Metro Remodeling Incorporated

★☆☆☆☆

About Metro Remodeling Incorporated

Categories
  • General Contractors
  • Home Builders

Home Construction & Remodeling

Home Construction & Remodeling
More choices in Woodland Hills:
Resultset_next

Worldwide Construction

6047 Tampa Avenue Suite 202 Tarzana, CA

Resultset_next

Daniel's Construction & Rmdlng

18541 Sherman Way # 202 Reseda, CA

1.0 1
Hi! Sign in to let us know how Metro Remodeling Incorporated was?
Write a Review
.

I did business with this company because they said they were able to do my home remodeling project within my budget and guaranteed their work. I do not recommend this company. This company did a terrible job and did not get the required permits from the city on several important parts of the project. They used unlicensed subcontractors who did work that was not according to city codes. When I refused to continue paying until they fixed the problems to standard quality workmanship, they abandoned the project. To make a long story short, an estimated 6 month project a year later the project was still not finished, and I was forced into an arbitration with this company through the Better Business Bureau who gave the judgment in my favor. To date (1/04/08), Metro has refused to abide by the decision which is legally binding. As a result, I??m taking further action and want to warn others of things that can be expected with this company.
Here are some excerpts from the Better Business Bureau arbitration decision:

It is found that much of the work performed by the Contractor is ??substandard, defective, illegal and non-code compliant.?

The site inspection clearly showed that many deficiencies cited by the owner do exist ? However, the unusually high number of deficiencies for a project of this size removed it from a category of having ??expected? and/or ??usual and customary? problems/deficiencies and placed it in a category of a project that contained an unacceptable level of substandard, defective, illegal and non-code compliant work.

It is found that the CONTRACTOR breached the contract.

1. The contract states , in part, that the ??Contractor will complete the work in a good, workmanlike and substantial manner.? ?. The CONTRACTOR failed to comply with this ?? requirement? and, therefore, breached the Contract?The arbitrator believes that this breach rises to the level of an egregious breach because the majority of the deficiencies are blatant violation of legal, aesthetic and ethical construction standards?. These deficiencies would have and should have never occurred if they were performed by licensed and properly supervised workmen. At the very least, the CONTRACTOR, had the ??professional and ethical responsibility? to recognize these obvious deficiencies and correct them before being cited by the OWNER and/or before he represented that the ??work was in completed in a good, workmanlike and substantial manner.?

2. The Contract states, in part, that the ??Contractor will obtain and pay for all required permits. .. The CONTRACTOR testified that he did not obtain permits for any of the work, other than the ??bedroom/bath addition.?

3. Based on un-refuted evidence and testimony from the OWNER, the CONTRACTOR failed to provide approximately seven written notices which are required to be part of the Contract and therefore, breached the Contract.

4. The CONTRACTOR testified that he did not use licensed contractors or individuals to perform the majority of electrical and plumbing work throughout the project or the design and installation of the kitchen cabinets. He, therefore, beached the Contract.

1
★☆☆☆☆

I did business with this company because they said they were able to do my home remodeling project within my budget and guaranteed their work. I do not recommend this company. This company did a terrible job and did not get the required permits from the city on several important parts of the project. They used unlicensed subcontractors who did work that was not according to city codes. When I refused to continue paying until they fixed the problems to standard quality workmanship, they abandoned the project. To make a long story short, an estimated 6 month project a year later the project was still not finished, and I was forced into an arbitration with this company through the Better Business Bureau who gave the judgment in my favor. To date (1/04/08), Metro has refused to abide by the decision which is legally binding. As a result, I??m taking further action and want to warn others of things that can be expected with this company.
Here are some excerpts from the Better Business Bureau arbitration decision:

It is found that much of the work performed by the Contractor is ??substandard, defective, illegal and non-code compliant.?

The site inspection clearly showed that many deficiencies cited by the owner do exist ? However, the unusually high number of deficiencies for a project of this size removed it from a category of having ??expected? and/or ??usual and customary? problems/deficiencies and placed it in a category of a project that contained an unacceptable level of substandard, defective, illegal and non-code compliant work.

It is found that the CONTRACTOR breached the contract.

1. The contract states , in part, that the ??Contractor will complete the work in a good, workmanlike and substantial manner.? ?. The CONTRACTOR failed to comply with this ?? requirement? and, therefore, breached the Contract?The arbitrator believes that this breach rises to the level of an egregious breach because the majority of the deficiencies are blatant violation of legal, aesthetic and ethical construction standards?. These deficiencies would have and should have never occurred if they were performed by licensed and properly supervised workmen. At the very least, the CONTRACTOR, had the ??professional and ethical responsibility? to recognize these obvious deficiencies and correct them before being cited by the OWNER and/or before he represented that the ??work was in completed in a good, workmanlike and substantial manner.?

2. The Contract states, in part, that the ??Contractor will obtain and pay for all required permits. .. The CONTRACTOR testified that he did not obtain permits for any of the work, other than the ??bedroom/bath addition.?

3. Based on un-refuted evidence and testimony from the OWNER, the CONTRACTOR failed to provide approximately seven written notices which are required to be part of the Contract and therefore, breached the Contract.

4. The CONTRACTOR testified that he did not use licensed contractors or individuals to perform the majority of electrical and plumbing work throughout the project or the design and installation of the kitchen cabinets. He, therefore, beached the Contract.

Was this review helpful to you?
Ratings_icons Ratings_icons

Wait, you're the expert.

If you've been to or used Metro Remodeling Incorporated, leave a review.

It's easy, only takes a couple of minutes and you'll help thousands make an informed decision.



Write a Review