Conned into signing (by a "Roofing Salesman")

[ImReady]

Hello,
I'll try to make this quick and accurate. Well, I don't know exact dates, so it isn't going to be that accurate!
1. about a year ago, a "Roofing Salesman" asked one of the trustees at my Church if he could examine our shingle roof for damage. He was given permission, and we didn't hear from him for a year.
2. about a year later, that same salesman asked again, and was allowed to check it.
3. two salesmen came to check it, and the first one, a trainee, was unsuccessful at convincing our trustee to sign a paper.
4. our trustee informed the salesmen three times that he does not have the authority to sign anything to commit the Church to anything. Both salesmen were aware that, as a church, we voted on everything like this.
5. the older salesman told him that he needed a signature "To allow him to contact the churches insurance company" and that "The Church would not be forced to give the job to their company"
6. trustee signed the paper.
7. The roofing company submitted a bid.
8. I submitted a bid at the same business meeting.
9. Since I am in charge of the music at this church, have been a member for around 5 years, the members voted to accept my bid.
10. It was too cold to start the shingles, so, I started some inside work that was included in the insurance payment to the Church. (most of the money was already presented to the Church, the rest after the job is completed.)
11. Upon learning that I had been given the contract, the Roofing company I bid against contacted the same trustee, expressing his disdain that we didn't give him the job.
12. Roofing company informed trustee that if we were not going to give him the job, we were obligated to pay him 35% of the insurance payment.
13. It seems that in "Fine Print" on the paper our trustee signed, (without authorization) that we were going to be forced to do this.
trustees met with roofing company to discuss this situation, and came away believing that he would have to be taken to court, maybe without church winning. We do not want to take our church to court.
14. I was informed last night, that our Church wants to just let him do the job, unless I can do it and pay him the $9,000.00 from the insurance money. This will take almost all of the profit.
15. I do not want to let this happen. It is wrong, in my opinion. Both salesmen "Conned" our trustee into signing a paper, knowing full well that he had no authority to award the roofing company any money without member approval. I don't expect the Roofing company to come away emptyhanded, as they did secure a check from our insurance company. We could have done the same thing with out him. I feel that, "Measuring the roof" and making a supply list, and contacting the insurance company, meeting with an adjuster on the property, deserves a bit of payment. but, NOT $9000.00. I expected the trustee/roofing company meeting to come away with an acceptable settlement of payment. It did not happen this way.
16. I can send copy of proposal that our trustee signed, but, can't access it until tomorrow.
Do you have any questions? Opinions? Advice?
I believe the roofing company is just bluffing.

[ImReady]

re: Conned into signing (by a "Roofing Salesman")

The roofing company said he has completed 'one third" of the work, just by meeting with the adjuster, and securing a check. Check is made out to my church, not the church and the roofing company.

[AFFA]

re: Conned into signing (by a "Roofing Salesman")

I wish to inform you that if your trustee has signed the contract without the approval of the Church then he may be sued in his individual capacity by the roofing company to make good their losses. The roofing company may demand all the damages and costs suffered by them due to breach of contract. If the contract has been signed under duress or without the free will or consent of the trustee then he may give a written notice to the other party that the contract may be treated as void. If the matter goes to the court, it will consider all the facts and decide the matter.

AFF

[sandyclaus]

re: Conned into signing (by a "Roofing Salesman&quot

Hello,
I'll try to make this quick and accurate. Well, I don't know exact dates, so it isn't going to be that accurate!
1. about a year ago, a "Roofing Salesman" asked one of the trustees at my Church if he could examine our shingle roof for damage. He was given permission, and we didn't hear from him for a year.
2. about a year later, that same salesman asked again, and was allowed to check it.
3. two salesmen came to check it, and the first one, a trainee, was unsuccessful at convincing our trustee to sign a paper.
4. our trustee informed the salesmen three times that he does not have the authority to sign anything to commit the Church to anything. Both salesmen were aware that, as a church, we voted on everything like this.
5. the older salesman told him that he needed a signature "To allow him to contact the churches insurance company" and that "The Church would not be forced to give the job to their company"
6. trustee signed the paper.
7. The roofing company submitted a bid.
8. I submitted a bid at the same business meeting.
9. Since I am in charge of the music at this church, have been a member for around 5 years, the members voted to accept my bid.
10. It was too cold to start the shingles, so, I started some inside work that was included in the insurance payment to the Church. (most of the money was already presented to the Church, the rest after the job is completed.)
11. Upon learning that I had been given the contract, the Roofing company I bid against contacted the same trustee, expressing his disdain that we didn't give him the job.
12. Roofing company informed trustee that if we were not going to give him the job, we were obligated to pay him 35% of the insurance payment.
13. It seems that in "Fine Print" on the paper our trustee signed, (without authorization) that we were going to be forced to do this.
trustees met with roofing company to discuss this situation, and came away believing that he would have to be taken to court, maybe without church winning. We do not want to take our church to court.
14. I was informed last night, that our Church wants to just let him do the job, unless I can do it and pay him the $9,000.00 from the insurance money. This will take almost all of the profit.
15. I do not want to let this happen. It is wrong, in my opinion. Both salesmen "Conned" our trustee into signing a paper, knowing full well that he had no authority to award the roofing company any money without member approval. I don't expect the Roofing company to come away emptyhanded, as they did secure a check from our insurance company. We could have done the same thing with out him. I feel that, "Measuring the roof" and making a supply list, and contacting the insurance company, meeting with an adjuster on the property, deserves a bit of payment. but, NOT $9000.00. I expected the trustee/roofing company meeting to come away with an acceptable settlement of payment. It did not happen this way.
16. I can send copy of proposal that our trustee signed, but, can't access it until tomorrow.
Do you have any questions? Opinions? Advice?
I believe the roofing company is just bluffing.

