Get matched with top basement waterproofing pros in Darien, CT

"Excellent - Tito was extremely responsive and his team did excellent work. I shopped around and got multiple quotes, and his was the lowest. More importantly, he had done work on a number of my neighbors’ homes and came highly recommended. His team was very responsive and got the work done on a short time frame which was great because I needed much of the work done before I moved in to my new home. My floors and skylights look great and I have full confidence in his work. One thing which I really liked is the fact that he is constantly in communication, is always available, and is local. The last part is important because he understands the importance of reputation which gives me full confidence in his work. I will definitely be coming back to him again for any future work on my house and wholeheartedly recommend!"

"The visit to my home in West Hartford was a nice affair. The technician explained everything. He even mentioned that I had to get a plumber to remove the sink away from the wall, so the work could be done to repair the window and wall area, but I did not hear him mention that I had to pull permits. The problem with this permit pulling issue is that I never initiated the pulling of permits, and this also is a red flag for me. The pulling of a permit should always be done by the contractor who is doing the job. It ensures that the permit pulled is to code. It ensures that the permit pulled follows local ordinance and CT. laws and statutes regarding construction, and that also includes consumer protection mandates in the State of Connecticut. Having me pull the permit to allow the CT. Basement Systems to do the work is a big, red flag, and it can result in my home owner's policy being cancelled if the permits are pulled either after the fact, or the permits pulled do not line up with the inspection process. I can also be fined by the town for pulling permits after the fact too. I've had my furnace replaced. The plumbing company who replaced the furnace followed state law and guidelines. Especially, since funding provided through a loan from a Credit Union chosen by the State of Connecticut ensured that permits were pulled correctly, legally. The same applies to my roof being replaced. The roofing company pulled the permit. Having a customer whom you are charging in excess of $20,000 to pull a permit is putting that customer in legal jeopardy, which is unacceptable. If I sell my house, and I had the work done in my basement, and the permits were pulled by me. The person who bought my house could sue me for an incorrectly pulled permit. How would I answer questions from the town about the technical aspects of the job, which should be handled by the contractor directly? Why introduce another layer of bureaucracy that slows down communication? Have the contractor pull the permit, so that the contractor and the municipality, town or city can communicate directly, and the pulling of the permit is done correctly and legally. How would I know, when the town should be doing an inspection during or while the job is being completed or after the job is completed? This should never be a requirement of the customer to pull the permit for a job to be done. The tech who visited my home mentioned that I had to hire a plumber to move a basement sink, but they did not mention about pulling of permits, but I went and re-read the quote again, and it is at the bottom of the quote page under "Customer Will" that states not only hiring of the plumber but also pulling permits and scheduling inspections. I did not have this job financed by CT. Basement Systems. I, instead, decided to get a home equity loan. If I did not get the home equity loan, then decided to go with CT. Basement Systems financing, then I would be screwed. The best thing I did was slow the process down, seek my own financing, and ask larger, bigger, deeper questions that prevented me from making a mistake by allowing this work to be done."

"Professional and efficient tech."

"Great. Kris is clear about each part of the project and we relied on him to clear it up. We could not have done it ourselves!"

"Job done well, on time."

"I had a lot of projects that we're done around my house. And what was great about it The company took on all the tastics. I'm very pleased with their performance."

"Outstanding service and value. Prostar Waterproofing and Construction were one of the most responsive and professional businesses I've come across. From start to finish, a pleasure to work with. They are extremely responsive, and will always follow through to ensure the customer is being taken care of. Calls, questions, estimates - all of this is done on time, as promised. Paul, who did the consultation, was extremely knowledgeable and did not try to upsell anything. The crew that came out were professional, and maintained a clean working area. Dust control was excellent. Their prices are very reasonable, and they will not nickel and dime. They will work with you throughout the project. Quality work, honest people. So far the system they put in place has been working as advertised. Would highly recommend this company."

"Very responsive, clear and professional. Gave me information I needed and then some."

