Roofer hasn’t
paid fine, but
takes out ad

Interlock Industries apologizes
to customers in an ad though
it has yet to pay a state
fine of $205,000

A former Honolulu roofing contractor that has yet to pay a fine ordered by the state Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs for alleged deceptive business practices has taken out a newspaper advertisement to reach out to customers.

In April, the state ordered Interlock Industries and Mark Wenzel, the company's responsible managing employee, to pay $205,000 in fines after 2,700 Interlock customers were left high and dry when the company closed shop and skipped town. Allegedly, hundreds of people were left with leaky roofs and worthless warranties, and Interlock has been named in a class-action lawsuit over the allegations.

Interlock, which sells and installs aluminum roofing and associated materials, has been hit by complaints and investigations in several states, including Hawaii. In 2001, Hawaii's Regulated Industries Complaints Office, which enforces professional licensing laws, began inquiring about Interlock after receiving several complaints from customers. Investigators said Interlock and Wenzel did not respond to most inquiries.

The state concluded that ordering the company to pay restitution would have been too difficult to enforce, but it fined Interlock heavily, said Jo Ann Uchida, the state's complaints and enforcement officer.

Interlock still has not paid the fine, Uchida said. However, on Sunday, the company ran an advertisement in the Honolulu Advertiser, apologizing to customers, pledging to honor its products and warranty and promising to return calls within two business days.

"We believe that the homeowners in Hawaii who had our roof systems installed over the heads of their families, had, and have, every right, to have the highest quality product," said the ad, signed by Wenzel, Interlock's top manager. "Please be assured that Interlock Roofing Ltd. has not abandoned the people of Hawaii."

Those who dial a phone number in the ad, (403) 214-7544, are greeted by an answering machine that encourages them to send complaints to a Canada address. Interlock did not return a call from the Star-Bulletin yesterday, nor has it ever returned a call.

Interlock's most recent overture is a classic case of too little too late, said Ulysses Guillermo of Hilo, who is involved in the class-action lawsuit against the company.

"Running an ad is the most obnoxious, insensitive thing that they could do to the people that they have injured," Guillermo said. "The money that they spent on this ad should be applied to those that they have injured."

Guillermo, who spent $25,000 on an Interlock roof, said his complaints against the company form a 50-page dossier.

"They are very shady and they don't return calls," Guillermo said of the company.

Oahu attorneys Buck Ashford, Jim Bickerton, Brandee Faria and John Francis Perkin filed a class-action suit against Interlock and its top managers in November.

"I think Interlock's ad is a huge step in the right direction. Now, let's see how they follow through," Ashford said.

Oahu homeowner Sharon Abe, who is also part of the suit, said she's skeptical that Interlock will follow through with promises in the new ad since the company has failed to answer or satisfy any of her many complaints.

"I don't think they would respond to customers who call about the ad," Abe said. "If they truly wanted to help us, they would have responded when we first called."