Snap Construction

Customer experiences with Snap Construction were generally positive, highlighting thorough initial inspections, transparent cost and timing, and responsive project leadership, but with some recurring issues around communication and cleanup, and mixed suitability for complex projects.

Key positives:
- Initial assessments and quoting: The inspection was described as thorough, with transparent pricing and timing; reminders during the process were appreciated.
- Insulation and attic work: Alexis and Tarik were repeatedly praised for efficiency, professionalism, and careful work (e.g., removing old materials through a window, setting up traverse boards, and providing airflow tests and rebate assistance). They were friendly and good communicators, and some customers appreciated the photo documentation of results.
- Roofing and gutters: Dan, Randy, Layne, and the crews were described as professional, detail-oriented, and responsive to scheduling constraints. Projects generally progressed smoothly despite logistical hurdles (e.g., dumpster issues, alley access), and gutters were noted to drain well into a cistern. Several reviews emphasized cheerful, courteous crews and strong workmanship, with several customers highly recommending Snap.
- Specific staff noted positively: Tarik, Alexis, Dan Lahr, Randy, Devin, John, and Layne Thomas appeared frequently in positive reviews for their knowledge, honesty, and customer service.

Notable concerns:
- Electrician coordination: In one instance, a contract stated an electrician would be provided, but Snap did not have an electrician on staff initially; a subcontractor was arranged afterward, causing scheduling challenges.
- Cleanup and follow-up: Some jobs left minor cleanup issues (stains on walls, insulation pellets on the ground, or items left behind) and inconsistent follow-through on promised cleanup or paperwork (e.g., work-order printouts or post-job follow-up).
- Not recommended for complex projects: At least one review cautioned against Snap for complex tasks requiring delicate handling, noting unbriefed subcontractors, scattered debris, and damage (e.g., nails in yard, damaged gas line, cracked downspouts, and cedar siding issues) with minimal response from management.
- Communication gaps and staffing changes: A review noted zero communication after a salesperson left, with no advance notice for a full-day commitment and a project that stretched from one day to three. Another reviewer highlighted the importance of better communication and follow-up for details and permits.
- Work quality for certain materials: There were reports of cedar siding not being handled with appropriate tools or expertise, resulting in damaged boards, suggesting variability by project type.

Overall value:
- The majority of feedback indicates a fair-to-competitive pricing with solid workmanship and a positive customer experience, especially on insulation and roofing/gutter projects. However, potential customers should be aware of possible scheduling, coordination, and cleanup gaps, and consider requesting clear communication expectations and documentation for complex or detail-sensitive tasks.