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:07/31/2022

  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 5/4/2020, I contracted with Manning to replace all of my roofing, including flashing. This was paid with ***** **** Insurance claim #*********. At the time, they said that I needed my siding trimmed so that it was not so close to the shingles. This work was completed by another contractor in July 2021. What was discovered shortly after was that my roof was leaking because the flashing had not been replaced as contracted. Multiple calls, emails, and texts have been exchanged to try to resolve this issue. I have confirmed with the insurance claim office that they paid for roof replacement including flashing and any code improvements. ***** ******* said they had replaced the flashing. ***** ******* has now said they did not replace flashing or bring it to the current codes during the roof replacement as expected. They have blamed the siding trim for this, but I sought another opinion from an uninvolved roofer who agreed with the siding company that this current state of the roof with openings into my home could not have been done by the siding repairs and that the flashing was not installed properly or to current code if it was replaced. I've been attempting to get Manning to fix this issue since my first report to them in 10/2021 that I was seeing leaks in the ceiling of the master bathroom. When the siding was repaired it has exposed this hidden issue. The story keeps changing during these points of contact and now they want all of the siding removed to replace all of the flashing to code like it should have been done to start with. I should not have to remove all siding to have work completed that should have been done to begin with. My siding contractor and Manning talked as well and I was told they would replace the flashing and the siding contractor would re-caulk and paint, but then Manning said that they would replace some flashing not all. At the advice of my insurance agent, I am filing this claim. Some documentation is attached.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/06/2022

  I am extremely disappointed that it has come to this. MGC installed a new roofing system in May, 2020. Our client gave us a great review and was extremely impressed with how we managed the installation and how well we protected her property. This roofing system did not leak and has not leaked since. MGC has been called out to the property on multiple occasions to inspect for leaks and we discovered that the Siding has been cut and the step flashing has been compromised. This is the location of the leak. EXTREMELY IMPORTANT - MGC did not do the siding work.
  
  
  
  We have discussed what is needed for the repairs with our client. Now there is a complaint issued against us when we are offering to fix problems created by another contractor, over a year after the installation of the new roof that had no leaks, MGC has offered a solution to repair the compromised area without damaging the integrity of the current roofing system. The client asked that the flashings be repaired along "three rooflines where the siding was trimmed to bring them all up to code". These areas were code compliant before the Siding/Painting Contractors crew cut the side walls. The roof did not leak. 
  
  
  
  Below is my response to each line of Ms. ********* complaint:
  
  
  
  -On 5/4/2020, I contracted with Manning to replace all of my roofing, including flashing: correct
  
  -This was paid with ***** **** Insurance claim #*********: incorrect. Please let me know which line item in your ***** **** Estimate paid for Step Flashing? This was a point of argument with the Adjuster.
  
  -At the time, they said that I needed my siding trimmed so that it was not so close to the shingles: Concern area was near the valley. 
  
  -This work was completed by another contractor in July 2021: Evidence that another contractors work lead to the problems.
  
  -What was discovered shortly after was that my roof was leaking because the flashing had not been replaced as contracted: Incorrect - see attached photos.
  
  -Multiple calls, emails, and texts have been exchanged to try to resolve this issue: Agreed. And we have responded and visited the property. We have provided you with options to the repair and our recommendations and asked that that  your decision be made and sent back to us in writing. We have not received that.
  
  -I have confirmed with the insurance claim office that they paid for roof replacement including flashing and any code improvements. - Incorrect. Step Flashing has not been added. I have emailed ***** **** and CC client. 
  
  -***** ******* said they had replaced the flashing: Correct
  
  -***** ******* has now said they did not replace flashing or bring it to the current codes during the roof replacement as expected: Incorrect - the client misunderstood what I said/wrote. See photos attached.
  
  -They have blamed the siding trim for this, but I sought another opinion from an uninvolved roofer who agreed with the siding company that this current state of the roof with openings into my home could not have been done by the siding repairs and that the flashing was not installed properly or to current code if it was replaced: we have asked to meet "uninvolved roofer" at the property to discuss their findings. Ms. ******** would not provide that roofers name nor assist with scheduling that meeting.
  
  -I've been attempting to get Manning to fix this issue since my first report to them in 10/2021 that I was seeing leaks in the ceiling of the master bathroom. When the siding was repaired it has exposed this hidden issue: Siding was cut. Not repaired. The height of the siding has changed and the step flashing has been cut. Our roofers install step flashing by hand. Not with tools that can cut metal. 
  
