RADNOV ROOFING

Great experience, we met Mike with Radnov Roofing through The Colony Chamber of Commerce and our first experience was fantastic! Highly recommend this company!

My husband and I called several roofing companies mid October, for an estimate to replace our hail damaged roof. Of all the companies that came out, we felt the most comfortable with Radnov Roofing. The representative was patient in explaining everything our insurance company was paying for, and explained all our options. For some reason, some of the other companies seemed to just want us to hand over the insurance company check without truly explaining procedures or the value we would get for our money. We signed up with Radnov Roofing after doing some research on the company in the Better Business Bureau, Angieslist, and other online sites.
Within a week of signing the agreement, we had our roof replaced. The crew was professional, had all the work done in one day, and left the property spotless! Mr. Radnov came by to inspect and ensure everything went well. Within a day of paying the balance, we had our warranty mailed to us. We had heard some horror stories of other companies and had hesitated on contracting a roofer for a while. Overall, we are extremely pleased with their work and would not hesitate to refer them to family and friends!

It was fine. I thought the estimate was honest so I would probably use them.

See above...

I am filing this complaint to: 1) seek your assistance in preventing Radnov Roofing from taking further action against us and 2) protect other consumers from the experience that we are having. On July 7, my husband was misled into signing a contingency agreement with Tommy Kennedy, a salesman for Radnov Roofing. Mr. Kennedy was going door-to-door in our neighborhood and noticed that our roof appeared to have hail damage. He offered to assess our roof for damages and claimed that his company worked with insurance companies and was often able to get the repairs done for a minimal amount. (He alluded to the fact that perhaps it would cost us nothing out-of-pocket.) My husband told Mr. Kennedy that we could not afford much right now, but agreed to see what they could do. After determining that our roof did indeed have hail damage, Mr. Kennedy said that he would need to contact our insurance company to determine our out-of-pocket expense. That's when he asked my husband, Nick Phillips, to sign said document and told Nick that it was an agreement to contact and work with our insurance company. (My husband readily admits that he should have read what he was signing.) Mr. Kennedy then walked away with the signed document and did not leave a copy with us. Mr. Kennedy must have immediately filed an insurance claim on our behalf. The insurance “work” that Mr. Kennedy claimed to be able to expertly handle amounted to placing a phone call to our insurance company to file a claim (which we certainly could have done ourselves yet were not prepared to do – we just wanted to know our out-of-pocket expense because of Mr. Kennedy’s claim that they could help us for a minimal amount). Radnov Roofing had no other contact with our insurance company. In fact, my husband Nick actually formatted and forwarded the information we received from our claim to Radnov Roofing. Nick did more work with the insurance claim than Radnov Roofing did. At this point, my husband began communicating with the owner of Radnov Roofing, Mike Radnov. He explained to Mr. Radnov that before we could make any decisions regarding our roof, we would need to see a breakdown of costs. Mr. Radnov ignored this request. My husband also explained to Mr. Radnov that we were currently not able to afford our deductible. Mr. Radnov offered to help us pay half of the $2,760 deductible, which seemed generous at the time. However, we later received a quote from another reputable roofing company whose estimated costs were $3,000 less than Radnov’s presumed total costs. (We never did receive an exact dollar amount from Radnov Roofing. They claim their costs to be equal to the insurance claim of $9,186.25.) After receiving this other estimate, Mr. Radnov’s offer did not appear to be so generous. We were not ready or able to pay our deductible – even half of our deductible - nor were we comfortable with the pressure that Mr. Radnov was putting on us. Mr. Radnov claimed that we had signed a contract. He claimed that we either needed to give him 25% of the claim amount as a deposit or, if we wanted out of this contract, we owed him a 25% cancellation fee. This raised a huge red flag. We felt trapped. Mr. Radnov persistently contacted my husband at work even though Nick made it clear that he was extremely busy and could not take personal phone calls there. My husband further explained that he would be busy through the month of August, but would resume discussion with him at the beginning of September. On September 2, Mr. Radnov e-mailed my husband and claimed that my husband’s lack of communication left him with no option but to pursue legal action. At this point, I stepped in and attempted to explain in an e-mail to Mr. Radnov the situation from our perspective – that we had been misled into signing this document because: 1) we believed we were finding out how much his company’s services would cost us out-of-pocket; 2) we currently couldn’t afford the deductible; 3) we were still deciding what to do and when we would be able to do it; and 4) we had not received a legitimate quote from his company (the one document we received had no start/stop date, no materials to be used, and no specific dollar amount) and, therefore, we could not make an informed decision. Mr. Radnov ignored our claims that we were misled and insisted that we had signed a legal contract. Mr. Radnov then accused us of cashing the insurance check and fraudulently spending it since we were not willing to give him the 25% deposit he wanted. This allegation not only is untrue – we still have the check in hand - but, after speaking with our insurance company, is also inconsequential since it is up to us how we use that money. We felt his allegation was intended to guilt and/or threaten us. At this point, I suggested that it would be beneficial for us both if we ended this dispute with no recourse by either party. I e-mailed him a termination agreement stating that we would not file a complaint with the BBB, Texas Attorney General, or media if he would not press the issue any further or file a lawsuit against us. He ignored the document and invited us to “hold a press conference” if we wanted to. Mr. Radnov then continued to harass us. Several days later, he showed up at our door asking what we intended to do about our roof. I insisted that our business relationship was over. After trying everything within my power to get Mr. Radnov to understand that we were misled when his salesman asked us to sign this incomplete document, he sued us in small claims court for a 25% cancellation fee, even though he incurred no out-of-pocket expenses. No materials were ordered, and no work was done. At our court date on November 10, the judge dismissed the case on the grounds that it was out of his jurisdiction based on an arbitration clause in the fine print of the document. Mr. Radnov breached his own contract by taking us to small claims court instead of seeking an arbitrator. Ironically, Mr. Radnov is holding us to the details of his document, a document that we were not given to review until days after my husband signed it, when Mr. Radnov himself is neither familiar nor in compliance with those details. In addition to the unethical business practices exhibited by Mr. Radnov, after I reviewed state and federal laws in order to support our case, I discovered that Mr. Radnov’s business practices and contingency agreement document are in violation of a number of state and federal laws. They are fraudulent on the following terms: • We were misled into signing this document under the pretext that we were signing a release allowing Radnov Roofing to speak with our insurance company. This constitutes fraud in the factum and is a violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. • Radnov Roofing: o Did not provide us with a copy of the document for review at the time of signing. (This is proven by the fact that the original signed document given to us at a later date has the insurance claim number already written on it. This could not have been known at signing since the claim was filed AFTER the document was signed.) o Did not inform us of the three day right-to-cancel/”Cooling Off” period, either verbally or in writing. o Did not provide a separate notice of our right-to-rescind in duplicate upon our signing. These are violations of the Texas Home Solicitation Transactions Act and the Texas Business and Commerce Code - Section 39.004. • The document is also in violation of Texas Property Code - Section 41.007, in which a home improvement contract must contain a warning next to the spaces for signatures that reads: "Important Notice: You and your contractor are responsible for meeting the terms and conditions of this contract. If you sign this contract and you fail to meet the terms and conditions of this contract, you may lose your legal ownership rights in your home. Know your rights and duties under the law." • Important and necessary terms are missing from this document in order for it to be an enforceable contract: o Start and stop date o Specific dollar amount o Detail of