X  |  CLOSE
Report: #718827

Complaint Review: FDM Construction Co. - Staten Island New York

  • Submitted:
  • Updated:
  • Reported By: prosej — Brooklyn New York United States of America
  • FDM Construction Co. 304 Broad Street Staten Island, New York United States of America

FDM Construction Co. an NNF Enterprise, Inc. willfully destroyed my property during neighboring construction. judge ordered them to fill crater in my yard. case settled but now my backyard collapsed due to shoddy work. wont make ammends. its bac Staten Island, New York

*Author of original report: Took You Three Years to Come Up With a Story

*UPDATE EX-employee responds: Greedy Neighbor!

Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

Is this
Report about YOU
listed on other sites?
Those sites steal
Ripoff Report's
content.
We can get those
removed for you!
Find out more here.
How to fix
Ripoff Report
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

FDM knowingly and willingly destroyed my property during neighboring construction.  My garage collapsed with everything in it.  The Department of Buildings ordered the entire rear portion of my property vacated due to the hazardous situation. My central air conditioning was destroyed and had to be replaced. FDM employees constantly harrassed my family and myself.  They used my utilities and property without permission. We tried talking to them, negotiating with them, all to no avail.  We then took them to Court.

In the course of litigation, the judge ordered them to fill a crater in my backyard, and make my property safe in order for an injunction and a Department of Buildings stop-work-order to be lifted. They filled the hole without backfilling the crater, and without tamping down the soil/debris under the cement.  It is approximately two years since that time, and my backyard collapsed due to the negligent way in which FDM did the work. Had the ground been properly back-filled and tamped down, no settling of the ground would have occurred, and my backyard would have been fine, but the shoddy work they did just couldn't hold up.

I contacted FDM and their attorney.  Their response was to send someone down to look at it (along with the engineer for the original project whom they subsequently sued as a third-party to my Court action).  That was it.  I have asked for their intentions regarding the repair of my backyard, as time is of the essence, but have not even received a response to that query.  Its back to Court!

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 04/17/2011 09:19 PM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/fdm-construction-co/staten-island-new-york-10304/fdm-construction-co-an-nnf-enterprise-inc-willfully-destroyed-my-property-during-neighb-718827. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Updates & Rebuttals

REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
1Author
1Consumer
0Employee/Owner

#2 Author of original report

Took You Three Years to Come Up With a Story

AUTHOR: prosej - ()

POSTED: Wednesday, July 02, 2014

Absolutely all of the supposed "project manager's" is blatantly false.  Court documents and DOB records will prove this! 

I will start with the rediculous staement made by supposed "project manager" that I "was upset that the developer didnt visit with [her] before the construction started". I do not need "visits" from total strangers. None of the many construction companies working on our block sent people to "visit" with me, and yet we had no problems with any of them - because they did not cause us damage!

As to the project manager's assertion that "Her surveyor told us that there maybe some encrochment below the grade, but he couldnt be sure" and "Mrs. A had her contractor dig up her yard in order to re survay. Her surveyor said, it was possible that 30 feet below grade, that we may have encroched 2" to 3". A judge laughed this out of court" I will make the record clear by stating that, firstly, all my assertions can be checked aginst Court documents and secondly, that my surveyor did find encroachment, that the Court ordered the defendants to open up my backyard and remove encroachments which they tried to cover up, and that the judge did not find any of this funny.  Anyone who knows anything about the legal system can confirm that cases without merit as one which would be "laughed out of court" would be, are defective prima facie and do not get heard.

 

As to the project manager's line "...come out to asses the condition of the shed, NOT GARAGE, SHED,..." , I will leave it upto the general public to decide what an 10'5"W X 18'L X 8'H constructed of cinderblocks with 4' concrete footings, a 7" thick concrete floor, steel crossbeams supporting a reinforced concrete roof edifice which was waterproofed with thoroughseal inside and out, with roofing material over the concrete, wired with electricity and had lights installed, in addition to a garage door and entry door should be called.  in my neighborhood, this is referred to as a garage by the DOB, the general public and construction workers alike. It is only referred to as a shed by those trying to diminish the extent of the damage they caused by diminshing the value or import of the subject of their destruction.

