Consumer Reviews of Tamko shingles
Read 194 Tamko Shingle reviews or write your own review.
194 reviews
The opinions expressed in these reviews are the opinions of consumers that submitted reviews to Roof.info. They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Roof.info.
Read more about Tamko shingles
Read reviews of other Shingle brands
Write a review
|
Date created: 2017-01-16
Name: john smith
Location: denver
Model: shingles
Satisfaction Rating:
Very Satisfied
Review:
"Incorrect Info"
Tamko shingle come with a 15 year Full Start Period and not a 7 as this column states! They also offer 5 years on their 1 time transfer-ability and not 2! TAMKO offers the best color line in the industry hands down and have the best up front warranty protection of any other manufacture out there!
Date created: 2017-01-14
Name: Derik Nierman
Location: Vallonia Indiana
Model: Heritage
Satisfaction Rating:
Very Unsatisfied
Review:
"Do not buy Tamko shingles"
Built new home in 2009 and have had nothing but issues from the start. Shingles not sealing, blowing off in 40 mph wind, leaking and algae everywhere on north side of home. Have sent samples in twice to customer service and basically was told they weren't properly installed and the national weather service showed 70 mph winds in our area according to Tamko. This is a very poor quality company along with their shingles and customer service! Would absolutely never recommend Tamko to anyone. On another note I built a large detached garage in 2010 and used Owens Corning shingles and have not had the first issue yet. No comparison on quality!
Date created: 2017-01-12
Name: Danny Cantrell
Location: rockwall tx
Model: Slate
Satisfaction Rating:
Very Unsatisfied
Review:
"Only 13 Years"
Had to replace when I sold my house. Shingles were slick, rock came off. This was a brand new roof only made it 13 years.
Date created: 2017-01-11
Name: Keith M
Location: Tallahassee
Satisfaction Rating:
Very Unsatisfied
Review:
"Avoid Tamko shingles at all cost"
We bought a house in 2012 that had a roof that had been installed in 2005. So we thought geesh the roof would be good for at least a while. Now we have to sell the house and the inspector for the buyer noticed that about 50 of the shingles have lost most of their granulation down to the fiberglass. We are getting stuck having to pay for half the cost of installing a new roof! All because of this sorry company. Never ever put a roof on your house with shingles made by this company. Think the warranty is any good? Fat chance. We are not getting anything. And the "contractor" that posted on here that it has to do with installation? I don't think so! How does installation have anything to do with how a shingle wears. The shingles that are most in direct sunlight (the south and west side) are wearing the worst.
Date created: 2016-11-10
Name: Tim
Location: Goochland Va
Model: Heritage
Satisfaction Rating:
Very Unsatisfied
Review:
"Worthless warranty"
Purchased new home January 2011. In mid 2016 roof began leaking. Looking at the roof in the sunlight will blind you as the fiberglass showing everywhere reflects the light. Contacted Tamko and the will prorate their shingles (to their benefit) but not cover any labor costs. The full start period where they pay labor changed less than 30 days after I moved in from the 5 years I have to 15 years. So Tamko isn't paying for any labor, not paying for any ridge vent that has to be removed, not paying for the damaged decking, and are not paying for the interior damage from the leak. I paid over $12000 for the roof in 2011 and with the little help they are offering it'll cost me that much again with the shingles they didn't provide, removal, and installation just 5 years later. Sinfull!
Date created: 2016-11-02
Name: C. Kohler
Location: Hertford, NC
Model: Architectural
Satisfaction Rating:
Very Unsatisfied
Review:
"Not Algae Resistant"
Tamko roofing is not algae resistant. I have black streaks all over an eight year old roof. I called customer service and a very rude young woman said they would assess it if I send two sections of the affected roof to them. When I said that was ridiculous, she said "well I guess you don't want to file a claim". I don't want to remove sections of a roof when I know I can't find the same dye lot of the shingles. I would never use this brand again.
Date created: 2016-10-13
Name: Jon Ames
Model: Heritage Tamko shingles
Satisfaction Rating:
Very Unsatisfied
Review:
"Leaks, Required roof replacement."
30 year warranty not worth the paper it is written on. Opps I mean the exterior shingle package. The shingle warranty is not the shingle package so if you don't read the package you might inadvertently do something to void the warranty. The 30 year shingles went to hell in less than 10 years and required an entire roof replacement. Leaks everywhere.
Date created: 2016-10-07
Name: Chris Chola
Location: NM
Satisfaction Rating:
Very Unsatisfied
Review:
"Very Bad Quality"
Installed new roof about 8 years ago to replace hail damaged roof. Within 4 years severe loss of granular coating with about 80% gone now. Will not use such a low quality product again. Do not buy from this company. One quarter the price would be too much.
Date created: 2016-10-03
Name: J, Ames
Location: Springfield, Mo
Satisfaction Rating:
Very Unsatisfied
Review:
"Warranty"
Tamko shingles are the worst. Mine had degranulation and Tamko said my warranty was not transferred properly. None of the roofers would recommend Tamko shingles, one said he would only use Tamko if shingles if I paid him to nail each shingle with and extra nail or he would not stand behind his warranty.
Date created: 2016-09-17
Name: Jon Ames
Location: Springfield, Mo
Satisfaction Rating:
Very Unsatisfied
Review:
"Degranulated and leaking"
Tamko has no intention of standing behind their warranty. I have 10 year old shingles that degranulated and are leaking all over the house. Tamko will not stand behind their advertised 30 year warranty because the warranty, printed on the shingle packages was not followed correctly. I ask, What homeowner reads the packaging on shingles. They are deceptive and crooked. The roof cost $15,600 which insurance denied because of the defective shingles and Tamko denied paying anything.
|