Duffy's Builders

Andrew Katzander

2022-05

The contractor received a deposit with the stipulation that the (small) house would be started in the spring and would be sufficiently closed up to stay dry before it started to snow. (Note that this project ended before covid began.) The contractor delayed the start of project multiple times without apology and it became evident that he had already scheduled a large home to be built that summer and never had any intention to build my house during the agreed time frame. Also he refused to return my deposit after I terminated the project and before any work had started. Duffy might be ok to build a lean-to, basic shed or other small projects but he is basically just one person with a couple of young helpers. For larger projects or anything that needs to stick to a schedule or requires efficiently and oversight please look elsewhere. This was a terrible experience.

Dean Angel

2018-05

This was a building contract for a detached, 24’ x 28’ garage, slab on grade, with a loft.EVERYTHING IS LESS PRECISEIt 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. Expensive siding (owner provided) was installed poorly, with trim regularly popping off and becoming detached.Loft stairs, 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.A haphazard latticework of blocking and support for the loft trusses made this area impossible to insulate to code.COULD NOT MEET CODE REQUIREMENTSWhen 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.DISREGARDED SPECIFICATIONSA 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 MATERIALSBasically, 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.