ComplaintsforBudrovich Contracting

• Initial Complaint

  10/16/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Order Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I've emailed Budrovich Contracting three times regarding this incident of negligence which damaged my car, but they stopped responding after the first email. The incident happened late evening on Thursday, March 16th 2023. A trench that was cut into the pavement across the road wasn't filled properly, which exposed a 90 degrees edge a few inches deep. The exposed area in the middle of the street was not blocked off with cones or warning signs. The right side of my car bottomed-out hard which immediately resulted with two flat tires. Workers were quick to fill the hole the next morning. I am very careful with my car and had been driving slowly, well under the speed limit. I am 100% certain if the scenario was recreated, the same result would occur. Attached are the damages I paid for the repair, and pictures of the incident. I also have video footage, but I can't send that due to email file size limitations. Thank you for your time and help with this matter. Hopefully this can be resolved without going to court.

  Business response

  11/03/2023

  Thank you for contacting us regarding Complaint No. ******** filed by Mr. *********.  We cannot locate the initial communication from BBB regarding this Complaint and appreciate the follow-up.
  
  The subject of Mr. *********' Complaint is alleged damage to his vehicle that occurred on March 16, 2023.  Mr. ********* first notified Budrovich of this incident on or about August 11, 2023, almost 5 months later.  Budrovich takes damage complaints very seriously and has an internal process for handling these types of issues which includes a full review and investigation of the facts by Budrovich's Safety Director.  Budrovich's Safety Director spoke with Mr. ********* via telephone on August 11, 2023 to gather information from him, including requesting any pictures he had, explained Budrovich's internal review process in these situations and explained that a 5 month delay in reporting the damage may hinder the investigation. 
  
  Mr. ********* provided two sets of photos, copies of which can be provided upon request.  The first set of photos were taken at night (according to Mr. *********, the night of the incident), under rainy circumstances, from the interior of a vehicle and show at a distance the area of the road which allegedly caused the flat tire.  The second set of photos were taken during the daytime and purport to show the unfilled trench that caused the damage in detail.  Upon review, it was determined that the area in which he took detailed photographs was blocked off by cones and closed to traffic; as a result, Mr. ********* could not have driven in that area, the damage did not occur in that area, and the second set of photos were not pertinent to the investigation.
  
  Budrovich's internal review and investigation showed several inconsistencies in Mr. *********'s allegations.  The area in which the damage allegedly occurred is a public street.  An approximately 48-inch wide gravel-filled trench crossed the pavement in this area, which was located about 100 feet from an intersection.  Contrary to Mr. *********' allegations, there was no "hole," the trench was properly filled in the area in which traffic traversed the trench and the edge of the trench was not inches deep.  The photos of the damage area provided by Mr. *********, taken at night, at a distance under rainy conditions, and provided almost 5 months later, were insufficient to support Mr. *********'s allegations.  The additional, more detailed photos, were of an area that was blocked off to traffic and which could not have caused the damage.  Further, contrary to Mr. *********'s allegations, the area was not filled the next day as it was already filled.  The trench remained in this area for several days in the exact same state and Budrovich received no complaints from any other drivers regarding damage to their vehicles. 
  
  Mr. ********* was informed in mid-August that Budrovich was unable to verify his allegations and, therefore, could not agree to assume responsibility for the damages.  There was no further contact from Mr. ********* until 2 months later, when this complaint was filed with the BBB.  While Budrovich understands that Mr. ********* may be frustrated with this situation, a delay of 5 months in reporting the initial damage, followed by providing pictures that did not fully support his allegations, did not put Budrovich in a position to verify that the damage occurred in the manner alleged by Mr. *********.  If Mr. ********* has additional photos or other information supporting his allegations, it can be submitted and reviewed by the Safety Director; however, absent any new or additional information, at this time Budrovich has insufficient information to verify the damage was in fact caused by driving over the trench and, therefore, is respectfully unable to assume responsibility for the damage.
  
  If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact either Nancy Gruber or Patrick Wineburner at (314) 892-3030.
  

  Customer response

  11/03/2023

  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  
  I have pictures embedded with the factual evidence of the dates in which the incident occurred.  The video and pictures clearly support the road wasn’t closed.  I also have documentation of correspondence from the developer who brushed me off for three months and which hindered this be handled in a more timely manner. Recently, the same sort of trench was dug across the road again, and to my knowledge at least three other cars were damaged.  I can collect written documentation from those residents if needed to prove this has happened on even more than one occasion.

  Who did the investigation?  Their company?  Again, let’s recreate the trench and do a thorough and proper investigation.

  This is extremely disappointing they are not taking responsibility for their negligence.

  Sincerely,
  
  Nick *********

  Customer response

  11/13/2023

  Does this mean BBB has sided with the construction company, simply because they said it wasn’t their fault?  Or does it mean the BBB simply provided a way for the two parties to communicate, and now it’s really out of their hands simply because they are not willing to take blame for their negligence?  
  

  I just find it shocking that they failed to provide any evidence that defends their negligence.  I provided pictures, and have an entire video of factual evidence as well.  However, if the pictures weren’t enough for them to take responsibility, I’ll continue to pursue this in small claims court.  It’s just so disappointing they said a thorough investigation had been completed when it obviously wasn’t, and there are factual errors on their part.

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