ComplaintsforS&S Concrete, Inc.

• Initial Complaint

  02/23/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  S&S to install a new driveway at my residence last June (2021). During the demo of the old driveway, the manhole for the water service was damaged. The foreman told me he would fix it when they formed it up. It looked fine when they finished but it is now slowly sinking. They used some kind of foam material when they formed it and I don't think its strong enough to support the manhole. I called S&S and they said they would come out to look at it. They called back to say they couldn't make it because of the weather. They told me to email pictures which I did. They denied the damage. They said that the manhole is not their responsibility and that I should contact the water company. I am worried that the manhole cover will fall in and damage the water meter.

  Business response

  04/11/2022

  S&S Concrete was instructed to install a driveway at Mr. *********** home last summer. We came in and excavated and installed the driveway just like every other project. A few months later Mr. ********* called to inform us that we had damaged the manhole cover in installation and that it was sinking. We had no idea about this so we contacted the foreman on the job to see if he had damaged the driveway, to which he said he did not. We understood this did not mean we weren't at fault, we just had no recollection of this. We proceeded to let the homeowner know that he would need to call the water company, as we cannot assess, fix, or replace the manhole cover. It is not something that we would be able to do. After the water company came out and deemed the damage from construction we would have gladly paid for the cost, but unfortunately the homeowner did not want to call the water company regarding the issue and just placed the blame on us. We will still gladly pay to repair the issue if we are deemed responsible, we just cannot unfortunately call the water company on his behalf or replace/fix the issue ourselves being that it wouldn't be a concrete issue, it would be a manhole cover issue. 

  Customer response

  04/11/2022

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
  
  Regards,
  
  ***** *********

• Initial Complaint

  02/03/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  The dispute involves the damage by S&S Concrete to a **-year-old homeowner’s property located in the ***** *** **, ***** *** Ground level tree roots grew through the existing driveway/sidewalk, preventing the **-year-old homeowner's caregivers from moving him to and from the car safely in a wheelchair. A $7,220 deposit to install a new driveway and sidewalk was paid to S&S on 11/2/21 to repair the driveway. Due to concerns about harm to the 100-year-old, 59-inch diameter tree located adjacent to the driveway, certified arborists were consulted prior to initiating the project. S&S was aware of our concerns about harm to the tree and the advice of the arborists. Despite our instructions to both the estimator and foreman to cut only the ground level roots, S&S caused severe damage to the tree by grinding a large cut into the side of the tree. The tree itself did not have to be cut to straighten the driveway, S&S was not instructed to cut the tree. On Dec 1st, a Metro Inspector who noticed S&S vehicles blocking the high traffic street stopped the work. At the same time, he noticed significant damage had been done by S&S to the side of the tree and said the tree would need to be removed. This was later confirmed by a Forestry Supv. who explained that the tree is in the public right of way extending 24 feet from the curb across the city sidewalk into the front yard. The tree removal/ replacement is estimated at $11,175. S&S has denied responsibility for damaging the tree and abandoned the project on Dec 23rd by entering the property without permission to remove the wooden forms, leaving numerous 2.5-inch nails in the incomplete gravel portion of the driveway and damage to the sidewalk and the yards at both the owner’s home and next door which require repair. The driveway has been unusable for the **-year-old resident for 7 weeks now. The homeowner was negotiating with S&S via letter sent 12/29 and email sent 1/19 but S&S has since abruptly cut off all contact.

