Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
Four Pennsylvania couples have joined together in a product liability class action lawsuit against IKO Manufacturing, alleging the company’s roofing shingles are defective.
Plaintiffs Frederick and Dana Leeds, Sven and Elizabeth Beauchmin, Kishor and Kannan Ghandi, and Michael and Simona Fabiano filed the proposed class action lawsuit saying that IKO deceptively marketed and sold its Cambridge AR shingles to homeowners in Pennsylvania.
The Cambridge AR (AR indicating algae-growth resistance) are laminated shingles made of asphalt and fiberglass, with a granule surface embedded into a filled asphalt coating.
The complaint alleges IKO represents and warrants the roofing shingles to be durable, free from manufacturing defects, and compliant with industry standards. However, the plaintiffs contend that the roofing shingles do not live up to IKO’s warranties and representations.
According to the plaintiffs, the roofing shingles contain a manufacturing defect which makes them prone to premature blistering, tearing, delamination and cracking along with early granule loss and loss of adhesion. These defects in the IKO shingles result in decreased wind resistance and moisture penetration into the underlying building components and interiors, and ultimately damage the structures on which they were installed, the plaintiffs say.
One of the couples, the Ghandis say they began noticing IKO roofing shingles blowing off their newly constructed home in 2013, causing severe leaks in their home’s interior walls and upstairs bedroom.
They say they immediately notified the home builder, who sent a contractor to perform multiple repairs in 2013, 2015 and 2016 which included replacing lost shingles. During April 2016, the couple notified IKO directly concerning the defective shingles. IKO sent a representative to inspect the roof who reported there was nothing wrong with the shingles.
Since that time, the Ghandis state the IKO shingles have continued to fail to adhere, blister, tear, crack, separate, lose granules and deteriorate. They claim to have spent approximately $4,900 to repair the damage.
The other named couples report similar experiences, and contend that the defects present in IKO shingles are so severe that they must repair or replace their roofs sooner than reasonably expected.
The plaintiffs are bringing this action against IKO, seeking to represent a Damages Class consisting of all persons and entities owning homes, residences, buildings, or other structures in Pennsylvania on which IKO shingles are currently installed or that were previously installed and were replaced by the owners due to the alleged defect.
Additionally, the lawsuit seeks to certify a Declaratory Relief Class for all Pennsylvania homeowners or entities who installed the allegedly defective IKO shingles by have not been compensated for their full losses.
The Pennsylvania case is not the first time IKO has been under fire for its roofing shingles. Class action lawsuits have been filed against the company as early as 2009, with many of these lawsuits consolidated into multidistrict litigation.
Another similar lawsuit was filed in July 2016 in New York federal court. This case challenges IKO’s warranty process, saying it discourages people from exercising their warranty and that IKO fails to properly compensate for replacing or repairing the reportedly defective roofing shingles.
The Pennsylvania homeowners are represented by Marc H. Edelson and Liberato P. Verderame of Edelson & Associates LLC; Paul J. Scarlato and Brian D. Penny of Goldman Scarlato & Penny PC; and Jonathan Shub of Kohn Swift & Graf PC.
The IKO Defective Roofing Shingles Class Action Lawsuit is Leeds, et al. v. IKO Manufacturing Inc., et al., Case No. 2:17-cv-00339-CDJ in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
26 thoughts onIKO Class Action Says Roofing Shingles are Defective
Built house in 2002 and had to replace roof in 2015 at a cost of $30k due to organic shingle issue. I received an offer of $930 and did not accept at the time. Now that class action has settled I contacted IKO warranty and they tell me that the $930 is the higher of the settlement and the original offer so that is my payout. What an insult. The same issue was settled in Canada and if my calculations are correct I would be receiving 3 times as much.
Our house was built in 2005, within 10 years we noticed our shingles were curling up and falling off. An IKO rep came and looked at it, took samples and pictures and determined the shingles were defective and offered us $900. to settle. We sold our house, taking $15,000. off for new shingles, they paid closer to $20,000. for a new roof. I’m out $15,000. and $900.
I have 35 sq in Catawissa, PA that are 14 years old and need to be replaced.
I have 38 square of IKO, have been bad for 4 years and is starting to leak in areas. We do not have the money to re-roof this.. Will somebody please resolve this case. It was already settled in Canada almost 3 years ago, because the shingles are FAULTY.. Why is this taking so long??
thank you,
Bill
I have 38 square of IKO, have been bad for 4 years and is starting to leak in
areas. We do not have the money to re-roof this.. Will somebody please
resolve this case. It was already settled in Canada almost 3 years ago, because the shingles are
FAULTY.. Why is this taking so long??
thank you,
Bill
We live in Berwick, PA and have an enormous roof that was replaced in August 2008 with IKO shingles at the cost of $18K for the roof installation and materials. By November 2017 we started with issues caused by the shingles. Thus far we have acquired HUGE damage to our plaster walls caused by snow melting through where the shingles are worn, our double solid wood entry doors being warped because shingles tore off during rainstorms (2). The new roof will cost 16K and the doors will cost an additional 6K to replace. As for the walls, we are still searching for someone who can do the plaster work to repair them. I’m certain the plywood will need replacing as well which will cost additional on top of the $16K for the roof replacement.
05/24/2018. Same here in Vermont. Used a HUD Certified Sub-Contractor to replace the Garage Roof. Was the condition for obtaining the mortgage. Garage roof was replaced in Late 2000. The shingles are now suddenly ragged on the edges and curling up very badly. An inspection confirmed the plywood is rotting and all will have to be replaced, to include shingles, water/ice shield and the plywood.