[WA] What legal options are available when a contractor damages property and delays repairs after a renovation?

I'm sorry to hear about the issues you've experienced with the siding and window company; that sounds incredibly frustrating. Have you documented all the damages and communications with the company regarding your concerns?

Have you attempted to resolve these issues directly with the company, and if so, what was their response?

Is there anything else the Lawyer should know before I connect you? Rest assured they'll be able to help with your contractor issues.

Greetings! I hope this message finds you well. I'm thrilled to have the opportunity to assist you with your situation and provide you with the support you need. Thank you for your patience, and I look forward to working with you.

Yes, and based on what you've described, you likely have several potential legal claims, and you are not required to simply accept damaged work because the project is finished. The fact that more than six months have passed does not necessarily prevent you from pursuing your rights, especially where the delays have been caused by the contractor repeatedly saying they would come back and address the issues. (WA Rev Code § 4.16.310)

The most significant concern is the electrical damage. If their work damaged the meter base or electrical service and created scorch marks or melting, that is far more than a cosmetic issue. If you have an electrician's report or can obtain one stating the damage was caused during the siding and window installation, that becomes very persuasive evidence. The cost to repair that damage is generally something you can seek from the contractor. (WA Rev Code § 18.27.040)

With respect to the damaged windows, you are also in a reasonable position. New windows should not be installed with scratches, dents, or discoloration unless those defects were disclosed and accepted beforehand. If the contractor is now proposing to remove finished trim and potentially damage your completed paint work to replace them, you are not necessarily obligated to accept that remedy, particularly if you have lost confidence in their workmanship. In many states, if a contractor has already had a reasonable opportunity to correct defects and has failed to do so through repeated delays, you may instead be entitled to recover the reasonable cost of repair or the diminished value of the defective work.

The roof penetration issue and any resulting repairs are also recoverable if you can show they broke the seal and you incurred expenses to have another roofer correct it. Keep the invoice from the roofing company because it helps establish your damages.

The drywall seam issue is a little different. Some minor drywall cracking can occur during window replacement due to movement of the structure, so that issue alone may not support much of a claim. However, if the damage was extensive or resulted from careless installation techniques rather than normal settling, it can still be included as part of the overall damages.

One fact that actually helps you is that they never completed a final walkthrough and apparently never sent a final invoice. That suggests the project may never have been formally closed out. Their intermittent promises to return also make it harder for them to argue that you waited too long to complain.

At this point, I would recommend that you stop relying on telephone conversations. Instead:

• Prepare a written timeline of the project and all defects.
• Gather all photographs, repair invoices, and any text messages or emails.
• Obtain an electrician's written opinion regarding the meter damage if you do not already have one.
• Send the contractor a formal written demand (preferably by certified mail and email) listing every defect, enclosing photographs, and giving them a firm deadline (for example, 14 days) to either:
  • pay for the documented damages,
  • agree in writing to a mutually acceptable resolution, or
  • provide proof that their insurer will handle the claim.

If they ignore the letter or continue delaying, your next options are typically to pursue a claim against the contractor directly, file a complaint with your state's contractor licensing board (if licensed), or bring a lawsuit seeking the cost of repairs and any other damages. Depending on the total amount involved, this may be in small claims court or a higher trial court.

Beyond what your contractor discloses directly, Washington law gives homeowners additional tools that fit this situation closely. Washington's Consumer Protection Act (RCW Chapter 19.86) allows a consumer to bring a claim against a business for unfair or deceptive acts in trade or commerce, which can include a contractor's pattern of delayed, incomplete, or misrepresented repair work. Separately, Washington's Contractor Registration Act (RCW Chapter 18.27) requires contractors performing this kind of work to be registered and bonded, and a homeowner may be able to make a claim against that bond for unresolved damages if the contractor fails to make things right.