About the allegation that "At this point Mrs. A called 311 over 60 times. I was told by her husband that 25k and a new shed, and this would all stop. Unfortunatly the Company is not in the practice of paying off neighbors for fictional encrochments claims." I will again state that this is false. While I definitely called 311 several times, it was nowhere near 60 times, or even half that. If 311 was called that many times, it was because others were affected by this affair as well and wanted to file their own grievances.  Also, we never offered to settle for 25K because our immediate losses, without legal fees, were closer to 95K, and we were prevailing for a number that would cover our losses.  When the contractors offered us a new shed as part of Court ordered settlement talks, the record will indicate that i refused to allow the contractors to come onto my property or to build a shed because i did not trust them. 

 

Regarding the claim that "Her lawyer quit, and would not continue. So, Mrs.A decided to go attorney pro se." I will state that my lawyer was dismissed by me for malpractice.  He even asked me to sign a statement that I will not sue him in exchange for all of the paperwork I requested that he hand over to me. I did not sign the statment and i did not sue him either - he was just simply incompetent, not malevolent.

 

I can go on and on about every statment made by whoever rebutted my original claim, which I staunchly stand by, however, I do not feel the need to answer to any of them.  I just wanted to point out what type of peson was rebutting.

I will give an update though: At the eve of trial, on the date that jury selection was to begin, we settled.  not for the "We settled for $7,500.00. Her husband just want the attorney fees back." amoun that the project manager asserted, but for a number closer to my damages, and did not cover any of the legal fees. I personally did not want to settle for this amount, but my husband did, and so I respected his decision.  As the settlement amount did not cover all our costs, we replaced our garage with a 10' X 18' X 8' wood structure we call a SHED.

 

 

 

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1 UPDATE EX-employee responds

Greedy Neighbor!

AUTHOR: FDM CONSTRUCTION - ()

POSTED: Thursday, May 22, 2014

I was the project manager on that project. 

We built a 7 story condo building on a property where two abandon buildings stood. The person filing this complaint, we'll call Mrs. A, Mrs. A was upset that the developer didnt visit with her before the construction started. We were shoring up the rear portion of the proberty when she sent her 4 children, all under 8 years old to stand within 2 feet of the construction area. 

Her first claim was that we were encroching on her property. She call the NYC DOB, an inspector came down and requested we stop shoring behind her property pending a survay. No violation was issued. After 3 days the surveyor, the DOB inspector and I meet at the site. There was no encrochment. She wasnt, convinced so she call the DOB again and this time her surveyor come out. Her surveyor told us that there maybe some encrochment below the grade, but he couldnt be sure. 

During all of this the DOB wanted our engineer to come out to asses the condition of the shed, NOT GARAGE, SHED, his recommendation was that the shed be removed for fear of collapse, due to the age and proximity to the excavation. Mrs. A gave the engineer her approval to have us demo the shed.

We pulled all the necessary permits and the shed was demolished. After the shed was demolished a judge granted us permission to continue the work. 

At this point Mrs. A called 311 over 60 times. I was told by her husband that 25k and a new shed, and this would all stop. Unfortunatly the Company is not in the practice of paying off neighbors for fictional encrochments claims.

Mrs. A had her contractor dig up her yard in order to re survay. Her surveyor said, it was possible that 30 feet below grade, that we may have encroched 2" to 3". A judge laughed this out of court. There is a 4" variance in surveying, because old landmark are not always accurate. Her lawyer quit, and would not continue. So, Mrs.A decided to go attorney pro se. 

Mrs. A, told a judge that the DOB was in bed with us. She also called a local politician. Who she also, claimed was on my payroll. It was the world against Mrs. A.

A judge order a court appointed surveyor. Who also found no evidence of encrochment.

We settled for $7,500.00. Her husband just want the attorney fees back.

In the end she called the NYC DOB 85 times, 2 violation were issued. She accused the NYC DOB and a well respected politician of lying and taking payoffs, and she sued the court appointed surveyor. 

 

 

Respond to this report!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.

X
What do hackers,
questionable attorneys and
fake court orders have in common?
...Dishonest Reputation Management Investigates Reputation Repair
Free speech rights compromised

WATCH News
Segment Now