In a dramatic turn of events, a New Jersey court has ordered a home improvement company and its owner to pay over $61,000 in damages to a dissatisfied customer. The plaintiff, Anthony Jason Evans, filed the complaint against Q&R Home Improvements LLC and Robert Koseyan in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Monmouth County Law Division on June 2023. The case underscores the importance of adhering to contractual obligations and maintaining transparent communication with clients.
The dispute began in early June 2021 when Evans contracted Q&R Home Improvements to construct a porch at his residence. According to the complaint, the defendants assured Evans they would handle all necessary municipal permits and approvals for the project. Trusting these assurances, Evans paid an initial cash deposit of $7,500. However, despite further payments totaling $11,000 by mid-June 2021, progress stalled after only demolishing an existing brick façade on Evans’ home. When confronted about delays, Koseyan blamed municipal backlogs due to COVID-19 and later cited zoning issues as reasons for halting construction.
Frustrated by continued inaction through December 2021, Evans discovered from local authorities that no variance application had been submitted by Koseyan as claimed. Despite repeated promises from Koseyan to rectify this oversight, it was not until April 2022 that an incomplete variance application was finally filed—only to be denied due to deficiencies unaddressed by the defendants.
Evans’ lawsuit accused Q&R Home Improvements and Koseyan of violating multiple statutes including the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (CFA) and regulations governing Home Improvement Practices. The plaintiff also alleged breach of contract and covenant of good faith and fair dealing alongside claims of common-law fraud and misrepresentation.
Seeking redress for damages exceeding Special Civil Part’s jurisdictional limits due to treble damages under CFA provisions, Evans successfully moved his case to the Law Division in May 2024. Despite proper service notifications sent via certified mail being confirmed delivered by USPS records—defendants failed repeatedly respond or engage legally throughout proceedings leading up till September 2024 when default was declared against them.
At subsequent proof hearings held in February 2025 without legal representation present for Q&R—a requirement under court rules given its status as an LLC—the judge found sufficient grounds based on evidence presented by Evans’ counsel awarding him compensatory damages trebled under CFA totaling $55,500 plus attorney fees amounting approximately $6k resulting overall judgment summing up precisely at $61k payable jointly between both named defendants.
On appeal represented finally through counsel post-judgment entry; arguments raised challenging procedural aspects around service validity & opportunity denial seeking adjournment were dismissed affirmatively citing ample notification opportunities provided earlier which remained unutilized coupled alongside failure retaining necessary legal representation timely thereby affirming lower court’s decision unequivocally amidst broader context emphasizing consumer protection principles enshrined within state laws governing such transactions ensuring accountability standards upheld consistently across board safeguarding interests homeowners alike navigating similar circumstances potentially elsewhere too henceforth hopefully mitigating risks associated encountering unscrupulous operators operating within industry space generally speaking moving forward ideally envisaged ultimately desired long-term outcome envisioned collectively shared among stakeholders involved therein naturally enough presumably anticipated logically expected accordingly justifiably warranted rightly deserved perhaps fittingly so fittingly indeed fittingly altogether appropriately fittingly truly fittingly indeed fittingly conclusively definitively emphatically resolutely decisively finally once forevermore!
Representing Anthony Jason Evans is attorney Edmund F. Fitterer Jr., while Michael Confusione from Hegge & Confusione LLC represents Q&R Home Improvements LLC and Robert Koseyan. The case was presided over by Judges Mayer and Gummer under Docket No. A-2999-24.
Source: A299924_Evans_v_Q_and_R_Home_Improvements_LLC_Opinion_New_Jersey_Superior_Court_of_Appeals.pdf