Atlas Stratford Shingles Subject to Premature Damage, Class Action Lawsuit AllegesAug 12, 2014
The national law firm of Parker Waichman LLP has filed a class action lawsuit over Atlas Stratford Shingles. The suit, which was filed on July 1st in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, alleges that the shingles are defective and fail prematurely.
According to the lawsuit, Atlas made a number of invalid marketing claims with regards to their Stratford shingles. They are advertised as “products that will give your home the curb appeal, lasting protection, and peace of mind needed to shelter your family and protect your investment.” but a number of consumers have experiences otherwise. The company also has a 30-year warranty assuring customers that the shingles would be “free of manufacturing defects”. Additionally, Atlas guaranteed that the products comply with certain industry standards.
Allegedly, the shingles are subject to blistering because Atlas' design allows moisture into the shingle. This creates an air bubble that expands upon sun exposure, leading to cracking and blistering. The consumers suing Atlas allege that the products do not live up to its representations.
The suit also alleges that Atlas knew about the defect but never informed its customers. Allegedly, there have been hundreds of warranty claims citing the same design or manufacturing flaw; some of them have been wrongfully denied while others were resolved in ways not consistent with the warranty terms.
Atlas' response to customers has been allegedly inadequate. According to the lawsuit, the plaintiff submitted a warranty claim when she noted that her shingles were cracking, splitting and blistering but her claim was denied. Instead of acknowledging a problem with their product, the company referred to a prior warranty submission. Even though the company received a number of complaints, the company has not informed of the issue and refused to pay for the damage. Instead, Atlas blames the issue on the weather or poor installation, the suit alleges.