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:11/22/2024

  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.

  AB Contracting Construction Services Inc was hired to demolish/replace stairs at my residence. Demolition on 11/27/23, construction began 12/18/23.
  
  AB's contract stated "all work to be in compliance with existing building codes," but they replaced stairs in the same manner as prior/expired code. AB never said any aspect wouldn't meet Code. In fact, mid-job they changed railing to meet City of ********** Building Code compliance, saying anything touched must be replaced to Code.
  
  During construction I noticed treads felt unusually sloped. After AB dismissed my concerns, City of ********** Building Inspections Department (City) Inspector ***** ****** visited and identified all items not to Code:
  
  1 stringer short,
  no barrier on tread back,
  risers not equidistant,
  tread slope excessive,
  removed 2 steps not 1 per contract,
  no anchor at top/base.
  
  The Inspector, and City email 2/8, stated I must apply for a permit, which AB disputed. I attempted to but couldn't, because AB's registration with the City expired in 2022. Despite records provided by the City showing expiration, AB denied it. On 4/3, I saw AB re-registered with the City and I obtained the required building permit.
  
  I emailed AB repeatedly asking to bring the stairs into code compliance. On 7/18, I wrote a final email requesting resolution, but received no response.
  
  I paid $2052 of the $5130 stair contract. (The power-washing and column refacing portion of the project is not in dispute.) Since the City noted multiple code violations, I propose the following solutions:
  
  * AB Contracting submit a plan to be mutually agreed upon to promptly bring the project into compliance at its cost. Then, after the City's final approval of the work, I will release funds in the amount of $3078 to pay the balance.
  
  * Alternately, AB Contracting may reimburse me $2,052 representing 40% of total paid for labor/materials related to the non-compliant stair construction and I will have the stairs rebuilt on my own.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 12/04/2024

  This work was quoted to replace to mirror the existing
  stairs and to shorten the ‘run’ length of the stairs; therefore increasing the ‘rise’
  height. The homeowner specifically requested no barrier on back treads for the
  ability to broom snow from the stairs and a slight slope to the stairs to avoid
  ponding water. While these items are not to current building code, the replacement
  was intended to mirror existing stairs with the homeowner requests.
  
  The stair assembly was completed as requested in full on
  December 20, 2023. During the stair assembly, the homeowner had stair railings
  to be installed. The homeowner requested we spray paint the ‘cuts’ of the railing,
  which was outside of the existing scope of work. In doing so, overspray got
  onto the railings, and it was decided AB Contracting was to replace the
  railings with overspray present.
  
  The replacement railings were ordered and a 50% deposit paid
  by AB. On February 9th, AB reached out to ***** to schedule the
  replacement railing for Monday February 12th/Tuesday February 13th.
  During this time, the (1) landing railing would also be installed, which was
  the only remaining item within original scope of work as homeowner did not have
  enough material onsite to complete the railing replacement. No reply was had
  from the homeowner. A follow up email was sent February 12th attempting to schedule the installation. ***** replied on February 13th communicating the issues with the stairs as it relates to current building codes
  (first time homeowner expressed any displeasure with replacement).
  
  Additional communication was had in April with homeowner
  listing items noted during inspection, however no inspection report was generated
  or provided. Additional items (paver patio removed and concrete foundation poured
  for stair landing) would need to be completed in advance of any AB work to
  bring surrounding areas to code.
  
  AB Contracting sent ***** an email with a proposed
  resolution to issues on April 9th, followed up with emails on May 7th
  and May 13th. ***** replied July 18th with no mention to
  proposed resolution and no further communication has been made.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 12/20/2024

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, reasons for rejection are included below.

  
  

  At the inception of the project, the signed and executed contract explicitly
  stated all construction would be completed in compliance with applicable
  building codes. However, the work performed does not adhere to and nor does it comply with City of ********** Building Code requirements.
  
  
  Regards,
  
  
  
  ******* *****
  
  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 12/30/2024

  The areas were replaced in the manner the homeowner requested (as outlined in previous response). The work was performed and complete (with the exception of one railing section as the homeowner was responsible for providing that material and did not have an adequate amount) with no items of concern communicated at the time of construction.

  There were additional items (outside of AB Contracting's scope) that were completed prior to AB arrival that are not up to building code, and no concern was noted of these items during or after construction.

