The Phantom Bathroom: Is my contractor screwing me over?

January 4, 2007 2:09 PM

I'm renovating my Manhattan apartment -- it's in a pre-war building -- and my contractor recently told me that he needed to charge $5000 extra to fix "something they found" after tearing out the drywall in my bathroom. Is this sort of thing normal, i.e., do pre-war bathrooms tend to have undiscovered problems, or am I getting screwed?
posted by waterbottle to home & garden (20 comments total)

What do the terms of the contract state about change orders?
posted by geoff. at 2:12 PM on January 4, 2007

Well, what did they find?

Was it just something about your drywall or was it some sort of structural issue.

If he refuses to answer your question, then yeah, you're getting screwed.
posted by bshort at 2:13 PM on January 4, 2007

You should at least request to be shown what he found and why it needs fixed. I suppose with that information I suppose we could be more helpful, too.
posted by !Jim at 2:13 PM on January 4, 2007

- 1 x "I suppose", which one is your pick!!
posted by !Jim at 2:14 PM on January 4, 2007

What they find, a landmine? Get him/her to explain what the situation is and what they plan to do. There may be several solutions to the issue. "finding something" means nothing - get the details and you can do research on what the codes (the absolute minimum) are and what alternatives are. He/she is doing it legit with permits etc?
posted by Country Dick Montana at 2:15 PM on January 4, 2007

Have they specified what the "something" was? I'd be pretty wary of a contractor telling you that it was just "something they found" without telling you exactly what it was. After you find out exactly what you found, do some googling or calling around to other contractors to get a general price range for fixing the something.

Have any of your neighbors had any renovations done similar to yours? Maybe asking around to a few of them as well would give you an idea of whether or not you're being screwed.

If some contractor was trying to charge me $5000 for a "something", that something better be a plasma TV mounted into my wall so I can watch House while I'm pooping.
posted by Verdandi at 2:17 PM on January 4, 2007

Right. If they found radium paint and an asbestos nugget, well it may cost you something. Probably what they found is that they need to re-do some plumbing and electrical, I dunno about $5000 tho.

I assume you own the place? Is it co-op? Find out more about the building and whether such things have been "found" elsewhere. Cuz it sounds to me like this dude is just ripping your house apart and then charging ransom to put it back together.
posted by Mister_A at 2:18 PM on January 4, 2007

My boyfriend does contracting work like this. If you can post more details about the "something they found" and their proposed solution, I'll ask him.
posted by scody at 2:38 PM on January 4, 2007

As far as I was told, the problem was "erosion in the wall," meaning I think the brick wall, behind the drywall facade.
posted by waterbottle at 2:54 PM on January 4, 2007

$5000 is a lot of money. Make them justify it, in writing.
posted by languagehat at 3:39 PM on January 4, 2007

When doing renovations on older buildings, there is *always* something unexpected. Always. To the point that it's common to build a contigency fund into any construction budget (usually about 10% of the total cost).

This does not mean that you aren't being jerked around. Plenty of regular folks wouldn't pass up an opportunity to squeeze extra money out of someone they don't know, and contractors are certainly no exception! So ask them to describe it more completely. Look at it yourself. Ask polite questions about what you are seeing. Decide for yourself if you can trust this person and proceed from there. Ultimately, you are paying the bills on this, so unless there is a code issue at stake, you can just tell the guy "No, don't do it." It won't be the first time this contractors has had to cover over some problem, because you won't be the first person to refuse to pay more.
posted by schwap23 at 4:05 PM on January 4, 2007

What schwap said... and if I can add "take pictures" to that.
posted by jerseygirl at 4:35 PM on January 4, 2007

I've done brick work, and even if you were doing the most expensive exposed brick work you could do (which this isn't, from the sound of it you have structural brick behind drywall), you would likely not be paying this much unless you were putting in an entire new wall.

Plus, brick doesn't erode that easily. Even if there was severe years-long water damage to the brick, I find it hard to believe that more than half the wall would have to be replaced. Which is a fairly simple matter of knocking out the bad stuff and tossing some new brick in. Add to that the fact that its a bathroom in Manhattan, so unless you're among the uber-rich, its probably not the biggest wall to begin with.
posted by allkindsoftime at 5:07 PM on January 4, 2007

Erosion? What was back there, a waterfall?
posted by flabdablet at 5:15 PM on January 4, 2007

When doing renovations on older buildings, there is *always* something unexpected. Always. To the point that it's common to build a contigency fund into any construction budget (usually about 10% of the total cost).

Word. But I would almost substitute "older" with "any". I've seen oddities in houses built in any part of the 20th century, it's just that the older houses skew towards bizarre construction methods while newer ones skew towards negligence and cost-cutting. This can probably be explained by the rise of tract-housing in the post-war era. Also, guess which part of the budget gets axed first by the client?

Weirdest thing I've ever seen was in a house built in the 20's where the heating contractors had to hook up a round duct with a rectangular one. They used an empty gas can, with a square hole cut on one side and a round one on the other.

Your situation in particular sounds odd, and I'd have to back up everyone else here in having the guy explain why he needs $5000 for what he's discovered, and getting the increase quantified in terms of material and labor costs in writing. Have him walk you through the current problem adn his proposed solution. If it sounds fishy, get a second opinion, but doing so may present an ethical issue for some contractors.
posted by LionIndex at 5:38 PM on January 4, 2007

In most coops in NYC, the building is responsible for the actual structural part of the building -- you actually have a lease to the apartment that you own. So if it's structural the coop would actually have to pay for it.

Sounds a bit shady to me.
posted by mtstover at 6:30 PM on January 4, 2007

You should talk to your landlord or leasing company, and figure out exactly where your responsibilities begin and end. In most condo arrangements, which may or may not be similar to your co-op or apartment, your responsibilities end at the inside of the exterior wall, or the exterior of the interior wall.

Somewhere in your lease agreement this should be specified. If you don't own the building, I'd be looking towards your landlord to make the call on the fix, and foot the bill if they want it done.
posted by Kadin2048 at 10:40 PM on January 4, 2007

thanks a lot, everyone. i clearly have to look into this a little bit further. but your knowledge and input is much appreciated!
posted by waterbottle at 7:08 AM on January 5, 2007

Back late to the thread -- I asked my boyfriend and he concurred: "erosion in the wall" is too vague to give you a good answer here. You need a lot more specific information from your contractor, condo association (if applicable), etc. about the problem and the proposed solution.
posted by scody at 12:22 PM on January 5, 2007

Also, what was the original price? Is $5000 more than the original price?
posted by bshort at 8:24 PM on January 5, 2007