Martin
Belknap,#2Author of original report
Fri, April 29, 2005
Taylor provided no 100% money back guarantee in my contract. You can't find that term anywhere in it. You will find a Buy Back Alternative clause which by definition is not a guarantee. This clause requires you to sell them your land or lot at a price which may be less than fair market value if they have to buy it at all. This clause states the First Party (Taylor) shall not be required to purchase any real property in which the blueprint and/or contract has been changed, in any way whatsoever, from one of the First Party's standard plans or in which any written change order has been executed. Their web page states they have over 40 flexible floorplans that you can modify any way you like. They do not tell you that if you modify one, they are not required to purchase the land or lot which keeps you from getting 100% of your money back. There is NO 100% money back guarantee but only a very limited buy back alternative. I feel this is nothing short of being the age old "Bait and Switch" tactic.
Dean
Nicholasville,#3Consumer Comment
Wed, April 27, 2005
According to their web site they are so good they offer a 100% money back Guarantee if you are not fully satisfied??? Are you saying they don't stand behind there promises??? Sounds like false advertising. Good luck with your claims and hope you wake them up.
Martin
Belknap,#4Author of original report
Wed, April 27, 2005
Taylor is now attempting to discredit or intimidate me by accusing me of fabricating a story about the Kentucky Attorney General referring to Taylor as a corporate criminal. This was done in order to get information removed from a web site known as Rate Your Builder.info in which homebuyers can rate their builders. It seems Taylor is monitoring this site and attempting to get information about them removed as well as adding their own ratings in an attempt to keep their ratings up. The statement about Taylor was made by the current Attorney General of Kentucky at a campaign forum in Louisville when he accused one of his opponents of hiring himself out to a "corporate criminal".It seems this opponent was the Attorney General of Kentucky when Taylor was the subject of numerous consumer complaints with no charges ever being filed and he then went to work for Taylor after leaving office. I certainly can't take credit for fabricating this story since the statement was made before a gathering of business and professional people and was published in newspapers as early as May 14, 2003. Taylor even went so far as to contact the Kentucky Attorney General's Office and complain that I had fabricated this story at the Attorney General's and Taylors expense. Their complaint even contained threats of legal action toward me or their office concerning these comments. It seems Taylor will stop at nothing to conceal information about their past and present practices in home construction. It seems Taylor doesn't want to respond to the Office of the Illinois Attorney General concerning my complaint of false advertising and other deceptive practices because I have an attorney yet they go running to the Kentucky Attorney General's Office rather than contact my attorney. I feel there is a lot of information out there to support such statements about Taylor both past and present. I believe this information will come through web pages, gripe sites, and legal action. I am now working on Taylor's use of unlicensed roofers in Illinois and their claims of not being aware of such law. These claims come after operating an office in Illinois for several years, lawsuits, and consumer complaints to the Illinois Attorney General's Office. Ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law and neither is negligence. I believe Taylor has made false statements to the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation during the investigation of them using unlicensed roofers. More to come.