Inside this section
Complaints Against Roofing Company Continue
8/24/2015
CHESTER, W.Va.—
Joy Sekora says it was like a swarm. The swarm after the storm.
Salesmen from Canon Construction, in the wake of the May 2014 hail storm that damaged dozens of homes in Chester and East Liverpool, traveled up and down her quiet residential street, offering inspections and repair contracts.
Sekora, who knows a little about sales from working at a car dealership, said she wasn’t even aware that her Florida Avenue house had been damaged but agreed to have work done on her roof.
A Canon Construction work crew replaced the shingles in November 2014, she said, but never returned to finish the other work spelled out in the contract-new window frames, downspouts and gutters.
“The guy assured me they would do everything,” she said.
Sekora paid the Ohio-based company $10,200 for work that her Chester neighbors paid closer to $4,000 for. She paid the whole amount despite her initial insistence that she pay half up front and the balance upon the work’s completion.
“I’m furious with myself for being taken. They suckered me,” she said.
A Canon representative spelled everything out in writing, she said, which gave her enough assurance to give him the second check. It was only after the work on her roof had started that she was told, “We just do roofs. We don’t do the other things,” she said.
Sekora insists that the work was done in a shoddy manner and was never finished. Several packages of shingles and nails have been sitting in her front yard for so long-six months-that they’ve killed the grass, she said.
“It’s been quite a distressing time,” she said.
Sekora has retained New Cumberland attorney Lawrence Manypenny to press for a settlement from Canon Construction or to take legal action. He has all her paperwork.
In the weeks since The Review’s July 29 article on East Liverpool couple Steven and Tammy Smith, several people, including Sekora, have come forward with similar stories-stories of frustration with Canon over what they characterize as unfinished work, shoddy workmanship, unresponsive customer service, and confusing interactions with company representatives.
Homeowners in East Liverpool and Chester speak of their bewilderment over dealing with aggressive sales techniques on the one hand and lackadaisical customer service on the other.
“They’ve got a terrible name around here,” Sekora said.
Several residents have complained to the Better Business Bureau about Canon Construction, while at least two have contacted attorneys. Some are still waiting, and hoping, for the work to be done.
Bruce Simard, of Indiana Avenue in Chester, said he was approached by a Canon field representative in April, nearly a year after the hail storm. He was offered a home inspection and, after contact with his insurance company, received a check for $5,746, he said.
One contract called for repairs to his roof, while a side agreement was made for repairs to the front porch gutters in the amount of $700. The work was done in the first week of June, and Simard paid them on June 10.
Since then, Simard has been less than impressed with the quality of the work. “It left quite a bit to be desired,” he said. “The front gutter work was accomplished but with split gutters which were not sealed, and each corner also leaked profusely.”
Canon returned to touch up the roof and did a partial sealing of the gutters, Simard said. But with such a rainy spring and early summer, the gutters regularly overflowed.
“It was like Niagara Falls out front,” he said.
After three attempts at sealing the gutters, Simard was told he needed seamless gutters. He’s still waiting, after multiple attempts at reaching the company, for that work to be done, he said.
“If nothing else, their definition of customer service is totally unacceptable. They will promise you calls, and they will never return the calls. To me, it’s just a total disregard for their customers,” he said. “I have gone through five different individuals, and my patience is wearing thin.”
Lisa Smith, of Grandview Road in Lawrenceville, said Canon replaced her roof in December 2014. She paid them $7,681 from an insurance settlement.
But as the weather got warmer, some of the shingles started coming down, she said. Others looked like they hadn’t been installed properly. Workers had to come back to reinforce the ridge vent, but Smith is still not pleased with the workmanship.
“I don’t know if I want them to make it right. I’m tired of listening to their stories,” she said.
Smith filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau of the Mahoning Valley, which covers Mahoning, Trumbull and Columbiana counties in Ohio. Although Canon Construction has its headquarters in Highland Heights, Ohio, east of Cleveland, it opened an office in Calcutta soon after the May 2014 storm. That office later closed and was moved to the East End.
Smith said her case was closed after Canon Construction responded to a letter from the BBB, but she may file another complaint. Canon is not BBB-accredited and currently has a D+ rating.
“They should be contacting me to resolve it. I shouldn’t have to keep calling them,” she said.
In addition to Ohio, Canon has offices in Texas and Louisiana. The Dallas BBB revoked Canon’s accreditation in August 2014 for engaging in “activities reflecting poorly on the BBB or its accredited businesses.”
Dallas BBB spokeswoman Jeannette Kopko said the Irving, Texas-based Canon Construction had common ownership and common principal management with D.D. Exteriors Enterprises LLC, of Stow, Ohio, which had a BBB rating of F in 2014 (it currently has a C+ rating and no accreditation).
The reasons for the F rating included one unresolved customer complaint, failure to respond to 14 complaints, and failure to resolve the underlying causes of a pattern of complaints, Kopko said.
Canon Construction owner Todd DeWald, of Stow, Ohio, said he is aware of some of the complaints and is trying to address them.
“There’s a lack of communication back to me, which is 90 percent of the problem,” he said. “I’d like to get everyone taken care of. I’m not going to run away from it.”
DeWald said he plans to close the East Liverpool office soon but that he will support the work that’s been done and honor each two-year service agreement. He insists that most Canon customers are happy.
“We probably did 1,000 roofs in Chester and East Liverpool. If you have 10 complaints, what percentage is that?” he said. “Then again, I don’t want any complaints.”
DeWald said many of the jobs are small-$5,000 or less-and involve subcontractors. He acknowledged that with that many jobs, there are going to be mistakes.
“Obviously, we didn’t do the right thing in every case,” he said. “(But) there wasn’t anything shady on our side.”
DeWald said he is willing to contact Sekora, Simard and Lisa Smith personally and talk to them about their complaints.
“I certainly don’t want a bad reputation. It’s all about ethics,” he said.
Meanwhile, Tammy Smith said she received a $500 reimbursement check after speaking with Canon’s East Liverpool manager but that no subsequent work has been done.
Source The Review