After reading Mr. Shoff's letter dated October 22, 2007, I realized Mr. Shoff is trying to state all discussions of December 11, 2006, never occured. My Arbitration case against Lincoln Logs International, LLC to perform to industry standards really should have been a sales fraud and deception case. I was never shown or provided the LLI manual until January 25, 2007 and section T-8 was never disclosed. The LLI manual is over 1,000 pages. My desire to build a business selling log cabins and complete this model cabin clouded my judgment to see the Dealership Agreement was signed because LLI used deceptive sales tactics, fraudulent information and lack of full disclosure to gain my signature.
Below are new facts the Arbitrator needs to be informed of because of LLI's failure to meet the Arbitration requirements:
1. I signed the Dealership Agreement, December 11, 2006, with LLI to gain a business Dealership to sell log cabins and for a log cabin to be built on my lot at 8,000 ft elevation in Coconino County, Arizona to use as a model cabin to secure additional sales. LLI was made fully aware of my business plan to use the cabin as a model home to generate new sales in the Coconino, Maricopa, Pima, Navajo, and Apache Counties in Arizona, just as LLI used the Laurel model during the December 11th meeting. I disclosed this business plan to Shelton J. Shirley, Steve Austin and Richard Shoff on December 11, 2006.
2. My signature on the LLI Dealership Agreement was obtained by complete fraud, deception and lack of full disclosure by LLI. On December 11, 2006, I signed the Dealership Agreement after a four-hour face to face meeting where many of the issues that LLI has failed to-date were discussed in detail with Shelton J. Shirley, Steve Austin, Kevin Shoaf and Richard Shoff. The only documents LLI provided up to December 11, 2006, was the LLI catalog, dealership application, dealership outline, and dealership agreement. I signed based on the information provided during the December 11, 2006, meeting and the only documents provided up to December 11, 2006. The information was completely fraudulent from the logs can meet 19% moisture content, to LLI provides complete plans for all permits required. LLI's only disclosed on December 11, 2006, and I quote, A local engineer with a State seal maybe required to review the LLI plans to meet any local code changes.
3. The 3 inch-3 ring binder that LLI calls the Manual was never provided or disclosed until January 25, 2007, some 45 days after the dealership agreement was signed. Even LLI admitted during Arbitration, I was not provided the manual until January 25, 2007. LLI is now using the manual saying the information was disclosed. However, I have a witness to both meetings of December 11, 2006 and January 25-26, 2007 that the information regarding the plans was never disclosed at either meeting and actually fraudulent information was presented at both meetings. This is the reason I was not able to locate the page T-8 stating LLI designs to North Carolina Uniform Residential Building Code until after the, September 6, 2007, Arbitration case because I only used the documents provided up to, December 11, 2006, the signing date of the Dealership Agreement. I sent Heath Tinley a fax detailing a number of items from the manual the day after the Arbitration hearing that disclosed a number of items that Mr. Shoff and Mr. Austin presented incorrectly during the Arbitration case. However, the information was not allowed to be present the Arbitrator.
I hope now because of these continuing LLI delays that the Arbitrator can review these critical failures to disclose at the time of signature to over turn the ruling and grant a full refund. I also believe LLI has known this entire time their logs could not be used in Arizona due to their past dealer Arizona Log Homes of Fountain Hills, Arizona that closed. Still no corrected plans as of October 24, 2007.
1. Until the load bearing for the LLI beams supporting the floor of the loft area are on the plans they are not acceptable for permit review.
2. I have sent emails, faxes, phone calls and letters to LLI and the BBB nearly every other day since September 12, 2007, requesting the documents LLI states were sent October 4, 2007. This is over 30 days since the Arbitration hearing when Mr. Shoff stated the load bearing will be completed in 3 to 4 days on September 6, 2007.
3. Mr. Shoff was 100% informed of the load bearing for the LLI beams supporting the floor of the loft area was required on September 6, 2007. Mr. Shoff is also 100% informed on March 30, 2007 and September 6, 2007 that the photocopy of a hand written calculation is unacceptable for the permit process. The load bearing for the LLI beams of the loft area must be on the PLANS in type not hand written. THIS IS PAINFULLY CLEAR.
4. This is another 35 days delay 100% the result by LLI's failure to respond to any email, fax, letter or phone call. This is completely unacceptable business practice. LLI has 100% ZERO Customer Service and no one should have this experience.
5. LLI clearly should not be a Better Business member with this type of contract, business practice of delay, failure to complete tasks, and failure to provide customer service. The BBB should be embarrassed for allowing LLI to remain a member. LLI is clearly embarrassing the good name of North Carolina businesses with this childish performance.
6. No lumber can be cut or shipped until LLI provides the documents needed to meet permitting. Additionally permitting is a 6 week approval process if the LLI documents are correct. Then HOA Approval is a 4 week process after permit approval. Winter will be in full swing at the 8,000 ft home site so no foundation work will begin until May 2008 at the earliest. The foundation work and curing will be an additional 30 to 60 days depending on weather. For LLI to state lumber is ready is 100% childish and shows no experience in building knowledge. If lumber is more then 30 days old from cutting when I send TPI, Inc. to inspect the lumber before shipping from NC, the load will be 100% rejected and a request for full refund plus damages due to 1 year delay will be filed against LLI. This is my written notice for LLI filed with the BBB.
7. This issue will be completed only when LLI provides all that is required to 100% quality control or refunds 100% of the purchase price. LLI has illustrated numerous times that LLI cannot provide 100% quality controlled services or product. This has been shown in numerous areas of work on both the Nevada and the Madison cabins.
8. The plans LLI states were shipped October 4, 2007, I believe arrived at the Arizona office October 9, 2007. I am out of town and will not be able to review these plans for a few days until I return from my business trip.
9. Clearly it is in LLI best interest to refund 100% of this purchase as LLI had to do for the failure to perform on the Nevada cabin but LLI continues to dig a deeper and deeper hole trying to save this single sale shows how desperate LLI as a company is for a single sale. Any respectable log company would have refunded the purchase price in June 2007 when the customer has to write a letter after 15 phones conversations of unacceptable work was reported to Steve Austin and Kevin Shoaf.
long Beach, California