The roofing shingles crack and blister prematurely Parker Waichman LLP is currently investigating legal claims for a class action lawsuit on behalf of consumers who purchased Atlas Chalet Shingles, Stratford Shingles, and GlassMaster Shingles manufactured by Atlas Roofing Corporation. The company marketed Chalet shingles as reliable, high quality product at an affordable price, but reports suggest that the roofing shingles crack and blister prematurely. Atlas Roofing no longer manufactures Atlas Chalet shingles, and now homeowners who attempt to contact the company report inadequate customer service. As a result, a number of consumers who purchased Atlas Chalet shingles are left with the bill for a new roof. If you or someone you know purchased Atlas Chalet shingles, our attorneys would like to speak with you. Call Parker Waichman LLP today for a free, no-obligation evaluation of your case.
Atlas Chalet Shingles May Prematurely Crack and Blister
In promoting their Chalet shingles, Atlas Roofing Corporation claimed that “Chalet gives you peace of mind at an affordable price.” The company also claimed that the shingles are resistant to algae and up to 80 mph winds. Reports from consumers who actually purchased the products however, indicate otherwise. A number of customers complain of premature cracking and blistering, sometimes in as little as one year after installation. The cracking and blistering of the shingles can lead to granule loss, where chunks of material dislodge from the allegedly defective shingles. As the Chalet shingles wear away and deteriorate over a short period of time, customers often found themselves investing extra time, labor and money in repairing or replacing their roofs. Instead of getting “peace of mind” from this product, Atlas Chalet shingles only led to a bigger bill and unnecessary stress.
Atlas Chalet shingles have been discontinued. Furthermore, despite the promise of a 30 year limited transferable warranty, a number of consumers who attempted to contact the company say that customer service is insufficient. As a result, customers who were promised a long-lasting, quality product are left in a situation where they are forced to foot the bill for a new roof soon after having new shingles installed.
Longer roofing warranties are sometimes used as a marketing tool rather than as a predictor of quality. The manufacturer’s reputation and specific terms of a warranty can be an important factor to consider. In fact, many companies attempt to avoid honoring their warranties for a variety of reasons. For example, a roofing company may refuse to honor a limited lifetime warranty by claiming that the shingles were improperly installed. Atlas Roofing Corporation, for instance, has denied that blistering is a construction defect and claims that the effect is purely aesthetic. Homeowners who see the damage firsthand, however, disagree.
Atlas Roofing Class Action Filed
On July 1, 2014, Parker Waichman LLP filed a Class Action complaint on behalf of one plaintiff representing a specific class of homeowners regarding alleged damages associated with Atlas Roofing products they had purchased. The action was filed in United States District Court, Southern District Of Florida, Miami Division and named Atlas Roofing Corporation as the defendant.
The individual and class allege that the shingles, in contrast to the warranties and representations made by Atlas Roofing, were defective at the time of sale and after because they blister and crack; lead to early granule loss; create increased moisture absorption; and, generally, do not perform as expressly warranted and represented. These issues, according to the allegations, caused damage to other components of the structures on which they were installed, as well as to property inside the structures.
Despite this, even after Atlas learned of the defect, Atlas still sold the shingles to the public and made bogus representations and warranties, even though it was known that the defects would eventually cause consumers to suffer enormous property damage and substantial removal and replacement costs.
The lawsuit notes that, despite its knowledge of its shingles to fail, Atlas sold the shingles to builders, contractors, and suppliers who, in turn, installed the shingles in homes owned by the Plaintiff and the Class members. Along with every sale, Atlas expressly extended a 30-year warranty to the original homeowners—and, for a more limited period, to a subsequent purchaser of the homes—that indicated the shingles would be free from defects or Atlas Roofing would repair or replace the shingles. Atlas Roofing also indicated that its shingles conformed to applicable building codes and certain industry standards in its warranty, public documents, product brochures, marketing materials, and product labels, making these representations prior to original purchase.
The Plaintiff and the Class allege that they and their builders and contractors relied upon Atlas Roofing’s representations and warranties, that the shingles do not conform to Atlas’ express representations and warranties and that the shingles are defective because Atlas improperly designed the shingles to be manufactured in a manner that allows moisture to intrude into the shingle creating a gas bubble that permits blistering and cracking. The blistering and cracking is the cause of early granule loss, increased moisture absorption, and reduced life-expectancy of the Shingles. These defects make the shingles unfit for their intended use and are so severe that the Plaintiff and Class members must repair or replace their shingles sooner than reasonably expected by ordinary consumers who purchase shingles generally or by consumers who purchased Atlas’ Shingles.
Need Legal Help Regarding Defective Atlas Chalet Shingles?
If you or someone you know purchased and installed Atlas Chalet shingles, you may have valuable legal rights. Please fill out our online form or call 1(800)-YOURLAWYER (1-800-968-7529) to speak with one of our experienced construction defect lawyers today.