"Overall, the project did not resolve the issue that I used Angi's for. In May, after a period of rain, I noticed that there was water accumulating in the basement floor of the property in Flushing, NY. Because of that I decided to seek out contractors to resolve the issue. I contacted many companies through and outside of Angi's. Through the estimates I learned that there were various options to resolving the issue of water accumulating in the center of the basement: french drain system, sump pumps, and also waterproofing the side of the property. Optimum Waterproofing and Construction (OWC) was willing to perform the job for $5,000 (but $4,000 if paid in cash), which was cheaper than the other companies that had come out to give me an estimate. The understanding was that the waterproofing would 1) have to fit my budget, as the property had undergone extensive renovations because of damages left by a previous tenant, 2) resolve the issue with the water coming in through the side of the building and forming a puddle in the center of the basement, and 3) the work would have to be done promptly, as a new tenant would be coming in. They recommended to waterproof the side of the property, approximately 10 linear feet along the property side. They agreed to start the day after the estimate. The next day, two laborers were sent to my property to break the concrete and dig the dirt (to expose the foundation) during inclement weather. They had performed the work underneath some tarp they had attached to the side of the house and on top of an adjacent fence (the neighbor’s property). After they had performed that work, the two who had come for the estimate explained to me, on site, that they could not continue with the work they had initially estimated, explaining that they had never seen a foundation that was so damaged. They said I required a sister wall and that would cost me another $10,000. I asked for some time to think it through. During this time I took photos and communicated with my principal and some other contractors and waterproofers that I had met while receiving estimates from other companies. Of course in the beginning I was flustered; however, one of the other waterproofers (A.M. Shield Waterproofing Corp.) said that “it doesn’t look too bad honestly. A good stucco coat would take care of that…” After a while, I asked if they could just close up the hole for the time being so that I could assess my options a bit further. They said they could not and that additional work had to be done, essentially putting me under duress to accept additional charges. I insisted that they continue the job as previously agreed upon, but the contractor said it was not possible and that I would have to do more work, which initially was an estimate for $10,000. Over the span of two hours I assessed my option by discussing it with other professionals and also my principal. During that time other alternatives were thrown out, one for $6,000 and another for $5,000. However, I was unable to meet them near any of the suggested price points. I even inquired about financing options, which I was informed they did not have that available. We compromised and he suggested foundation repair for an additional $1,000, bringing the total to $5,000. However, it was already too late for them to continue their work, and so the job was to be completed the following day. The excavated area was left open without proper barricades, but I used that opportunity for another general contractor to swing by. He (J.F.A.P. Inc.) also stated, “It doesn’t look like much of an issue. They just need to patch that up with stucco.” However, after he saw the work that was being performed, he advised me to make sure that they dug all the way down to the foundation to do the waterproofing. Additionally, he told me to make sure that the workers compacted the soil when they were refilling the hole (which was not being done, until I told them to). Although I am understanding of modifications, OWC knew I was operating off a budget and it seemed like they were using the inclement weather and also the fear of possible foundation issues to pressure me into a decision. They additionally wanted to charge me for the cement to cover the hole they dug as well as for trash removal (it has been my consistent experience with contractors that they have an understanding that they should leave the premises in the same condition, aside from the work performed). From my perspective, it just looked like OWC wanted to tack on additional fees wherever and whenever possible. Although the removal of trash and the cement work was included in the $5,000, I did feel that everything leading up to the resolution was underhanded. The following day they completed the work; however, the original problem still persists. On May 31st I sent OWC a picture of the leak in the basement. The text message did not go through. I tried calling them approximately 5 times, but no calls were being answered. I even sent an email: "I've been trying to get in touch via phone, but I am unable to get through...." When the communications seemed impossible, I contacted Angi and voiced my concern. After I spoke with a representative from Angi, I was able to get in touch with OWC. I opted not to file a formal complaint at this time, as I wanted to give OWC the benefit of the doubt and try to resolve this without involving Angi's more formal policies. After the phone call, I attempted to set a time with OWC for them to come see the issue. After a few attempts they agreed to come out to the property on June 4th. After inspection and also running a waterproofing test (running the hose in the area they waterproofed for approximately 30 minutes over the concrete they had covered the dirt with), they said that it was not their workmanship that was at issue. They said that the waterproofed wall was causing the water to travel around the waterproofing and enter in through new areas. If that was the case, they are the professionals and should have known that would have been the result. They said to contact again during the next instance, but I decided to forego communications with OWC directly in hopes of a resolution. If anything, it sounds like a sump pump should have been installed in addition or they should have done a French drain system. On July 24th my tenant contacted me and informed me that the basement was leaking again. Pursuant to my experience discussing this issue with OWC, I did not bother to contact OWC this time, because it sounded like they were going to skirt responsibility. Overall, I am upset that OWC feigned this was not a problem with their workmanship or services. I find that viewpoint to be problematic. Nobody pays a contractor to attempt to fix a problem. We pay to have the problem solved. In my situation, the problem was not fixed and I ended up spending $5,000 with nothing to show for. I had given them an opportunity to rectify the issue last time, but it was to no avail."