I think your approach is a practical one. If they genuinely send a qualified electrician to repair the electrical damage correctly and at their expense, it generally makes sense to allow them to do so. Courts typically expect homeowners to give a contractor a reasonable opportunity to cure defects, and it sounds like you have already done that repeatedly over the past six months.

As for the remaining balance, you are in a stronger negotiating position than you may realize. If they eventually send a final invoice, you do not have to simply pay it without addressing your outstanding claims. You can respond in writing that you dispute the amount because of the documented defects and the out-of-pocket costs you incurred, such as the roof repair. It is often possible to negotiate a credit against the remaining balance rather than insisting they perform additional work that you no longer trust them to perform.

The window issue is particularly suited to that type of resolution. If the windows are functional but have cosmetic defects, a reasonable settlement could be a reduction in the contract price that reflects the diminished value of receiving scratched or damaged new windows. Likewise, reimbursement for the roofing repair is a straightforward item if you have the invoice showing you had to pay another contractor to correct damage they caused.

Regarding a mechanic's lien, that depends entirely on your state. Every state has its own deadlines, and some are measured from the last day labor or materials were furnished, while others depend on whether preliminary notices were served. Six months may be beyond the filing deadline in many states, but not all. Without knowing your state, I would not assume their lien rights have expired.

One thing I would not recommend is refusing to pay the remaining balance without explaining why. Instead, if they invoice you, respond in writing with something like: "I dispute the amount due because the project remains incomplete and there are documented defects, including damaged windows, roof damage requiring third-party repair, and the electrical damage that has yet to be resolved. Once these issues are addressed or we reach an agreement regarding an appropriate credit, I am prepared to resolve the remaining balance." That shows you are acting reasonably rather than simply withholding payment.

One additional point in your favor is that they never conducted a final walkthrough and apparently never issued a final invoice. Combined with their repeated promises to return, it makes it much harder for them to argue that you accepted the work "as is" or waived your objections.

You're asking exactly the right question, and I don't think the answer is as clear-cut as simply counting 90 days from when the siding and windows were installed.

Under Washington law, the 90-day period runs from the date the claimant ceased to furnish labor or materials for the project, not necessarily the date the project was substantially complete. The more nuanced issue is what counts as "furnishing labor." Washington courts generally distinguish between:

• Good-faith completion or punch-list work performed under the original contract, which can extend the "last furnishing" date.
• Work performed solely to keep lien rights alive, which generally does not.

In your situation, I actually see an argument against the contractor, even if they eventually send an electrician. The electrical work wasn't simply an unfinished item from the original scope, it is allegedly repairing damage they caused during construction. If they are hiring a third-party electrician months later to repair their own negligence, that is arguably remedial or damage-repair work rather than furnishing labor under the original improvement contract. A court could conclude that the original contract was effectively complete in December 2025 and that later corrective work does not restart or extend the lien deadline. On the other hand, if the contractor characterizes the electrical repair as completing unfinished contractual obligations, they may argue the project was never complete. There isn't a bright-line rule that guarantees either outcome.

Practically speaking, I would not worry too much about the lien issue at this point. If they have waited over six months without issuing a final invoice, failed to perform a final walkthrough, and have repeatedly delayed corrective work, they may have a difficult time convincing a court that they diligently preserved their lien rights. Even if they attempted to record a lien now, there would be legitimate factual questions about whether it was timely.

One thing I would not do is raise the lien deadline with them. If they have overlooked it, there is no advantage in reminding them. Instead, continue treating the matter as a contract dispute. If they send a final invoice, respond in writing that you dispute the amount because of the documented defects and are willing to resolve the balance after appropriate credits are applied for the damaged windows, roof repair, and any other documented losses.

From a negotiation standpoint, I actually think you're in a fairly favorable position. You're not refusing to pay, and you've consistently expressed a willingness to pay the undisputed amount once the defects are fairly accounted for. That tends to be viewed much more favorably than simply withholding payment without explanation.

Thank you!