A southeast Florida couple is accusing a local steel company of never starting construction on a $70,000 building that they allegedly paid for in advance.
The lawsuit was filed in the circuit court for the fifth judicial district of Marion County by attorneys representing Joseph and Kimberly DiGiacomo, who reside in Martin County.
According to the complaint, on April 25, 2022, the DiGiacomos entered into a contract with Ocala Steel Enterprises, LLC for the construction of a “steel building in exchange for payment” of $70,000.
The complaint alleges that the agreement required the DiGiacomos to pay Ocala Steel a “First Payment” of $35,000 in cash, followed by a “Final Payment” of $35,000 that would take place “when the building was erected.”
On September 20, 2022, the couple says Ocala Steel asked for an additional payment of $20,000 to “expedite the construction process.”
“At that time, a $15,000 balance remained, and no work on the steel building had commenced,” reads the complaint.
On February 21, 2023, the DiGiacomos say Ocala Steel “apologized” for the delay in the construction of the building, and that the owner of the company assured them that if they paid off the remaining balance, “the steel building construction would get done immediately.”
The DiGiacomos proceeded to pay the remaining balance of $15,000, and, according to the complaint, have contacted Ocala Steel “on almost a daily basis regarding the status of the work to be performed.”
On July 18, 2023, the couple says they were promised by the company that “if the construction on the steel building did not begin by July 28, 2023, Ocala Steel would issue a full refund within seven days.”
The couple says that the only thing that “has been done by Ocala Steel” is “obtaining a permit,” which expired on July 14, 2023.
Attorneys argue that the DiGiacomos are were entitled to “a full refund as promised and agreed.” They accuse Ocala Steel of engaging in “deceptive and unfair” business practices and of violating the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.
The DiGiacomos are seeking relief “including $70,000 in damages, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, and costs.”