Atlas Stratford shingles are subject to early blistering, cracking and other forms of damage, alleges a class action lawsuit filed by the national law firm of Parker Waichman LLP. The suit was filed on July 1st in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division.
The lawsuit alleges that the Atlas Stratford Shingles are defective and not live up to marketing claims. Furthermore, it is alleged that Atlas will not comply with its own warranty, The company has touted the shingles 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 the Plaintiff and Class allege that the shingles only lead to more expenses and damage. The design of the shingles allegedly allows water inside, creating air bubbles that expand, crack and blister upon sun exposure, the suit alleges.
Atlas allegedly responded poorly when customers submitted warranty claims for these defects. The company provides a 30-year warranty ensuring that the shingles would be “free of manufacturing defects” and guarantees that the products comply with certain industry standards. But when the plaintiff
submitted a claim on January 17, 2014 after noticing that her shingles were cracking, splitting and blistering, she was denied. Atlas allegedly referred to a prior warranty submission instead of admitting that the product is faulty, the suit alleges.
According to the lawsuit, hundreds of customers have allegedly submitted warranty claims citing the same design or manufacturing flaw. Atlas has allegedly wrongfully denied a number of them while others were resolved in ways not consistent with the warranty terms.
The Plaintiff and Class have suffered damages that were foreseeable to Atlas. Allegedly, the company knew or should have known that their product was defective. Even though a large number of complaints were submitted to Atlas, the company has not informed customers of the issue and refused to pay for the damage. Instead, Atlas blames the issue on the weather or poor installation, the suit alleges.