  -The story keeps changing during these points of contact and now they want all of the siding removed to replace all of the flashing to code like it should have been done to start with: Client has misunderstood my statement. The roof is per code. The siding "might not be" and MGC is not responsible for code compliance for work not performed by MGC. If client is asking for siding repairs to be compliant, that will be the responsibility of the Siding Contractor and MGC will assume no liability. Any consequential damage to the siding will also be the responsibility of the Siding Contractor. This is what I have been trying to explain.
  
  -I should not have to remove all siding to have work completed that should have been done to begin with: It was done correctly - please refer to photo file. If the siding was not cut, the step flashing would not have been damaged. I have proposed a repair method that the siding will not need to be replaced. I need a response in writing before work can be scheduled.
  
  -My siding contractor and Manning talked as well and I was told they would replace the flashing and the siding contractor would re-caulk and paint, but then Manning said that they would replace some flashing not all: Correct -There is no need to replace all of the flashing and tear open a perfect roof. The compromised areas need to be addressed. Again, we have asked for a reply in writing. 
  
  At the advice of my insurance agent, I am filing this claim. Some documentation is attached.Tell us why here...

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/16/2022

  [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Assumed Answered]
  
  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because: MY COMMENTS ARE TYPED AFTER MY NAME IN RESPONSE TO THE BUSINESS

  I
  am extremely disappointed that it has come to this. MGC installed a new roofing
  system in May, 2020. Our client gave us a great review and was extremely
  impressed with how we managed the installation and how well we protected her
  property. This roofing system did not leak and has not leaked since. MGC has
  been called out to the property on multiple occasions to inspect for leaks and
  we discovered that the Siding has been cut and the step flashing has been
  compromised. This is the location of the leak. EXTREMELY IMPORTANT - MGC did
  not do the siding work. -*********: THERE
  IS NO PROOF THAT THE STEP FLASHING WAS CUT; THE PHOTOS SHOW THAT IT WAS NOT
  INSTALLED TO THE PROPER CODE (MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT SHOULD BE AT LEAST 2”
  BEHIND THE SIDING). THERE IS ONLY ONE PHOTO THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED FROM THE
  INSTALL AND IT SHOWS ONE PIECE OF STEP FLASHING AND DOES NOT SHOW THE ENTIRE
  ROOF LINE OR THAT IT WAS 2” OR MORE BEHIND THE SIDING. IF THE SIDING HAD BEEN LIFTED/MOVED
  TO PROPERLY INSTALL, THAT ISN’T EVIDENT IN THE PHOTOS.
  
  
  
  We have discussed what is needed for the repairs with our client. Now there is
  a complaint issued against us when we are offering to fix problems created by
  another contractor, over a year after the installation of the new roof that had
  no leaks, MGC has offered a solution to repair the compromised area without
  damaging the integrity of the current roofing system. The client asked that the
  flashings be repaired along "three rooflines where the siding was trimmed
  to bring them all up to code". These areas were code compliant before the
  Siding/Painting Contractors crew cut the side walls. The roof did not
  leak. -*********: I AM
  ASKING THEM TO BE BROUGHT TO CODE BECAUSE THE DOCUMENTATION CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
  SHOWS THAT IT WAS NEVER IN CODE AND THE EMAIL FROM ***** ******* SAYS “Per the documentation that we have, the step flashing was
  replaced based on access. All of the flashings that were damaged and
  accessible were removed and replaced and we brought your roofing system
  back to pre-storm conditions. In other words, flashings were removed and
  replaced to the limitations of the previous installation. “
  
  
  
  
  Below is my response to each line of Ms. ********* complaint:
  
  
  
  -On 5/4/2020, I contracted with Manning to replace all of my roofing, including
  flashing: correct – *********: MY
  INSURANCE COVERS CODE IMPROVEMENTS AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE BUSINESS
  LICENSE OF THE CONTRACTOR ALSO REQUIRES THAT CODE IMPROVEMENTS BE MADE
  
  -This was paid with ***** **** Insurance claim #*********: incorrect. Please
  let me know which line item in your ***** **** Estimate paid for Step Flashing?
  This was a point of argument with the Adjuster. -*********: I CONTACTED ***** **** AGAIN 8.16.2022 AND
  THEY HAVE NOT RECEIVED A SUPPLEMENT REQUEST FOR FLASHING WITH THE REQUIRED
  DOCUMENTATION SHOWING PHOTOS/VIDEO THAT FLASHING EXISTED AND WAS DAMAGED WITH A
  REQUEST FOR PAYMENT TO REPLACE AND BRING TO CURRENT CODE.  WHEN DID MANNING SUBMIT A SUPPLEMENT WITH THE
  REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION FOR THE CLAIM?
  
