The client replies back to Decktech regarding an issue with railings and money.
Without warning, the email back to the couple turns scary....I've highlighted the parts that appear to threaten the client.
McKenna also left a voice mail recorded on the couple's I Phone, where this reported heard Ron McKenna call the client "the lowest of the low and most miserable person on earth".
Read through and then tell us what you think...would you ever dream of sending an email like that to your client? If you were in their shoes, would you feel threatened or intimidated if you got an email like this?
From: x
Date: 11/29/2013 6:59:55 AM
Cc:lawyer
Subject: Settlement letter of November 27, 2013 DeckTeck day after threatening email and not so nice voice mail!!
November 27, 2113
To: DeckTech attn: Ron Mckenna
945 Huber Street
Grover Beach, California 93483
Your threatening telephone voice mail yesterday at 4:47 PM did not go unnoticed by me or others. When I sent my email at 4:56 PM, I had not heard your message. I was still busy getting ready for another contractor to arrive. I only noticed you had called 4 times within a matter of 3 minutes. I can not imagine having to manage your anger that was heard in your voice. I want you to know, that I do not want you on this property unless you are invited and supervised. Your attitude and demeanor reminds me of a school yard bully. It will get you no where with me or others. I had been advised to make a police report as your email and phone call leaves a lot to be explained. I did.
We discussed at length prior to signing your contract, as well as during the reconstruction, my desire to use our existing glass that was installed in 1986. Our home was built under permit and multiple inspections.
You hired a structural engineer to fabricate and determine the layout of the new steel posts that were going to replace our dry rotted posts and accommodate or existing oversize glass. The new posts and glass are going in the same places as previous glass and posts. You had agreed to install the post and glass if you got the contract. Please note on the contract where I put a question mark alongside the 6' spans of glass that you called out. The reason I put the question mark there was that you had indeed said you could and would do the install with the existing oversize glass. I signed the contract and you had assured me that insertion in the contract was for your benefit and my existing glass was indeed going to be used.
As of this date, I feel a need to clarify with you what work has been done and paid for what work has not. As you recall, I have indicated to you the tile layout is unacceptable and no where near the same layout. The grout staining is massive and also unacceptable.
I informed your tile subcontractor's helpers of the manufacturer's written instructions on the tile boxes, and suggested they give you and Scott a phone call as they were not following the manufacturer's written instructions on all 85 boxes of tiles regarding laying, cleaning, sealing and grouting. Both you and Scott inspected the work that very morning and conveyed to me that a Coronado Tile Company area representative stated the way the job was being grouted was acceptable and to disregard the written instructions on the boxes. You instructed the subcontractor's tile helpers to continue grouting the tile, disregarding the manufacturer's instructions. That total disregard of the manufacturer's instructions has left us with a huge mess on the tiles, with grout smeared around the tiles causing them to resemble picture frames, and many with grout smeared over the entire tile dramatically darkening those tiles. The 1-1/4 grout joint on the leading edge of the southerly tiles outside our living room doors is a major layout mistake. The attempt to cover up the layout mistake with the extreme oversize joint on the leading edge of the fascia is totally unacceptable. The grout joints vary from 1-1/4" to less than ½". The manufacturer's instructions call for ¾" joints. I have asked Scott several times for an email that was supposed to have been sent to you from this Coronado representative, and to this date have not received one.
You also told me that the new tile and grout would also be cleaned and sealed as part of the job as the pre-seal from the factory were not acceptable to you. You needed the extra sealing for protection before you walked away from the job. Again, I have waited well over a month, since October 18, 2013 when tile job was completed. Either you or your tile subcontractor was to remove the stains before the tile was sealed. If it is sealed prior to removing the stains, the stains and picture frame look will be sealed into the tiles.
I also have contacted the Coronado manufacturer of the tile and they confirmed my earlier suspicions that someone needed to read the instructions on the box and follow the recommendations to minimize the grout staining on the tiles. I furnished them with photos illustrating the smeared grout and application that you had approved by telling the subcontractor's tile helpers to continue. In addition, I showed Scott a broken tile that had been installed. No attempt to replace this tile has been made.
As far as your contract goes, I do have concerns regarding the mil depth that was applied by your workers as to the waterproof membrane. The manufacturer's specification sheet that you included in your contract package entitled Nevada Coating System dated January 1, 2008 clearly states on page one, "NCS-6000UVS is installed in thicknesses of 45 mils to as much as 125 mils (please contact NCS for design specifications)".
The sprayed on application, that I witnessed, is no where near the thickness on the sample board that was given to me. I based my approval of the membrane, on you, your sample board, and the written NCS spec sheets that were given to me prior to the contract being signed. I was led to believe what was going to be my finished product was the mil depth of the sample board and the NCS spec sheets. I am only expecting the mil thickness as illustrated on the yellowish portion of the board and not the sanded walking surface that is illustrated on the other half of the board.I question the application and thickness of the membrane and I am wondering if this might be a classic example of the old "bait and switch" that often happens in other areas of the country, but seldom here in San Luis Obispo County.
