Good job gone bad

[washingtonsignguy]

So i had a job last winter that ended up being a nightmare, and am curious what others thought of the situation. So the job was to replace the faces on an illuminated sign box with some new sheets of lexan and vinyl with logo for a upcoming restaraunt. simple enough i gave the bid of around 4,000.00 (it was a big sign) which included design of new logo, fabrication and installation of the new faces. He approved and i went on my way with fabrication. On install day i was in the air 30' on my bucket truck when a city official came down and said we were to stop work immediatly. I talked with him and he said he would explain more later. I came back to the shop and checked the cities regualtions and found that for replacing sign faces, permits are NOT required. Which is what i had already known and which is why no actions were taken with the city. So the next day i sat down with the customer and the city officials and he said that 15 years ago the sign was not up to code and was ordered to be taken down. The previous owners did not do this and the city obviosly didnt take any more ations at that time. So they now say the owner has to take it down. So now i take a few days to think this over. I have already fabricated the signs and installed one side. I have also taken a down payment of 50%. I sit down with the owner and after a long heated discussion, he comes to the conclusion that it was my fault and i was to refund his money. What would you do at this point? As i said permits are not required on this type of sign, but am i at fault for not checking with the city to make sure it is up to code. This sign is very well built out of steel and showed no signs of wear besides paint. The sign is 30' tall which is the maximum hieght in the citys codes. We ended up agreeing to disagree and i kept his down and the other sign and he didnt pay me the rest and kept the first sign to make his new ones out of. A fair resolution i guess, but i always wonder when i drive by if i should have handled it differently.
Thanks for your time in reading this.

 

[washingtonsignguy]

I also wanted to say that I had on my signed bid that no permits were included with this bid even though i knew that they were not needed. His side was that if i had checked in with the city they would have noticed this earlier.

 

[J Hill Designs]

His fault. If permits aren't needed, why would you go down to the city at all? If it was an upcoming restaurant, he would have been permitting everything else, why not ask about the sign along with the other stuff (ADA, fire, etc...)

 

[p3]

Man seems like a bad deal. I don't know about the legalities of it, but even if you would have checked with the city, they would have said changing the face of it was fine, no permits right? So that would have yielded the same results you got I think. Seems like the person moving into the building would be the one at fault for making sure everything is up to code, or before buying the place, someone would have looked it over and told him what was wrong, not someone who was hired to replace graphics on a sign that was already standing.

 

[washingtonsignguy]

Yeah those were my arguments. par tof the problem with this, was the guy was oriental and didnt really have good knowledge of how things worked here, this made him hard to reason with. He was doing lots of work in the kitchen without permits also, which he had got in trouble for also.

 

[J Hill Designs]

yeah you probably will have to eat the $2k - materials def. paid for, hopefully you didn't have to rent a truck for the install...

 

[washingtonsignguy]

My down just barely covered my expenses, i ended up coming out of it even, but i was upset to see so much work go without any profits and he got to keep the other sign which he ended up nailing to the side of his building. (really hoboish). Thanks for the comments, its nice to know what other sign shops think.

 

[threeputt]

You know, that's a tough one. But I think I almost see it this way:

The City should have enforced their non-compliance edict. Way back when they became aware of it. Their failure to do that somewhat mitigates (waters-down) their claim. It takes a lot, and I mean a lot of steam, out of their huff and puff. If you know what I mean.

I think if I were the new owner of the property, I would argue that unless there was some sort of notice, some sort of lien, anything...on the property title to alert him of this situation, that the City's claim that the sign must come down is un-enforcable. And he may even have money damages against the City.

Not a lawyer by any means, but hang out with many and have listened to many a legal argument...and the legal basis's for such arguments. So you kind of get a feel for this stuff.

Municipalities make mistakes. I go to enough City Council meetings to know that much. And when they do make mistakes, they're liable for them...just like you and I.

Just my take on the situation.

 

[SignosaurusRex]

You did your job. You knew that you did not need a permit. Sounds like you did things correctly. You are NOT the Code Compliance Inspector. Business is business and the client is the one with his pants down with his head up his arss....not you. Small claims for the balance minus the install of one face. Did you remove the face that you had already installed? If so...charge for that too. The owner should have known that the sign was not in compliance. That is just plain stupidity in my opinion and stupidity is often expensive as well as painful. You weren't the stupid one here.

 

[BobM]

My guess is the customer knew that the sign was illegal. The city/town wouldof or should have filed an order against the property and that would have been enforced at time of closing. The new owner was hoping they could use the "languge barrier", I didn't understand" excuse after you had the sign done.

