Renval Construction
reviews and complaints

7th lawsuit against Renato Busljeta Renval Construction in less than two years. More victims decided to come forward to take legal action against Renato Busljeta /Renval Construction. It does not seem to stop him to continue to operate business and continue to rob people via construction projects.

If you are also a victim, either contractor or home/store owner. Please post your experience online so that he does not enrich himself by taking people's hard earned money.

Another case filed last month.la MAY & SONS, INC. - v. - RENVAL CONSTRUCTION, L.L.C. Court Case #715765/2017

Renato Busljeta struck again by robbing people's money via construction project. He now has total of five lawsuits in less than two years. He needs to be delicensed and put in jail.
1. Court Index Num 157010/2016 B&H Restoration Inc v.s Renval Construction
2.Court Index Num 654491/2016 Archstone Development v.s Renval Construction
3.Court Index Num 651857/2017 Archstone Development v.s Renval Construction
4.Court Index Num 654816/2016 Dean & Silva v.s Renval Construction
5.Court Index Num 656565/2017 West Side Physicians v.s Renval Construction.
For court case details, check out http://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/iscroll/

As a subcontractor hired by Renal Construction. Renato Busljeta, owner of Renval Construction failed to pay for work performed according to the agreement. He tried to avoid phone calls, delayed payment and eventually not pay for the work performed upon completion. Apparently, he has track record of legal cases against him.
1. Court Index Num 157010/2016 B&H Restoration Inc v.s Renval Construction
2. Court Index Num 654491/2016 Archstone Development v.s Renval Construction
3. Court Index Num 651857/2017 Archstone Development v.s Renval Construction
4. Court Index Num 654816/2016 Dean & Silva v.s Renval Construction

For subcontractors out there, do not deal business with Renval Construction or you will face the same fate.

I am a Vice President of Archstone Development, a real estate developer. In Spring 2016, Archstone was looking for a contractor to convert two SRO's in NYC into 8 mid to high end condos. We requested proposals from three contractors. After interviews, we selected Renato Busljeta’s company, Renval Construction LLC, which presented the lowest of the three bids we received.

After we hired him, Busljeta of Renval asked for a 25-30% deposit before work would even start. We eventually agreed to a 10% deposit -- $334, 000 -- and we moved forward.

We paid Renval the 10%, which was no small sum of money. After doing what in my opinion was minimal work, Busljeta requested additional funds that amounted another 15% of the proposal, more than $500, 000, claiming that the total amount of work completed was about $889, 000. After we questioned this, Renval reduced its demand for additional money to about $434, 000.

Renval and Busljeta did not submit to either Archstone or to our Architect any back-up documentation substantiating the requested amount. The Architect requested back-up documentation accounting for the additional funds requested and for how the initial deposit had been used but Renval and Busljeta responded via email: “There is no back up for the [additional funds request], ” and then stated “we are working on providing you with details break down regarding 10% deposit already paid.”

I then sent an email to Renval suspending work: “I don’t think this is going to work. . . . At this point I think it may be best if you stop the work at the site and refund the deposit minus any legitimate and documented expenses.” Busljeta replied by email: “I will have my team stop with the work at the site as per your request today . . . . We will work on returning deposit minus all legitimate fees and work that is finished.”

We never got more than what, in our opinion, was a cursory, unsubstantiated, and unsupported breakdown of how our money had been spent. This breakdown purported to account for about $146, 000 of the initial deposit, leaving more than $188, 000 that it said was a “Credit back due.” Renval claimed he had spent the $146, 000 for a little bit more than a week’s work at the building….which basically consisted of site mobilization.

On August 8, 2016, our attorneys wrote to Renval/Busljeta’s attorney asking that Renval “immediately remit the undisputed sum of $188, 772.60 to our client” and asking “Renval to substantiate the amounts it has retained from the initial payment . . . as called for by the parties’ agreement . . . .”

Renval’s attorney replied a few days later that “Renval is in the process of calculating its "costs by reason" of Archstone's termination as well as its "reasonable overhead and profit" on the Work not executed. These costs all constitute "legitimate fees" that Renval intends to collect. This amount is expected to greatly exceed any funds that Renval is still holding from the contract deposit and, as such, no funds will be returned to Archstone.”

On September 23, 2016, the Architect, issued a letter, sent to the attorneys for Archstone and Renval/Busljeta, as follows:

After careful review and consideration of the information made available by both parties to date and based upon the facts that existed on the day of termination; we conclude that the contractor: 1) was overbilling the Owner, in contravention to the terms of the contract; 2) billed for work that was not in place; and 3) failed to diligently pursue the work. Therefore, as the initial decision maker, we conclude that there was sufficient justification to terminate the contractor’s services for cause.

We believe that Renval and Busjleta walked off the job and kept our 10% deposit without justification. We also believe that Renval, when he stopped work, left the building in an unstable and potentially hazardous state.

We think that if you do business with Renval, you may suffer the same fate. Be careful!