they have done nothing buy complain about a product that is not finished. But we have been willing to work with them and their concerns have been heard and we have addressed them in-person and had a resolution planed and in the works

  Incidentally, we have already consulted with an
  engineer and he has reviewed the pictures and has stated that the work appears
  to be sound with the necessary corrections as they had been discussed with
  management and ownership. With his willingness to certify the integrity of the
  structure this should be sufficient to satisfy your need for the structural
  soundness of the deck.

   

  Customer Answer

  Date: 09/25/2023

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because AES’s latest response is not acceptable for multiple reasons. First of all, despite the detailed timeline below, they still haven’t acknowledged or addressed our many concerns with the deck, which include, among other things:
  
  • Rusty and corroding nails throughout the upper and lower decks and staircases
  • Crooked and uneven stairs
  • Deck boards that are uneven and a tripping hazard 
  • Multiple structural and safety problems with support beams and footers
  
  We have brought these issues to their attention several times (in person, via email, and through this Better Business Bureau complaint) and they have had plenty of opportunities to provide solutions, yet they still refuse to even acknowledge the problems. Instead, they try to deflect the issues by repeatedly regurgitating their incomplete punch list talking points, which don’t address the numerous safety and workmanship issues that we brought to their attention. The fact that they minimize the safety of our deck (i.e. support beams that move) does not give us any confidence that they can safely fix any issues.
  
  Also, their statements regarding the ”change orders” are inaccurate. Several of the items they mention were not change orders, they were part of the original plans. Other items they mentioned aren’t even true. And if they considered them as change orders, then they needed to share those with us in writing per the contract. However, they did not do so, except for one regarding additional support and one about the thickness of the deck boards, and we responded to both in writing.
  
  Lastly, there are multiple inaccuracies/falsehoods in the details of their latest response and timeline of events, and we have documentation that shows this. It is clear they have no intention of taking accountability for their mistakes or providing us with a refund for the poor and unsafe work they have done. The only reason this work has been delayed for 13 weeks is because AES refuses to acknowledge their mistakes. We want this resolved as soon as possible, but the fact that they continually refuse to acknowledge these issues makes it impossible for us to move forward with them. Therefore, we would like to pursue arbitration through the BBB to terminate the contract and receive a refund for the full amount paid to them so far.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  **** ********

  Business Response

  Date: 10/31/2023

  After speaking with the owner and BBB answering our
  questions, we will not be interested in the pursuing arbitration on this
  complaint.

  We have done everything we can to willingly satisfy the
  owners complaints. These were all of the punch list items that are listed in
  the complaint and we offered to address all of the concerns. Including, getting
  an engineer to certify the work but they would incur the additional cost for
  said certification(s). Those certifications will address all of their concerns
  by a licensed 3rd party professional.