I don't want to profile, but those that "don't understand" or don't "communicate" during the layout, design, contract phases pay me in advance. And especially the ones that ask "Is that your best price" or say "theres not that much in my budget".

Be happy you covered your costs and were able to walk away from a bad customer.

 

[Gino]

Based on your story.... I see it your way also. Here in PA, you have to get a permit to do anything, so this whole thing would've been avoided completely.

My thought would be this..... he might not have needed a permit to change out the faces.... but how is you didn't need a permit to do work on a municipal street, 30' in the air during normal hours ?? Around here, you have to clear off the sidewalks and the street if you have a truck on the property in the air... and that means going in and clearing it with City Hall.

Don't you even have to show your liability insurance papers to anyone to go in the air, do electrical work or anything else that high up ??

 

[J Hill Designs]

don't have to do that here, gino, unless you need to block city roads...most stuff I do is from parking lots...no need for any paper showing...IDK about washington, but prob same same

 

[MrSigns]

I agree with threeputt city bares some responsability. Also you could've been played by the business owner. I would not assume your customer is telling the truth not knowing.

if a small town like mine, very easy for the city official to know whats coming and going. new business owner should have prompted the city official or reminded him of the sign not being compliant. I think you handled it well, my frustration would have been focused on the city or city official. I have personally had a building inspector stop a crew working on a sign. I marched into his office, told him never to stop me like that again and make me lose money. A simple polite phone call would have resolved the issue. I had a good relationship with the inpector after that. Kind of put him in his place. He was overstepping his authority. That tends to happen.

 

[round man]

If he is he property owner by law he should have been notified about the illegal sign. If not the previous property owner is liable here. either way it is not your fault and you have the right to be compensated for your time and effort if you have a valid sales contract for said efforts,...take the guy to court and or jointly take the previous property owner to court.

 

[Just Another Sign Guy]

i always prefer a happy customer to a unhappy customer...i know crazy me...anyways happy customers spend more money with me and send me referals...unhappy customers bitch and moan to anyone that will listen.

have you asked him what it would take to make him happy? explained your position and tried to find a happy medium that doesn't make you lose money?

maybe there is a way to sell him a new sign fixture and utilize the sign faces you have already made and get him up to code? and still make a few extra pesos...

if there is no making him happy without losing money...well i'm not in the business of working for free or worse paying to do a job..but if i can find a way to make him happy and still make a few bucks...that's just good business.

 

[washingtonsignguy]

Thanks everyone for the input. So as long as i am not working in the road rightaway, i dont need any permits or permission, which i was not. And i wasnt doing anything structural or electrical to the sign, just changing the faces. The city had agreed with me in my meeting that i didnt need a permit, but they said i should have asked anyways. I have done replacment of the sign faces in this town, about a dozen times and after asking the first few times, and them just telling me no, i stopped asking. shame on me, right. It is all said and done, i knew i could have taken him to court, but didnt feel right doing that, I am a fairly new business and havent had to do that before, so it probly just kinda intimidated me. I have a family to feed and didnt want to take the risk. I didnt take the first face down, the contractor that took the sign down did that. They guy himself was pretty level headed, however his wife is the one that really pissed me off. she really tore into me in a language i had no idea what she was saying and didnt need to. Anyways, it is all done and i need to get over it, but i appreciate everyones, support.

 

[Mosh]

Have I mentioned I have been arested for assalt???/

 

[Pro Image]

Have I mentioned I have been arested for assalt???/

Against SOY BEANS............:ROFLMAO:

 

[Rick]

Do you need a contractors license for this type of work?... if you do, then you may very well be responsible for code compliance at a certain point. You may to be in the clear, but you were refacing a bootleg sign, a simple check of the code/zoning may have answered that.

Over here in California we need a contractors license for this type of work. We are restricted to small down payments. Some cities do have permit requirements. Hanging sign faces on a bootleg cabinet has gotten a few shops in trouble over here. Usually a hand slap and a hundred dollars, but I warn my clients that it's not worth putting your contractors license in jeopardy for a simple sign face replacement.

 

[ggsigns]

Not to hijack this thread but several comments show a wide range of regulations sign guys must contend with. Seems like no matter how bad your local govt is somebody has it worse. Here in metro Atlanta it's ridiculously easy. Any one can pull a permit, any one can build a sign, any one can install a sign. No licenses required, no certification, UL is not required in 99% of locales. Some locales do require a business license from the sign builder but most not. Unless you must block a sidewalk or a traffic lane the police don't care either. The result, prices are ridiculously low and so is quality but most buyers don't care because the sign is cheap. Install is also shoddy, I've seen more than one raceway put up with sheet rock screws.