Engineered to Fail. Built to Leak.
About five years ago we called a contractor to reapply the Elastomeric roof coating. We had recently bought the house and knew it needed maintenance. There were no leaks of any type. The contractor informed us that the built-up roof looked like it was old and it should probably be replaced. We were referred to Navarro Roofing by a trusted neighbor and realtor who said his company used Navarro Roofing for all their roofing, so we felt if Navarro Roofing was good enough for the realty company, they should be OK. They were wrong and the realtor has since stopped using Navarro Roofing upon our recommendation.
Navarro Roofing sold us on replacing the composite roof with good quality fiberglass shingles so that we would not have to maintain it like we did the composite roof. It cost $1000-$1500 more, but we thought it would be worth it. We were wrong.
When Navarro arrived to remove the existing roof, rather than using our driveway, they backed their stake truck up on our yard – right over our main sewer line. Navarro denied they parked the truck there despite the dual tire tracks from the street through the yard up to the side of the house. There was no immediate problem, but within a month there were constant sewer backups and a scope revealed crushed sewer tiles where the truck was “not parked.” It cost us over $3000 to replace the line.
Navarro Roofing made a mess of our yard. After the job was “completed,” there were pieces of shingle, globs of tar, roofing nails and construction debris all over the place. It took us four hours to remove the tar stains from the patios, walkways outdoor furniture and our dog! Inexcusable! It was the weekend and no one was available and we were tracking tar all over the place, so we cleaned it up ourselves. Thanks Navarro Roofing.
The roof looked good from ground level, but the inadequacies of the crew and their shabby construction methods were hidden from view. (Photo #36)
When the first monsoon struck, after about the third day of rain, the ceiling below the roof mounted evaporative cooler became saturated and leaked terribly. We called the HVAC contractor who installed the cooler and complained that the cooler was overflowing and leaking into the house. He said it was impossible because it was sealed and would only leak on to the roof. He came out and upon inspection informed us that when the new roof was installed the roofing contractor Navarro Roofing failed to replace the flashing around the cooler mounting. THERE WAS NO FLASHING AT ALL! No flashing, no sealant, no nothing! Just a straight shot from the outdoors into our attic! Water had been pouring in, soaking the insulation and saturating the sheetrock. We had to replace the flashing, dry out the attic, replace the ceiling and insulation, and clean the carpet. Cost: $1200. Thanks Navarro Roofing!
There are leaks at two other areas where Navarro should have removed and replaced flashing when the old roof was removed. One area was simply never replaced (Photo #16), another done very poorly, and another around the chimney (Photo #43) was ignored, using tar for sealant (Photo #40), which eventually failed (Photo #38) instead of doing it properly. Failing to replace the first and second areas have lead to rot (Photo #2) and the chimney alone has caused major interior damage to the amount of $800. Instead of doing it correctly, they globbed some tar sealant on it. Shoddy construction methods – engineered to fail (Photo #42) and built to leak! (Photo #38) How lazy can you be? This drip edge (Photo #28) is lifting between the fir strip and fascia because it’s not nailed down. Thanks Navarro Roofing!
The real damage caused by Navarro Roofing’s poor workmanship and building practices (Photo #35) appeared later. Navarro improperly installed three valleys (Photo #14) that have caused major leaks (Photo #1) and interior damage. Two separate interior areas at opposite ends of the house require repairs estimated at $2000. The third has caused cosmetic and structural damage (Photo #7). YES, that’s the sky you see (Photo #33) though the gaping whole is another quality Navarro roof. (Photo #17)
No one was willing to repair the damage without replacing the entire roof at the cost of $10,800, including replacement of the rotted roof sheeting, (Photo #30) the tongue and groove (Photo #33) and structural rafters. (Photo #29 & 46)
At this point what remains of the Navarro roof is about six years old, one year out of warranty and far short of the shingle manufacturer’s 25 year warranty. Three licensed roofing contractors assessed the roof and every one of them remarked that the shingles appeared to be 15-20 years old (Photo #5) and in need of replacement. They stated that a majority of them have “marbling lines” (Photo #10) or a marble texture, (Photo #13) as well as curling corners (Photo #5) and edges (Photo #3) – all signs of old shingles! Unfortunately, the marbling does not show up well in photographs, (Photo #25) but I saved hundreds of them in the hope that Navarro Roofing would stand up to the manufacturer and defend their construction practices and workmanship.
But that has not been the case. We have contacted Navarro Roofing several times but is has done no good. We gave them ample opportunity to correct their errors, bad work and poor construction. We were either ignored or told that we are responsible for the failure of the roof, yet they offered no proof. They basically told us it’s out of warranty and we could contact the shingle manufacturer. We disagree and feel if that’s the way they do work and “stand behind it,” then they should tell people that. If they won’t, then we will!
