Jon Campisi Apr. 2, 2013, 8:54am

A Bucks County couple has filed a consumer fraud action against two product manufacturers over allegations that the windows the plaintiffs purchased from the defendants were not designed the way they were advertised to be.

Jenkintown, Pa. attorney Evan L. Frank filed suit March 26 at the federal court in Philadelphia on behalf of Michael and Deborah Spiro, who reside in Upper Makefield Township.

The defendants named in the civil action are East Rutherford, N.J.-based Allied Building Products Corp. and Cary, N.C.-based Plygem Window Company.

According to the complaint, the plaintiffs had previously purchased windows from the defendants to install in a home the couple was having built for themselves.

The two companies informed the plaintiffs that the windows would have a two-and-a-half-inch brickmould, and the Spiros told the defendants that this feature was a deciding factor for the couple, in part because it would reduce the material and labor costs of installation, the lawsuit states.

The brickmould, the suit says, would work with an arch-shaped top, and the couple informed the defendants that they had planned on installing windows with an arched top.

Allied and Plygem then assured the Spiros that arched windows would not be a problem, and the companies even promised a sample in order to address the plaintiffs’ concerns about this style of window.

After purchasing and receiving the windows, however, the Spiros noted that the products actually came with a one-inch brickmould, not the two-and-a-half-inch brickmould as promised.

When the couple raised the issue, the defendants informed them that a two-and-a-half-inch brickmould was not possible with the windows the couple had purchased.

The lawsuit says that the couple additionally discovered that the windows that they received were actually defective.

Furthermore, after the windows were installed, the couple began experiencing leaking into the home during heavy rain events, due to the fact that the windows contained little or no sealant between the glass and the frame.

The water leakage soon caused extensive damage to the walls and floor of the couple’s new home, the lawsuit alleges.

As a result of the defendants’ conduct, the Spiros have suffered damages including the cost of the defective windows, the cost of correcting the brickmould, water damage to the walls and floor, future costs of replacing doors damaged by water leaks, and future costs of replacing the defective windows, the complaint states.

The lawsuit asserts claims of common law fraud, breach of contract, negligence, strict products liability and violations of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law.

The suit says that Michael Spiro, who works as a professional contractor, had learned about the defendants’ products when he was visited at a job site by a salesman for Allied back in March 2011.

The windows in question were manufactured by Plygem and distributed by Allied, the suit states.

In all, the couple incurred about $60,000 to repair the damage caused by the defendants’ products, not including the future costs that are expected to be incurred to replace the water-damaged doors and to replace the defective windows, the complaint shows.

The couple has obtained a quote to replace the defective windows for $134,065 and the defective doors for $37,517.

The plaintiffs seek compensatory damages in excess of $181,249, plus treble damages for the defendants’ willful, wanton and outrageous conduct.

They also seek attorneys’ fees, costs, and prejudgment interest.


The federal case number is 2:13-cv-01561-RB. 

More News