On 7/6/17, Inland/ Schulte Building Systems field representative finally came to inspect the damages. On 7/7/17, I sent an email to thank them. Unfortunately within days after this we learned of the unauthorized revision and all work was halted as we clearly understood that the building delivered was not the building purchased and was not in compliance with the permitting issued. Finally on 8/16/17 a field representative that was a certified welding inspector arrived to make inspection of the repaired columns and he advised Inland would be altering the bar joists and making necessary correction to alter the building into the building we purchased.
In anticipation with Inland’s Field Policy we provided two potential companies to do the work.
Rather than complying with their own Policies, I believe created a new contract making election of repair.
On 8/22/17 we were advised Schulte/ Inland Building Systems would be replacing all bar joists and they were looking for a contractor.
We again advised Schulte/ Inland Building Systems of our 2 chosen contractors. On 8/23/17 we again had a different a field service representative come to the property. He advised that we should continue erection of the roof and sidewalls. This was in direct disagreement with all other experts that we had view the premises.
A field representative again arrived on 8/29/17 bringing their own contractor; 3 men and a truck to correct the issues on the 32,910 sq. Ft building. From here the issues only got worse. Inland maintained a Field service representative onsite throughout the repair process.
I still am confused what his actual job function was. I know he ordered materials, periodically advising on their work schedule, primarily he sat in his truck at the road.
I made report to this gentleman of numerous concerns of their crew from alcohol to inappropriate handling and treatment of the materials and damages to the jobsite.
When I questioned that materials were being improperly handled and stored even in accordance with Inland’s own guidelines, as Inland’s guidelines require the use of a spreader bar on large materials. Their crew not only was not using one but didn’t have one at least on this job. The field Representatives response was “I’d use one”. What does that even mean, one would think he was there to assure Inlands standards are met. He didn’t appear concerned about my property, the job their crew was doing and most of the time he wasn’t even where he could see the job or what their crew was doing.