By the way, TAMKO BUILDING PRODUCTS (www.tamko.com), the shingle manufacturer, will not stand behind the warranty of the shingles saying that the warranty is void (Photo #19) because of “poor or improper application or installation.” (Photo #6) They said “the application was applied incorrectly.” Whatever the hell that means!? Regardless, it doesn’t say much about you when your own work voids a manufacturer’s warranty! But I guess that’s not something you put on your business card…
TAMKO also offers some other insight that Navarro Roofing might want to consider. TAMKO’s own Application Instructions recommend Valley Application in a weave rather than the metal W valleys Navarro Roofing installed. It may be why all the valleys Navarro Roofing installed have failed! (Photo #46)
We have learned a lot about roofs from the professionals who refused to repair Navarro Roofing’s poor work. (Photo #4)
- The roof was engineered to fail. The roofers who gave us quotes on repairing Navarro’s roof all refused to do so. All of them said they would never put a shingle room on a roof with such a low pitch. The City of Tucson Building Inspector said that the minimum pitch for a shingle roof is 2/12, but that code states that a roof with this pitch requires double underlayment. It would have been nice if Navarro Roofing would read and follow local and international building codes. They didn’t, but the ROC (www.azroc.gov) will only address claims within two years of construction.
- The roof was built to leak. (Photo #8) That’s a roofing nail you see hanging there.
- Navarro Roofing’s quote calls for two-ply 30# underlayment. We can’t find any. That is bare roof sheeting (Photo #37) you see between the gaps in the shingle. (Photo #21)
- If you build it poorly, the underlying structure will fail. (Photo #47)
- Roof Valleys are not Navarro Roofing’s strong suit! (Photo #42) They are engineered to fail and built to leak. According to the pros, if you are going to use the W Channel and not the manufacturer’s recommended method, then you must seal the top of the valley with roofing cement to prevent debris and water from being blown up and settling there during strong storms.
- Three roof valleys failed for various reasons, but the most significant reason is that in the words of one roofing expert, “they were built to leak.” Take a look at the two sides of this valley (Photo #14). The roofing pros we brought in after the we developed significant leaks and Navarro Roofing essentially told us to go f*** ourselves, say that the left-hand side of this valley is done properly (one said never use “W channel”, only weave shingles to avoid failure, something the manufacturer also recommends). The right-hand side is built to leak. (Photo #17) The left-hand side has two layers that overlap the entire length of the valley. It’s crooked as hell and looks like crap, (Photo #45) but it is apparently the proper way to construct if you are not using the method the manufacturer recommends. This overlapping has apparently helped prevent failure. However, the right-hand side is built with gaps between a single layer of shingle. (Photo #15) The left-hand side is apparently “roofing 101”, at which Navarro Roofing has failed miserably at the customer’s expense. We have to wonder, if they knew how to do it the right way, and the two sides of the valley are totally different, wouldn’t you think someone would know one of them is wrong? Of course they did! They just didn’t care! They did inferior work, and didn’t give a crap! Thanks Navarro!
- Note the clean lines (Photo #45) along the roof valleys! The gaps (Photo #17, 18, 19) allow leaves and debris to gather at the gaps. (Photo #22) The bent channels (Photo #23) don’t help either. Looking downward from the peak, the gapped side (now on the left) collects debris and channels water into the gaps. (Photo #41) Heavy rainfall flowing down the roof valley catches the points of the shingles and runs horizontally along the top edge and under the shingles. (Photo #39) If the underlayment were installed as per the contract, it would slow the progression of the leakage and rot, but probably only to the point where it would be out of warranty! Regardless, if the roof is so poorly constructed (Photo #21) as our roof was, then the unprotected roof sheeting will ultimately fail. (Photo #37)
- Flashing is a critical component of the roofing system and if Navarro Roofing would have reinstalled pieces they removed (Photo #5) then those points would not have failed (Photo #16) either!
- Chimney flashing (Photo #43) is also critical. Glopping tar (Photo #40) on top of old flashing (Photo #44) is inexcusable. Interior leaks require $800 repairs. Caulking along the shingles and step flashing is just shoddy workmanship and poor construction practices. (Photo #38) Why not do it right?
- In spite the horrific results of the job, apparently someone on the crew had some knowledge of construction practices. Unfortunately they method is not what the manufacturer recommends and thus the 25 Year Warranty is void. Some parts are functional, but ugly! (Photo #31 & #34) Ironically the valley termination was engineered to fail and did! (Photo #32)