The roofing company said he has completed 'one third" of the work, just by meeting with the adjuster, and securing a check. Check is made out to my church, not the church and the roofing company.

It seems that the trustee failed to have an attorney read over the agreement that was given to them to sign by the Roofing Company. Instead, they believed the things that this salesman told them.

It's entirely possible that the Roofing Company is bluffing. Just signing a document most definitely doesn't constitute 35% of doing a roofing job, especially when signing that document didn't include an actual contract to do the work. The trustees never should have signed anything, nor allowed someone who might not ultimately do the job to contact the insurance company regarding the matter, either.

If the Church is unwilling to fight the roofing company on what appears to be a scam of some sort, there is nothing YOU can do about it. However, I would tend to agree that they bluffed themselves into agreeing to have the Roofing Company do the work. Presumably, the Church ALSO since signed an actual contract to perform the services. Now that that has happened, the Church is obligated to allow them to do the work.

[Disagreeable]

re: Conned into signing (by a "Roofing Salesman")

Or, the church can take the approach that said trustee was not an authorized agent of the church and fight it in court. Most churches do not want to be the topic of lawsuits.

[Friend In Court]

Re: Conned into signing (by a "Roofing Salesman&quot

Hello,
I'll try to make this quick and accurate. Well, I don't know exact dates, so it isn't going to be that accurate!
1. about a year ago, a "Roofing Salesman" asked one of the trustees at my Church if he could examine our shingle roof for damage. He was given permission, and we didn't hear from him for a year.
2. about a year later, that same salesman asked again, and was allowed to check it.
3. two salesmen came to check it, and the first one, a trainee, was unsuccessful at convincing our trustee to sign a paper.
4. our trustee informed the salesmen three times that he does not have the authority to sign anything to commit the Church to anything. Both salesmen were aware that, as a church, we voted on everything like this.
5. the older salesman told him that he needed a signature "To allow him to contact the churches insurance company" and that "The Church would not be forced to give the job to their company"
6. trustee signed the paper.
7. The roofing company submitted a bid.
8. I submitted a bid at the same business meeting.
9. Since I am in charge of the music at this church, have been a member for around 5 years, the members voted to accept my bid.
10. It was too cold to start the shingles, so, I started some inside work that was included in the insurance payment to the Church. (most of the money was already presented to the Church, the rest after the job is completed.)
11. Upon learning that I had been given the contract, the Roofing company I bid against contacted the same trustee, expressing his disdain that we didn't give him the job.
12. Roofing company informed trustee that if we were not going to give him the job, we were obligated to pay him 35% of the insurance payment.
13. It seems that in "Fine Print" on the paper our trustee signed, (without authorization) that we were going to be forced to do this.
trustees met with roofing company to discuss this situation, and came away believing that he would have to be taken to court, maybe without church winning. We do not want to take our church to court.
14. I was informed last night, that our Church wants to just let him do the job, unless I can do it and pay him the $9,000.00 from the insurance money. This will take almost all of the profit.
15. I do not want to let this happen. It is wrong, in my opinion. Both salesmen "Conned" our trustee into signing a paper, knowing full well that he had no authority to award the roofing company any money without member approval. I don't expect the Roofing company to come away emptyhanded, as they did secure a check from our insurance company. We could have done the same thing with out him. I feel that, "Measuring the roof" and making a supply list, and contacting the insurance company, meeting with an adjuster on the property, deserves a bit of payment. but, NOT $9000.00. I expected the trustee/roofing company meeting to come away with an acceptable settlement of payment. It did not happen this way.
16. I can send copy of proposal that our trustee signed, but, can't access it until tomorrow.
Do you have any questions? Opinions? Advice?
I believe the roofing company is just bluffing.

