Loading...
2015-03245Follow-up Investigation on call regarding roof at 5956 7th Street NE October 28, 2015 I reviewed my voice messages on Tuesday and had received a forwarded call (from Ron Julkowski) Monday afternoon/evening originally from Ms. Lilith Mohammad, 5956 7th Street NE. Ms. Mohammad's voice message was somewhat non-descript but asked to speak with me regarding her permit for new shingles. I called Ms. Mohammad and she began discussing her inspection from Tony (DeForge) on October 13, 2015. She indicated that Tony was not wearing his I.D. Badge and that he did not offer her a business card. Prior to that inspection Ryan "RR" (a contract inspector working for the City) inspected the roof and questioned the lack of information regarding the 3 -tab shingles. He was not certain that 3 -tab shingles where sufficient to meet State Building Code requirements. Research and a re -inspection would be required once more was known about the 3 -tab product used. Tony verified after the first visit that the roof work was completed by Perfect Exteriors of Minnesota. This matched the permit paperwork. She indicated that Tony asked her to go in and get a copy of the Fridley Permit. She went in her home and came back with just the card and photos. Every contractor was to take pictures of the Ice/Water and roof preparation, prior to their installing the shingles. Tony then asked if there was shingle information that was left by the contractor. This is important to assist in gathering the ASTM data specific to the shingles used on her project. Ms. Mohammad was critical of being asked to go back into the house 3 times for information and alleged that Tony DeForge substituted her black and white photos for colored ones. Suspicious of why, she inquired with me. I indicated that I would need to ask Tony and get back to her on that question. Mrs. Mohammad also indicated that Tony DeForge went through her garbage. I indicated to her that quite possibly he was looking the packaging from the shingle bundles is important as it includes the ASTM numbers required to validate the shingle qualifications and match that against the other paperwork like warrantees. She was suspicious. She indicated several times during the phone conversation that she does not like the shingles, does not believe they meet a 110 MPH wind resistance standard, and that they do not match the screen porch roof, that was not re -roofed. She also indicated that the Builder had threatened to take her to court and place a lien on her home. Ms. Mohammad was certain that Tony DeForge was being dishonest, questioned why he would want the shingle information and was certain he exchanged the black and white photographs for colored photos because as she stated he is in some way connected to the builder that re -roofed her house. Ms. Mohammad also indicated that Mr. DeForge forged the initials RR on the inspection card when he was present. Though when pressed she indicated that there were 2 sentences or notes that DeForge made and the RR came after his notes. I assured her that I would follow-up with investigating her questions and allegations. I sat down with Ron Julkowski (Building Official) prior to bringing Tony in for an interview. If allegations were true, I needed Mr. Julkowski to be on hand for the discussion with Mr. DeForge and I needed to better understand the "RR" inspection on October 3rd as it then relates to the later inspections by Mr. DeForge. From Ron Julkowski I learned that he too had had a 45 minute discussion with Ms. Mohammad. He had attempted to explain that the inspector, Ryan "RR" who inspected on October 3rd needed more information on her shingles to validate their match to State Building Requirements. Ms. Mohammad seemed to believe that since the Ryan "RR" inspection, that there was an issue with shingle quality. There wasn't, he just needed more information on the shingle product used. Ron attempted in his discussion to explain about the need for the ASTM numbers before they could validate the 3 -tab shingles and match them to Building Code requirements. With Ron Julkowski also she seemed to believe that once the inspection was not finalized on October 3rd that the matter was a problem and quality was the issue. She also indicated to Mr. Julkowski that she was not happy with the shingles, that they did not match her detached porch and that they did not meet Code requirements. Ron explained that Tony was in fact our inspector, that he does not ever come to work without his Fridley ID (which he wears on a lanyard around his neck) and he did come to the site for an inspection on the 13th of October and returned to the Site on the 19th of October. It should be noted for the record that a late Summer hail storm has caused the City Building Division to have over 2800 new roofing permits and there have been 2000 roof inspections in the last 2 weeks. We have had to contract with other Certified Building Inspectors (RR is one of them) to complete the demand caused by hail, before snow begins to cover the roof these inspections are imperative . Ron and I then interviewed Tony DeForge. Mr. DeForge indicated that he was at the home of Ms. Mohammad on October 13th and October 19th. On October 13th he indicated that he was on site. Introduced himself to the homeowner. He had his ID tag on his lanyard as he always does and that he asked for the permit information from the roofing job. When asked if that meant 3 separate trips back in to the house. He said honestly, I do not know, I have spoken with so many homeowners in these recent months it could have been, but he was not certain. He said he does request the permit, because that packet included the builder's photos they left behind shingle information or extra bundles. When asked about photos, I asked if the photos were there, he said yes. I asked if he had his own photos of the site with him that day, he said no. I asked if there where both color and black and white photos attached and he just looked puzzled. He said he looked at the pictures, kept them as they were with the permit and then asked if there were any shingle information or extra bundles left. He wanted to look for the ASTM numbers on the bundle to assure that once again, the ASTM numbers match the paperwork and that the shingles on the house match the ones in the package with