  -At the time, they said that I needed my siding trimmed so that it was not so
  close to the shingles: Concern area was near the valley. 
  
  -This work was completed by another contractor in July 2021: Evidence that
  another contractors work lead to the problems. -*********: APPROXIMATELY ¼” TO ½” WAS TRIMMED ON
  THE SIDING TO ENSURE IT WAS 1” ABOVE THE SHINGLES. THIS IS WHEN I NOTICED LEAKS
  AND IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT FLASHING WAS NOT PROPERLY INSTALLED TO AT LEAST 2”
  BEHIND THE SIDING TO MEET CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS.
  
  -What was discovered shortly after was that my roof was leaking because the
  flashing had not been replaced as contracted: Incorrect - see attached photos. D******** – THERE IS ONE PHOTO WITH ONE SECTION OF
  FLASHING WHICH DOES NOT CLEARLY SHOW INSTALLATION TO CODE REQUIREMENTS
  
  -Multiple calls, emails, and texts have been exchanged to try to resolve this
  issue: Agreed. And we have responded and visited the property. We have provided
  you with options to the repair and our recommendations and asked that
  that  your decision be made and sent back to us in writing. We have not
  received that. D******** – THE OPTIONS
  PROVIDED WERE TO REPLACE SOME OF THE FLASHING OR TO COMPLETELY REMOVE SIDING TO
  REPLACE IT ALL. 
  
  -I have confirmed with the insurance claim office that they paid for roof
  replacement including flashing and any code improvements. - Incorrect. Step
  Flashing has not been added. I have emailed ***** **** and CC client. -SEE PREVIOUS COMMENT THAT A SUPPLEMENT REQUEST WITH
  REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION WAS NOT SUBMITTED
  
  -***** ******* said they had replaced the flashing: Correct
  
  -***** ******* has now said they did not replace flashing or bring it to the
  current codes during the roof replacement as expected: Incorrect - the client
  misunderstood what I said/wrote. See photos attached. *********: SEE PREVIOUS QUOTE FROM ***** *******’S
  EMAIL THAT NOT ALL FLASHING WAS REPLACED AND THAT IT WAS DONE WITH LIMITATIONS
  TO PRE-STORM CONDITIONS AND NOT CURRENT CODE.
  
  
  -They have blamed the siding trim for this, but I sought another opinion from
  an uninvolved roofer who agreed with the siding company that this current state
  of the roof with openings into my home could not have been done by the siding
  repairs and that the flashing was not installed properly or to current code if
  it was replaced: we have asked to meet "uninvolved roofer" at the
  property to discuss their findings. Ms. ******** would not provide that roofers
  name nor assist with scheduling that meeting. *********: NAMES WERE NOT SHARED TO PREVENT A
  BIASED OPINION AND AS A PROFESSIONAL COURTESY FOR THE REPUTATION OF MANNING DURING
  MY INQUIRIES.
  
  -I've been attempting to get Manning to fix this issue since my first report to
  them in 10/2021 that I was seeing leaks in the ceiling of the master bathroom.
  When the siding was repaired it has exposed this hidden issue: Siding was cut.
  Not repaired. The height of the siding has changed and the step flashing has
  been cut. Our roofers install step flashing by hand. Not with tools that can
  cut metal. *********: SEE
  COMMENTS FROM SIDING CONTRACTOR IN ATTACHED PHOTOS
  
  -The story keeps changing during these points of contact and now they want all
  of the siding removed to replace all of the flashing to code like it should
  have been done to start with: Client has misunderstood my statement. The roof
  is per code. The siding "might not be" and MGC is not responsible for
  code compliance for work not performed by MGC. If client is asking for siding
  repairs to be compliant, that will be the responsibility of the Siding
  Contractor and MGC will assume no liability. Any consequential damage to the
  siding will also be the responsibility of the Siding Contractor. This is what I
  have been trying to explain. *********:
  WHERE IS THE PHOTO/VIDEO EVIDENCE THAT THE FLASHING WAS INSTALLED PER CODE?  THIS HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED TO ME OR THE
  INSURANCE COMPANY.
  
