Actual Client Case Examples

The following client cases were presented to our construction advisors. These are the findings of their advisor's consultation and the fee charged.

Example 1   I   Example 2    I   Example 3   I   Example 4

1. Client Problem

Upon reviewing buyer's working set of plan/blueprints, we found:

• 1" x 6" trim silhouetting the doors and windows rather than the standard 2" x 6".
• Silhouetting was excluded from the rear of home and the fireplace chimney chase.
• Six panel doors were shown on the blueprints for the first floor but flat doors upstairs, although specifications called for 6 panel doors upper and lower.
• Laundry tub was omitted in the basement.
• Garage overhead doors were identified only as insulated metal doors. The specs should have included the identity of its manufacture, model, R-factor, color and size.
• They were billed for the upgrade to dimensional shingles that were not identified on the plans or in the building specifications.

Results: Upon owner presenting our written report to the builder, builder revised his contract to include all of these items at no additional cost to our clients.

Professional fee: No charge. Our service was part of reviewing their contract and specifications.

Back to top

2. Client Problem

Customer changed the original kitchen cabinetry layout, replacing certain cabinets with a planning desk, assuming an even exchange as the builder didn't mention any price difference when he had them sign a blank "Change Order" form. After the cabinetry installation was completed, owners received an additional bill for a shocking $3,000.00. The builder agreed the amount sounded excessive but insisted it was correct and payable per the signature on the "Change Order" form. The owner contacted us.

Solution: We contacted the builder to point out his unethical treatment of the customer and potential courses of action. A few days later the owner received a revised bill reflecting a $2,400.00 savings, costing them $600.00 for the desk upgrade.

Professional fee: $45.00

Back to top

3. Client Problem

Client bought a building site from their prospective builder where in the "Offer to Purchase", a contingency clause was added stating he would be the sole builder of any home on that lot. After the site closing, the builder re-quoted the home price, reflecting nearly an $18,000.00 increase over his original quote. With that contingency in the "Offer to Purchase," the builder had the buyer locked into purchasing the home from him. It would be nearly impossible for them to resell the site to anyone.

Solution: We had several phone conversations with the builder, applying strong builders' dialogue. The following day the builder called to tell the owner he decided to reduce his quotation by $17,400.00. With this and other builder issues, we saved our client in excess of $23,000.00.

Professional fee: $135.00

Back to top

4. Client Problem

A new home had significant color variation in the factory stained cedar siding. The builder offered to put an additional stain coat on the discolored boards, trying to match all the others. Our client nearly accepted, but decided to get our opinion. We informed them that the boards would not weather evenly because of the difference between factory applied and manually applied stain. The builder insisted this would work.

Solution: We intervened with a conference call including the builder, the supplier and the manufacturer. After discussing the problem, the manufacturer agreed to restain the entire home at no cost to the owners. We preserved several thousand dollars of home value by maintaining the integrity of the exterior stain color.

Professional fee: $90.00

Footnote: We presented our consumer guidebook and advocate services to twenty-six lending institutions in the Milwaukee, Wisconsin metro area. Upon its conclusion, the lenders gave our program a strong recommendation and stated it fulfilled an urgent need and its value far exceeded its cost. All agreed that both lenders and borrowers would greatly benefit from our program and it would enhance the quality of mortgages.

Back to Homepage