  AB attempted to follow up with ***** several times and proposed a solution to complete the install of the final railing section (as outlined in previous response) with no response from *****.

  All work was executed (with exception of railing section mentioned above) per homeowners request and is complete.
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 01/08/2025

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, reasons for rejection are included below.

  
  

  Homeowners rely on specialized expertise and integrity of
  professional contractors to ensure safety and legal compliance of work done at their
  residence. Mid-project, without letting me know in advance, AB Construction
  replaced the railing in a different configuration than my requested preference,
  saying afterward that anything they removed must be replaced in compliance with
  the current City of ********** Building Code. 
  Email, text and calls document this.  Until that occurrence, at no time was I
  informed any aspect of the design or construction would not meet the code requirements
  specified in the contract. It is reasonable to expect the stairs should also
  be constructed to current code, which the contract requires. As with
  the railing, it was AB Construction’s obligation to construct stairs that comply
  with Code, which it states in its initial reply 12/12/24 it did not do. 

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

  

  Business Response

  Date: 01/15/2025

  The change that was made to the railing was due to the homeowner having insufficient material (homeowner provided) to complete. The railing was constructed within current code but was unable to be completed do to the insufficient material.

  The construction of the stairs was done per the homeowners request. The resting area of the stairs (paver patio) is not in compliance with existing building code and that was not a concern of the homeowner.

  Homeowner did not reply to numerous attempts to return to complete the railing section which would have completed the project. After much time passed, these new concerns were brought to our attention and the course of action to remedy that was proposed to the homeowner was ignored.

  The original proposed resolution is the only resolution we are willing to offer.
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 02/04/2025

  
  5 attachments (1 MB)
  Carpentry Repair-Pressure Wash 2023-11-21.pdf; Scanned_AB_Construction.pdf; Stairs 2 treads removed not one.jpg; Railing
  Suprise Cut for Code 2.png; Railing Surprise Cut for Code 1.jpg;

  
  Issues of non-compliance under City of ********** Building Code:
  contractor must be registered with City of ********** to perform this work for this type structure (AB was recommended by and chosen because ***** ********** uses them regularly. I assumed they were registered. AB is now reregistered after a 2-year lapse.)
  permit can only be issued to contractors registered with the City (I got it after learning of the requirement from the City, and getting AB to finally reregister)
  stamped drawing by a structural engineer must be submitted for the required permit (I got this after learning of the requirement from the City)
  Remaining reparations required per City of ********** Building Code:
  add a fourth stringer required for treads of this width   (currently have only 3) 
  install stair backs   (the gap between treads may not permit passage of a sphere of 4" diameter)
  reset stair treads into new stringers  (tread slope may not be greater than 2%. slope angle exceeds limit)
  stair treads must be equidistant   (variations between treads exceed acceptable range)
  add back missing tread   (2 treads were removed, rather than 1 per contract. before/after image attached)
  attach 2 pieces of railing on exposed 10' deck edge  (one piece was always available but not installed as it was quitting time, another has been sent from Fortress and is in garage)   
  stringers to be securely attached at top to existing elevated deck 
  TBD:
  stringers to be securely attached to base at bottom of stairs (City Inspector was willing to accommodate existing base of pavers overtop 4" substrate overtop clay, but the next inspector may not. Had AB Contracting has informed me what was required per Code, a base could have easily been added when pavers were lifted to level and powerwash patio prior to installation of stairs.)  If necessary, pad can be poured by Bzak Landscaping or AB Construction. TBD. 
  Remaining reparations outside of Code requirements:
  replace 2 pieces of railing on stairs  (damaged by overspray during construction. replacements ordered from Fortress/Huber Lumber by AB Construction who paid 50% at time of order, and are on hold at retailer)
  
  
  Finally, since I referred to it, an image of the unexpected railing design alteration AB did to comply with ********** Building Code is attached. (AB cut the more expensive 8' rail segment to add in additional posts, as expanse was 1 3/4" too long for Code)
  
  
  Best regards,
  
  ******* *****
  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 02/04/2025

  All repairs/replacement was completed per specific request by homeowner. Not until after the work was completed did homeowner bring any issues to contractor attention.
  

  Multiple attempts were made to reach out to homeowner to complete job; all with no response.

   

  Contractor will not work with homeowner again to any capacity.