Another concern that has bothered me was the taking of more than 10% of the contract or $1,000.00 dollars, which ever is less, at the signing of the contract as a deposit. My letting my money get ahead of the work was over shadowed by my confidence in you. I was wrong to allow this to happen. I have not, at this time, made any formal complaint against you or your company. My main concern is to get to what ever level of completion you call complete and look at your interpretation of completion and " workman like manner", and have all work finished before bad weather comes.
The final settlement will be as follows:
$59,970.00 Work to have been completed to workmanlike manner & to industry STDs
-12,320.00 Lousy tile job. Stained tile not to manufacturer's instructions.
-9,714.00 New posts and NEW GLASS!!!!!!!!!!!
-13,860.00 Membrane "Not applied as to mils and sample board".
$24,076.00 Amount contract SHOULD have been written for.
$24,076.00
-46,500.00 3 individual draws that we have paid at $15,500.00 each.
$22,424.00 Amount we have over paid as of November 27, 2013.
Since we have over paid, as of November 27, 2013, $22,424.00, and we are using our own glass instead of NEW GLASS, I will reduce our overpayment by the exact amount of the new post, the galvanizing of the posts, the powder coating of the new posts and the fabricator's time for layout of the posts. I will expect an itemized invoice from the fabricator prior to ANY REDUCTION of the $22,424.00.
In addition to the above posts reduction, I will also consider a credit back to you of the $13,860.00, which is the membrane application, when you remove the broken tile and you prove to me with a core sample that you have indeed applied at least the mil depth as illustrated on the sample board and specs provided me. In addition to the questionable mil thickness, I am wondering if the tile was installed to the industry standards of the Tile Council of North America F-104. This would be good to know with a certification from you that the tile standards do conform to industry standards. When, and if, you remove the broken tile and core sample the membrane, I will have my own forensic specialists here to inspect both the tile lay and membrane sample. I have just determined that the NCS manufacturer's forensic specialist recommended in San Diego by David Krubinski, the manufacturer of NCS was at one time a PARTNER of NCS. In my eyes, that RELATIONSHIP is a little too close and sounds to me like possible collusion.
In closing, in an email from you sometime ago, you stated that Scott Wilson was an honorable man. I want you to know, that bothxand I have always felt that way. It is a very uncomfortable situation that he is currently in. I suspect he has been put in this situation before. It will be just a matter of time before he realizes that he has had enough.
Again, I want the lien releases NOW and A FULL ACCOUNTING OF ALL MONIES PAID TO ALL SUBCONTRACTORS AND MATERIAL SUPPLIERS. NO FURTHER DELAYS!
Ron, you need to make a real business decision before this gets expanded. I may not be as smart as you, and certainly do not claim to be, but, I do KNOW RIGHT FROM WRONG.
This morning, I talked to the city regarding the oversize glass and new steel posts. It is their determination that our existing glass lengths, heights and thickness, steel posts and clips will be considered a repair and not subject to 6' lengths.
Thank you,
Bill,
Can you believe this!! Apparently Mr. McKenna forgot to address me with my new unearned names, such as, most miserable person he has ever met, and the most lowest of low life he has ever dealt with. And of course he must like me now as his email was signed "RESPECTFULLY".
Wow, what a surprise. I suspect he has consulted with his investors, attorney and most of all his conscience. Anyway, he time wise is exactly 24 hours late and even if I would have received it yesterday, I would still have moved ahead.
I sincerely feel, he has gotten away with similar shoddy work and unkept promises for as long as he has been in business. He really needs to rethink his way of doing business and treating people.
I also suspect his new and returning clients are a little intimidated by his profound confidence he projects during his presentations and feel as I did, he is the only one for the job.
Hopefully, the contractors board hops on this less than STELLAR contractor and stops him cold in his tracks. I feel sorry for most of his laborers as they always seemed to want to do the right thing.
X
-------Original Message-------
Date: 12/6/2013 12:15:17 PM
To:X
Subject: Project Conclusion Statement
X,
This email is to confirm we are complete and no further action will be implemented on our part. I discussed your project with the subs involved to insure they are compensated without your involvement. I also requested Tile Contractor continue efforts with inspection by Coronado so some sort of documentation can be provided to you on their findings.
If you feel motivated to pursue something else then of course that is up to you. My staff and I personally want to move on and we have a waiting list of new and returning clients whom feel our work is stellar. We are focused to those continued efforts and wish you well.
Respectfully,
LEAVE US YOUR THOUGHTS!
.jpg)
.jpg)