the ASTM numbers. He said on the 13th she said no she didn't have any other shingles or information and that the contractor cleaned up everything and took it with them. When he returned to visit with her on the 19th, bringing the shingle information he had researched, he tried to explain and to give the homeowner the information about why it is necessary. She insisted that those weren't the shingles that were on the roof and then proceeded to open the garage to show me the shingles that were left over. Which were Royal Soveriegn GAF shingles. Four bundles of shingles were stacked in the garage and he asked the homeowner, Ms. Mohammad about them. She then confirmed those were left from the job. He matched them to the ones to assure they were what was installed on Mohammad's home and he made a note for his file about the ASTM number, gave the paperwork to the homeowner, proceeded to complete his inspection and he was on his way. On October 21, the case was closed and the roofing project documents were prepared showing that the work past Building Code Specifications and was complete. All supplementary data including the manufacturers data has been attached to this report as it was received from Mr. ®eForge relating to this inspection. When asked about signing RR on the permit card, he said no, that his sign -off on the job was typed back at his office based on his field notes. He was not aware of anyone signing off on anything on-site except that which was signed by Ryan "RR" himself on October 3rd, when more needed to be known about the 3 -tab shingles. When asked about digging in her garbage, Mr. ®eForge said no, he had not. He indicated there was a pile of material by the side of the garage, but no helpful shingle data was evident there. Apparently Ms. Mohammad stopped at City Hall on October 16, 2015 and spoke with Fridley Permit Technician, Jolene Buberl regarding her suspicions about the "RR" note. From my later follow-up with Ms. Buberl, she did as we would have hoped, asked questions and encouraged the homeowner to use caution and call City Hall or stop in as she did, if she has questions regarding an inspector or a signature. She then described to Ms. Mohammad that Tony would not sign off on that card, but instead inserts his typed comments on the final sign -off into the permit works data system. I called Ms. Mohammad back on 10-28-15 to inform her of the findings of my investigation and that I found no improprieties in Mr. DeForge's inspection process. is Z S4 ® t4s n Your 8881 Md Safest Cltofce... Qua1 You News Release Can Trust Since 18861 For Immediate Release: For more information contact: June 22, 2010 Alyssa Hall, Corporate Communications Mgr. 973-628-3301 ahall(92 _ aq f.com GAF -Elk Shingles Now Pass Two Toughest ASTM Wind Tests for Superior Protection WAYNE, NJ (06/2010) — GAF Materials Corporation, North America's largest roofing manufacturer, today confirms that every shingle it manufactures now passes the two toughest wind tests in the roofing industry: ASTM D3161 Class F 110 mph and ASTM D7158 Class H 150 mph. Roofing contractors in the U.S. can now install any GAF -Elk shingle in any area without concern about whether they comply with national or local wind speed requirements. To its knowledge, GAF may be the only shingle manufacturer that can make this claim. In order to pass these arduous ASTM tests, the shingles were first subjected to 110 mph winds using ASTM's testing protocol. Not only did the GAF -Elk shingles pass, but they exceeded the test requirements by enduring the test conditions for a full two hours, showing no damage. They were then tested using the 150 mph wind test protocol, and passed again, thanks to GAF -Elk's DuraGrip® adhesive's tight seal. In case some contractors think that wind may not be a major concern outside of obvious coastal areas, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers (who develop wind guidelines for construction in the U.S.), the lowest wind speed that home designers should plan for is 85 miles per hour. In fact, for about 110 million people in the United States from Maine to Texas, codes require 110 mph or greater ASTM classifications. Further, high winds are not just a concern for coastal regions, as local geography can cause high winds at peaks, mountain passes, or large water bodies. The threat is real. According to The Institute for Business and Home Safety, more than 60% of all homes in the U.S. are vulnerable to damage from high winds generated by storms and heavy rains: Blown -off shingles can leave a home vulnerable to water damage, mildew, and mold and 4 c damaged roo&Aire expensive to repair. As part of -its continuing effort to provide the highest quality shingles to homeowners, GAF -Elk submitted to ASTM's severe testing regimen and successfully proved the quality and reliability of its shingles for use in any market in the U.S. Brochures detailing these tests are available to contractors to use in educating homeowners. About GAF Materials Corporation GAF Materials Corporation is the largest roofing and ventilation manufacturer in North America, with sales of nearly $3 billion annually. The company's products include a comprehensive portfolio of steep -slope roofing systems (marketed under the GAF -Elk brand) and low -slope roofing systems (marketed under the GAF brand), which are supported by an extensive national network of factory -certified contractors. Its success is driven by a commitment to provide property owners and specifiers with the best and safest choice in roofing and by helping supportive contractors and distributors to build their businesses and avoid hassles. With a focus on social responsibility, GAF -Elk has developed Advanced Protection shingle technology, which provides superior durability and wind resistance, while reducing the use of scarce natural resources. The Company also supports the industry through CARE, the Center for the Advancement of Roofing Excellence, which has provided education to over 100,000 professionals. CARE's mission is to help professional contractors and distributors build their businesses through sales and management education, and to provide product and installation training to contractors, distributors, architects, property owners, and related industry personnel. For more information about GAF -Elk, visit www.gaf.com.