Buyer Beware!
Robert Singer, CEO/CFO of Timberline…read moreManufacturing (Timberline Geodesics), and main point of contact (apparent proprietor) for Timberline's subsidiary/affiliate, Skylight and Sun (att 3, 4, 5, & 6) has defrauded me of 5 skylights, for which I paid $8022.40 in 2019, as part of a Cypress dome kit, for which I paid $60,654 (att 7, 8 & 9). He has refused to meet his ethical obligation to deliver, despite repeated attempts to contact him by phone and email over a period of two years (att 1 & 5), demonstrating clearly, in common parlance, that he is a determined thief and a determined liar (see #2 below).
For all attachments ("att"), see: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/141MaCML9AkMYHKdjLpJmkJVgpLA7KKKq
Considerations:
1) I am a veteran who has served this country honorably. I simply want to put a complete roof over the heads of my three children and live quietly. What kind of man defrauds a veteran of such a basic necessity, taking his money and incorrigibly refusing to deliver what has already been paid for?
2) Per attachments 5 & 12, Mr. Singer compounded his determination to defraud me with deliberate and calculated deceit, claiming, since my request for delivery in January 2023, that he no longer manufactured windows.
3) The skylights and framing are integrated items in the invoice, and only repel weather when combined (duh), yet Mr. Singer and his lawyer want to now back out on completing the delivery, offering me only a partial refund, intending to leave me to bear the burden of $3,365 for the framing, which is useless without the skylights. Again, what kind of man deals with his customers this unscrupulously?
4) Meanwhile, I also bear the burden of maintaining temporary covering: attempting to secure it to slick metal flashing is like herding cats. Mr. Singer's 'answer' is that "the framing is integral to the building," and "should not have been damaged by weather if cared for properly." This begs the question: how are 5 gaping holes "integral to the building?"
5) Mr. Singer's billing ethics are questionable. For 215 board feet of skylight framing and ~86 ft of 10 in 24ga flashing, he charges a whopping $3,365 (att 7). Even with a generous 3 man hours of labor, this is an incredible amount, compared to a reasonable calculation (att 10). This gives a reasonable person the impression that Mr. Singer has padded one portion of his bill (framing) to the decrement of the other (skylights). Given that quotations for the custom skylights (triangles) far exceed the amount he originally billed, any attempt to claim a refund for the skylights alone puts the customer at a significant financial disadvantage, while padding Mr. Singer's wallet.
6) Despite his clear breach of ethics, Mr. Singer is willing to compound fraud with veiled threats of litigation and attempts to silence me with money insufficient to procure skylights, engaging his finances to consult a lawyer to help him avoid his ethical obligations. This begs the question: if he has money to consult a lawyer, why does he not use that money to meet his ethical obligations? Does that not prove he is more fervent in defrauding his clients than in meeting his ethical obligations to them?