  -I should not have to remove all siding to have work completed that should have
  been done to begin with: It was done correctly - please refer to photo file. If
  the siding was not cut, the step flashing would not have been damaged. I have
  proposed a repair method that the siding will not need to be replaced. I need a
  response in writing before work can be scheduled. *********: PATCHWORK IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION
  WHEN ALL OF THE STEP FLASHING SHOULD HAVE BEEN INSTALLED TO CURRENT CODE.
  
  -My siding contractor and Manning talked as well and I was told they would
  replace the flashing and the siding contractor would re-caulk and paint, but
  then Manning said that they would replace some flashing not all: Correct -There
  is no need to replace all of the flashing and tear open a perfect roof. The
  compromised areas need to be addressed. Again, we have asked for a reply in
  writing. 
  
  At the advice of my insurance agent, I am filing this claim. Some documentation
  is attached.Tell us why here...
  
  
  
  Regards,
  
  
  
  ******* ********

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/18/2022

  I see that the customer has sent you documents. Not sure what is being asked if MGC but the customer has stated that ***** **** paid for the Step Flashings and it is not on the insurance paperwork. If a complaint should be made, it is that her insurance company is lying to her and making her think that we have done something wrong. 
  

  MGC installed a roof at this property and there were no leaks or concerns until another contractor came and cut the siding. The leak areas are through the siding where there said contractors cut. Now we have a complaint against MGC for another contractors workmanship. MGC has offered to make repairs and the customer has rejected that offer. At this point, I’m at a loss. 
  

  Look at it like t hi is: A Landscape Company installs a sprinkler system and let’s the homeowner know that they should put a French drain at the low point to prevent pooling. The sprinkler system works perfect and the grass looks great. The homeowners is extremely happy with the work of the landscaping contractor. A year passes and the homeowner decides to hire somebody to install a French drain. That contractor digs a hole in the yard and damages the pipes to the sprinkler system. He does not notify the homeowner that he has damaged the sprinkler system. Months later the homeowner has pools of water in the backyard and the grass is dying. She calls the landscape company and tries to figure out why the sprinkler system is damaged. Upon inspection, the landscape contractor finds that the contractor digging the French drain has caused the damage. This is pointed out to the homeowner. The Landscape contractor offers to do repairs. At that time the landscape contractor says they’re not responsible for any of the additional damages at the property that would occur to gain access to the pipes. 
  

  It is at this point that the homeowner misunderstood what the contractors trying to explain and files a complaint with the BBB. My questions:

  1. Wasn’t the damage caused by the French Drain Contractor?
  2. Should the landscape contractor charge for the repairs? 
  
  

  Regards,

   

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

   

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

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/24/2022

  [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Assumed Answered]
  
  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  THIS RESPONSE FROM THE BUSINESS ANSWERS NONE OF THE QUESTIONS I ASKED IN MY LAST RESPONSE. 
  

  WHERE IS THE PHOTO/VIDEO PROOF SHOWING ALL OF THE FLASHING INSTALL BEING MADE AND THAT OT WAS INSTALLED TO CURRENT CODE? THE INSURANCE NEVER RECEIVED IT AND NOW I NEED TO SEE THAT PROOF AS WELL. THE PHOTOS I PREVIOUSLY ATTACHED INDICATE POOR WORKMANSHIP ON THE FLASHING INSTALL WITH VARYING HEIGHTS BELOW THE 2” CODE REQUIREMENT. I EVEN ASKED FOR A WATER TEST EHICH WAS NEVER PERFORMED.

  THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THE STEP FLASHING WAS CUT; THE PHOTOS SHOW THAT IT WAS NOT INSTALLED TO THE PROPER CODE (MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT SHOULD BE AT LEAST 2” BEHIND THE SIDING). THERE IS ONLY ONE PHOTO THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED FROM THE INSTALL AND IT SHOWS ONE PIECE OF STEP FLASHING AND DOES NOT SHOW THE ENTIRE ROOF LINE OR THAT IT WAS 2” OR MORE BEHIND THE SIDING. IF THE SIDING HAD BEEN LIFTED/MOVED TO PROPERLY INSTALL, THAT ISN’T EVIDENT IN THE PHOTOS.

  RESPONDING WITH COMMENTS ABOUT SPRINKLERS IS NOT AN ANSWER TO THE ISSUE AT HAND.  IT IS ANOTHER DELAY WHEN I HAVE BEEN WATCHING MY HOME LEAK. I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT MOLD AND PESTS ENTERING MY HOME WITH THIS EXTENSIVE DELAY IN SERVICE. 

  
  
  
  Regards,
  
  
  
  ******* ********