In January 2012, we noticed water coming down two sections of one interior wall in our 2004 built house after a heavy wind and rain storm. We immediately located a roofer to find the source of the leak and fix it. We hired Merlo Brothers Roofing ("Merlo") to find the source of the leak and make the necessary repairs. In their professional opinion, Merlo recommended that a section of roof be removed and replaced since it was the cause of the water leak. This replacement would stop the water leak. On January 13, 2012 we signed a $3,500.00 contract for Merlo to replace a section of the roof that, in their professional opinion, was causing the leak. Merlo performed the work and was paid in full.
In April 2012 after a heavy rain storm, the interior water-damaged wall had water appearing in the exact two sections as the original leaking problem. Merlo returned and, in their professional opinion, determined that extensively caulking the exterior wall and windows directly above the interior room with the water damage would stop the water leak. In September 2012 another heavy rainstorm caused more water to leak in the same two sections on the interior water-damaged wall as the original leaking problem. Merlo came back again and, in their professional opinion, extensively caulked a different exterior wall above the interior room with the water problem. They determined that this repair was the solution to the water leak.
During Hurricane Sandy at the end of October 2012, the water damaged interior wall suffered even more extensive water damage, spreading to two adjacent walls. We contacted Merlo and they had to come back again to try to locate the source of the water leak. For the first time, Merlo ran water through a hose to find the source of the water leak. They found the source of the leak on an area of the roof that had not been replaced or caulked previously. Water was leaking down the interior wall through three nails that had backed out through a shingle. Merlo made the repairs to the three nail holes, which took about thirty minutes to fix. To test the area that they just repaired, Merlo ran water through the hose and no water leaked onto the interior wall.
The complaint is based on the following facts:
1. During the original inspection of the roof after water first appeared on the interior wall, Merlo did not run any water through a hose to find the source of the leak or enter the attic crawl space to do an inspection.
2. Merlo made the professional determination that the leak was coming through a section of roof that needed to be replaced directly above where water was coming down the interior wall.
3. When Merlo came back to find the source of the leak again in April 2012, they did not run a hose with water. They again made a professional determination that an exterior wall needed to be caulked to stop the water leak.
4. When Merlo came back in September 2012 to find the source of the leak they, once again, did not run a hose with water. They made another professional determination that a different exterior wall needed to be caulked to stop the water leak.
5. When Merlo came back after Hurricane Sandy to find the source of the leak, they finally ran a water test to find the source of the water leak. Water finally came down the interior water-damaged wall when they located the source of the leak, the three nails that had popped through a shingle.
6. We spent $3,500.00 to replace a section of roof that was not the source of the original water leak.
7. After almost one year from the original water leak problem, the interior wall and two adjacent walls that suffered the damage, now require more extensive repair work. The cost to make these repairs to the three interior walls is $3,450.00.
8. We have almost $7,000.00 in costs that we would not have spent if Merlo had performed the most basic water leak test, running water through a hose, when they first assessed what was causing the original water leak.
9. Merlo made the diagnosis of the water leak problem without performing the most basic water leak test, running a hose with water over the suspected problem area to see where the water entered the house.
10. We have tried to contact Merlo to discuss this issue. We sent Merlo a letter outlining our complaint of their work. We have received no response from Merlo after many follow-up emails and phone calls. read more