As I previously noted here and here we are being sued for defamation by a local construction company that did some home improvement work on our house back in 1996.
The Empire Has Been Struck Back
Yesterday our attorneys filed a counter suit against that company for several violations of Home Improvement Act ATCP 110.01 under which the contract was defined. Our suit alleges that the contractor:
-Represented a warranty which they did not intend to honor in full;
-Made false, deceptive, and misleading representations in order to induce the entrance into the Contract by offering a 20 year warranty on workmanship, but expressly denied such warranty in the Contract;
-Accepted payment for home improvement materials (vented soffits) which they did not intend to provide in accordance with the Contract;
-Substituted products or materials (non-vented soffits) for those specified in the home improvement contract (vented-soffits) without prior consent of the buyer.
We are asking for dismissal of the contractor's defamation claims, pecuniary damages including, but not limited to cost of repair, twice the amount of their recovery, and actual costs and attorney fees along with such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and equitable.
It is interesting to note that our original complaint to the company; that the fashion in which they sealed their trim had caused damages to our stucco exterior has not even entered in to our final complaint. The other observations made by the engineer who has recently inspected the house have not come into play either.
Judging by the reactions of our attorneys after the deposition of the contractor, we feel we have a good case.
Our lawyer also argued a similar case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court. If the ruling comes back in his client's favor (sometime in January) that should bolster our own case even further.