Duffy's Builders & General Contracting

THE NEGATIVE ISSUES:
EVERYTHING IS LESS PRECISE
    It seems that the
contractor?s underlying attitude was that ?this is just a garage,? but the
resulting construction was more in line with building a shed.
Window headers were left not completed. Cement-coated, scrap
wood was used in visible portions of the exterior.
Expensive siding (owner provided) was installed poorly, with
trim regularly popping off and becoming detached.
Loft stairs, although specified to be construction grade,
appear to be styled to meld with ?The Little Rascal?s? club house; with varying
sized treads and an OSB floored landing?the contractor tried to charge extra
for this because they were ?winders!? 
Not enough anchor bolts were ordered to secure the floor
plates; at the contractee?s insistence, Tapcons were used to make up for this
error. Most of these were not driven in sufficiently?likely because the pilot
holes weren?t drilled deep enough.
A haphazard latticework of blocking and support for the loft
trusses made this area impossible to insulate to code. Much of this had to be
removed and properly reinstalled to obtain the required insulation thickness
without excessive compression.
To make up for a shortfall of approximately 18? of drip
edge, a scrap piece was installed over the top of the existing edge. This
makeshift installation would have directed rain into the roof, if the
contractee had not corrected this error.
The contractor?s trademark ?electrical entrance thru the
foundation? was executed poorly with the electrical entrance conduit neither
within the stud wall, nor outside of it. This construction trademark was
supposed to make the electrical entrance disappear. However, the result is that
the 2? conduit protrudes from an interior wall; making it impossible to conceal
and difficult to sheathe. It would have been more aesthetic to do a
conventional outside entrance.
 
COULD NOT MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS
    When the Building Permit was issued, the Code Enforcement Officer sent along requirements for
Bracing for Overhead Doors in Seismic Areas. This document was promptly relayed
to the contractor?who ignored it during construction. The contractee had to
facilitate a meeting between the CEO and the contractor, and still, the issue
was not resolved until (at the urging of the contractee) the eleventh hour.
Throughout the project, the contractor appeared either not to understand the
requirements, or was culturally unwilling to comply with them.
    This project also included a change order in the form of an extended roof eve and a cantilevered
balcony. To the contractor?s credit, he was willing to accommodate the change
and conferred with the building materials supplier for the engineering requirements.
However, when the CEO requested the engineering report after the additions were
completed, the contractee discovered that there was no written or formal
report. To receive a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy, the contractee had to
work with the building materials supplier (who graciously worked with their
materials supplier) to generate a Structural Engineering Report. Although his
assistance was requested, the contractor abstained from any involvement during
this process.
 
DISREGARDED SPECIFICATIONS
    A few of these omissions were minor, like
cutting off the ends of the gamble braces instead of beveling them, or using
OSB for the loft flooring instead of the specified plywood. But for the slab
concrete, the contractor ordered a #3000lb mix, instead of the specified
#4000lb mix. The contractor?s Mason did a fine job of finishing the floor, but
it cracked diagonally in several quadrants. I can?t help thinking that if the
specified mix were used, the foundation wouldn?t have cracked as severely.
 
POOR COMMUNICATIONS WITH EMPLOYEES AND COORDINATION OF
MATERIALS
    Basically, the contractee needed to supervise this project, because the contractor did not,
and was rarely onsite. Unfortunately, the contractee realized this necessity
late in the project.
    Several days after the slab was finished, the lone Mason hastily arrived, followed shortly by the
cement truck. Soon, the Mason was rapidly filling buckets of concrete from the
truck and pouring them throughout the curb, without any assistance. Realizing that
no help was forthcoming and that the resulting job would be poor, the
contractee assisted the Mason by distributing buckets of concrete, so that he
could perform his expertise of vibrating (with his reciprocating saw) and
finishing the concrete. Despite this effort, the resulting curb is poorly
finished and leaks whenever it rains.
    The change order of the extended roof and balcony were charged separately and performed on a
Labor and Materials basis. A significate amount labor was unnecessarily used because
the contractor failed to inform the workers that a change order was in effect,
requiring them to dismantle a considerable amount of the previous day?s
construction. This waste of paid labor reinforced the notion that a ?change
order? is a contractor?s ?license to steal.?
    A half-round window was specified to be installed over the balcony door. After the window
had been received, the contractor informed the contractee that the window could
not be installed because of the truss construction. In the contractor?s
defense, I will state again, that the project did not have architectural plans;
however, a knowledgeable contractor should know from experience what
accoutrements will work with various types of construction.  Of course, the contractor would not refund
the cost of the window. Accordingly, just as with the code compliance issue;
the contractee had to solve the problem by designing an installation for the
window within the truss structure.
 
THE PROS:
    The contractor, Charles Duffy is a most congenial, warm and friendly person. His passion for
deer hunting is unpatrolled and is always willing to share his vast knowledge
of the sport with his clients. As such, it is wise for prospective clients not
to schedule projects during, or allow them to overlap into the deer season,
such as this one did.
    The contractor did an excellent job of removing all construction and demolition debris from the
site. However, a better job of retrieving lost fasteners is necessary, as I am
still picking nails from my driveway?one year later.