  Business response

  02/08/2022

  S&S Concrete was contracted to pour a driveway & sidewalk for ***** **** & ****** *****. According to the proposal, tree roots needed to be cut in order to ensure safety. The estimator explained to Ms. **** that the roots should be cut, but gave her an alternative that allowed for work around the tree. Ms. **** contacted an arborist prior to starting, who stated a treatment could be used to help the roots after cutting, but never stated that the tree could not be cut, nor that the tree was city property. Had this been explained, we would have never attempted the project with the tree. Ms. **** insisted on the proposal including the roots. In order to proceed, S&S hired a professional capable of removing the roots. This was made clear to Ms. ****. When the company arrived, they saw it necessary to cut the entire root off or it would grow back and again damage the driveway that was causing so much trouble. Unfortunately, the roots were very large and went up the tree which caused an issue. While S&S was working on the second day, after concrete was already poured in the back, an Inspector stopped all work on the project due to failure to acquire permits. The proposal Ms. **** attached states that the homeowner is responsible for all permits. Although not signed, she sent in a 50% deposit which constituted that S&S could begin the work as outlined in the proposal. The company was forced off of the property to avoid fines and the homeowner was very upset at this situation. S&S tried to acquire the permits for Ms. ****, but unfortunately were unable as they were very extensive. On 12/23/21 we were notified by our attorney that we could retrieve our forms from the property. We have tried to compromise. We have offered a full refund. We offered a full refund + 10% cost of the tree, both to no avail. We have been more than willing to help, unfortunately, it is not feasible for S&S to be solely responsible for the entirety of the tree & the counter offer is not justifiable.

  Customer response

  02/14/2022

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
  
  The position of S&S Concrete with regards to responsibility has not changed as they are only agreeing to accept 10% responsibility for the severe damage done to the tree.  Their rationale for denial of responsibility changes with every interaction with them.  We (my **-year-old ****** and I) are now tasked with removing and replacing the tree, completing the abandoned driveway project and making repairs to the yards at both his property and the adjacent yard.  Their offer does not come close to the damages they have caused as our property is now in worst condition than it was before.  Please see my attached response to their message.

  The alternate proposal that S&S is referencing was actually discussed prior to a decision to cut the roots.  This work-around was not feasible as it extended the driveway across the property line several feet into the neighboring yard.  S&S knows this as it was clearly explained to Mr. ******* ***** when I had him return on October 27, 2021 to look at the project again after consulting with an arborist.  From the photos sent it is obvious that the tree did not have to be cut to make the driveway straight.  Neither Mr. ******* *****, nor the foreman ***** during the walk through, were given permission to cut anything other than the ground level roots. They were shown exactly where the roots should be cut at a natural upgrowth of the root.  Had the person cutting the roots thought it necessary to do anything over than what was discussed, the homeowner should have been consulted. I can assure you that we were not.  The whole purpose of contacting the arborist was to ensure that the tree would not be harmed, it goes without saying that grinding out the side of the tree should not have been done.  When the pictures of the damage were shown to the arborist, he was quite shocked. The roots did not extend up the side of the tree as S&S is implying and the photos clearly confirm this.  There are many examples all over the city where roots have been cut next to driveways, many in the immediate vicinity of my ******’s residence without grinding out the tree trunk.  S&S employees also admitted on two separate occasions that they made a mistake in cutting the tree.  During one of these conversations, stating that perhaps the person that cut the tree thought they were giving S&S workers more room to work.  S&S also says that they hired a professional to remove the roots, however when they arrived on the job the very first day their employees were not prepared to do the job and even asked amongst themselves if any of them had a saw.  S&S also says that they made this clear to me that they were hiring a professional to cut the roots when this was never discussed at all. They had not arranged this professional to do the job prior to starting the work as they appeared to be scrambling to find someone to do the job.  Making phone calls, etc. They never told me who they got to cut the roots or even informed me when they arrived at the property.  The issue of a permit has nothing to do with the poor quality of work performed in the severe damage done to this nearly ***-year-old tree.  In the many conversations that I had with S&S prior to beginning the work, permitting was never discussed.  On the day that S&S started work, no one from S&S ever asked whether I had acquired a permit.  In fact, the Metro Inspector told me that it was S&S responsibility to obtain the permits, not ours.  It is quite shameful that S&S would try to use the issue of permits to avoid responsibility for the damage that they have caused.  If an attorney advised S&S to retrieve their forms two days before Christmas, they did so without permission or notification to the homeowner.  This does not appear the proper way to do business when a simple email notification or phone call could have been made. There has also been no acknowledgement or explanation of the nails that appear to have been intentionally placed by the workers in the gravel driveway on this day.  The property has been left in a state of disrepair by S&S in addition to the damage to the tree.  We reject S&S recounting of events and their belief that they are only responsible for 10% of the damage done to the tree.  S&S abruptly cut off communication after our last counter offer therefore we have no knowledge of why they feel it was not justifiable.

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

*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. ↩