Without having performed any work, the roofing company does not have a leg or shingle to stand on. There is a legal principle when collecting for work or services done, "quantum meruit" which loosely translates to 'what it is worth.'

The work he did was to be able to prepare a bid. And bids are usually given in construction without charge. If he intended to charge for preparing a bid, then he should have notified up front.

Without knowing, of course, exactly what the trustee signed, it is imposisble to venture an opinion. But most likely that can be avoided if there was misrepresentation or duress put upon the trustee to sign it. And then, there is good ole "quantum meruit." Then there is industry standard. The roofing industry has a lot of scam artists in it, unfortunately. It sounds like the church met one.

[I wish someone would pay me $9,000 to meet with an adjuster, measure a roof and bid it. Nice work if you can get it.]

[Disagreeable]

Re: Conned into signing (by a "Roofing Salesman&quot

I bet they have visited every church in a 40 or 50 mile radius.

Without having performed any work, the roofing company does not have a leg or shingle to stand on. There is a legal principle when collecting for work or services done, "quantum meruit" which loosely translates to 'what it is worth.'

The work he did was to be able to prepare a bid. And bids are usually given in construction without charge. If he intended to charge for preparing a bid, then he should have notified up front.

Without knowing, of course, exactly what the trustee signed, it is imposisble to venture an opinion. But most likely that can be avoided if there was misrepresentation or duress put upon the trustee to sign it. And then, there is good ole "quantum meruit." Then there is industry standard. The roofing industry has a lot of scam artists in it, unfortunately. It sounds like the church met one.

[I wish someone would pay me $9,000 to meet with an adjuster, measure a roof and bid it. Nice work if you can get it.]

[agoode100]

Re: Conned into signing (by a "Roofing Salesman&quot

Can you send me a copy of the contract that was signed? I may have someone who can help you out that had a similar experience. Email me at [email protected]

[Unregistered]

I'm no attorney however, typically a contract must be accompanied by consideration (check) to be enforceable. The PR fall out would tend to discourage a reputable contractor from engaging a church in litigation. Most roofing contracts I've seen are not binding due to lacking legally compliant verbage. For example, a paragraph describing a cooling off period, usually 72 hours, for customer cancellation rights etc. Call an attorney or contact the consumer protection division of the attorney general.

Hello,
I'll try to make this quick and accurate. Well, I don't know exact dates, so it isn't going to be that accurate!
1. about a year ago, a "Roofing Salesman" asked one of the trustees at my Church if he could examine our shingle roof for damage. He was given permission, and we didn't hear from him for a year.
2. about a year later, that same salesman asked again, and was allowed to check it.
3. two salesmen came to check it, and the first one, a trainee, was unsuccessful at convincing our trustee to sign a paper.
4. our trustee informed the salesmen three times that he does not have the authority to sign anything to commit the Church to anything. Both salesmen were aware that, as a church, we voted on everything like this.
5. the older salesman told him that he needed a signature "To allow him to contact the churches insurance company" and that "The Church would not be forced to give the job to their company"
6. trustee signed the paper.
7. The roofing company submitted a bid.
8. I submitted a bid at the same business meeting.
9. Since I am in charge of the music at this church, have been a member for around 5 years, the members voted to accept my bid.
10. It was too cold to start the shingles, so, I started some inside work that was included in the insurance payment to the Church. (most of the money was already presented to the Church, the rest after the job is completed.)
11. Upon learning that I had been given the contract, the Roofing company I bid against contacted the same trustee, expressing his disdain that we didn't give him the job.
12. Roofing company informed trustee that if we were not going to give him the job, we were obligated to pay him 35% of the insurance payment.
13. It seems that in "Fine Print" on the paper our trustee signed, (without authorization) that we were going to be forced to do this.
trustees met with roofing company to discuss this situation, and came away believing that he would have to be taken to court, maybe without church winning. We do not want to take our church to court.
14. I was informed last night, that our Church wants to just let him do the job, unless I can do it and pay him the $9,000.00 from the insurance money. This will take almost all of the profit.
15. I do not want to let this happen. It is wrong, in my opinion. Both salesmen "Conned" our trustee into signing a paper, knowing full well that he had no authority to award the roofing company any money without member approval. I don't expect the Roofing company to come away emptyhanded, as they did secure a check from our insurance company. We could have done the same thing with out him. I feel that, "Measuring the roof" and making a supply list, and contacting the insurance company, meeting with an adjuster on the property, deserves a bit of payment. but, NOT $9000.00. I expected the trustee/roofing company meeting to come away with an acceptable settlement of payment. It did not happen this way.
16. I can send copy of proposal that our trustee signed, but, can't access it until tomorrow.
Do you have any questions? Opinions? Advice?
I believe the roofing company is just bluffing.