Royal Roofing Bronx
  
 143 Google reviews 
 
 Write a review 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Posted on Google  
 
  
 
 
 Rachel Szeto 
 
19 days ago
 
 
 Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. 
Replacing a row-house roof requires some consideration for the homes attached to it. The neighboring property had a newer membrane, while ours had failed along the shared party wall. Both sides were photographed before work began, and the termination point was reviewed with the adjoining owner. Our roof was removed without cutting into their system, and the wall connection was rebuilt on our side. A small amount of debris crossed the property line during tear-off but was collected immediately. The technical work was handled well, and so was the potentially awkward neighbor conversation
  
 
 
 
 
 
 Posted on Google  
 
  
 
 
 t ford 
 
20 days ago
 
 
 Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. 
The low roof above our rear bedroom leaked for years. It was replaced in two days, TWO! Royal Roofing Bronx came in with a full crew and swiftly did everything, even keeping the place clean and not disturbing the neighbors or anything. Solid crew!
  
 
 
 
 
 
 Posted on Google  
 
  
 
 
 Jazmine 
 
23 days ago
 
 
 Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. 
The gutter no longer overflows, the basement no longer smells damp, and I no longer climb a ladder during thunderstorms. Strong improvement in all three categories.
  
 
 
 
 
 
 Posted on Google  
 
  
 
 
 Richard Williams 
 
50 days ago
 
 
 Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. 
The quote included a decking allowance, and that became important once the old roof was removed. Four damaged plywood sheets were found near the hatch and replaced without increasing the agreed price. New insulation and modified-bitumen roofing were then installed over the repaired deck. The final invoice matched what we expected from the beginning.
  
 
 
 
 
 
 Posted on Google  
 
  
 
 
 Jack Arthur 
 
53 days ago
 
 
 Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. 
Wrost roofing installation.  Not recommended.
  
 
 
 
 
 
 Posted on Google  
 
  
 
 
 Michelle 
 
57 days ago
 
 
 Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. 
Our building has separate front and rear flat roofs, and I assumed both would need replacement. The inspection showed that the front section was dry and still performing well, while the rear contained wet insulation and deteriorated seams. Only the rear roof was removed and replaced with a new EPDM system. The front received minor seam maintenance and drain cleaning. The divided scope saved us from replacing a roof that did not need it. I appreciated that level of judgment.
  
 
 
 
 
 
 Posted on Google  
 
  
 
 
 SNZZ daGOAT 
 
65 days ago
 
 
 Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. 
Overall, I had a very good experience replacing the flat roof on our community building with Royal Roofing Bronx. The old roof had been coated several times, and new cracks kept appearing around the vents and drains. Test openings confirmed that some insulation was wet, so another surface coating would not have solved the complete problem. We chose a PVC system with new insulation and a cover board.
Work was planned around the building’s regular daytime activities. A damaged section of decking was discovered beside an old vent, photographed, and replaced before the membrane went down. The landscaped area beside the building was covered during tear-off, and the neighboring property remained clean. We had one weather delay, but the roof was secured and the revised schedule was communicated. The final inspection included drain testing and a review of the warranty. Several months later, the building is dry and the new roof is performing as expected.
  
 
 
 
 
 
 Posted on Google  
 
  
 
 
 Kristina Ribinson 
 
70 days ago
 
 
 Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. 
Replacing the roof above an occupied hotel required more planning than the material installation itself. Eleven plumbing vents, two exhaust curbs, an internal drain, and a roof hatch all served occupied areas below. Closing the entire top floor was not realistic, so the work was divided into controlled zones.
Moisture testing and core samples showed wet insulation near the drain, one exhaust curb, and part of the rear perimeter. The leaks visible in two guest rooms represented only a portion of the affected roof. Repairing those ceiling locations would have left wet material elsewhere.
The approved scope included complete removal, deck evaluation, tapered insulation, a single-ply membrane, drain detailing, curb flashing, perimeter work, and service walkways. Guest rooms beneath each active zone were left unoccupied during removal. Housekeeping received a daily map showing where interior protection needed to remain.
The metal deck was sound across most of the building. Two corroded sections near the drain were marked from above and below before replacement. Photographs and measurements were provided before the added metal work was approved.
One guest complained about drilling that began earlier than the posted time. The work stopped, and the morning schedule was corrected for the remaining days. That mistake did not repeat.
The vents and curbs were completed individually rather than covered by one generic penetration detail. Walkway pads now provide a defined route from the hatch to the equipment, and the drain approach has a visible slope. Final documentation identifies every curb, vent, deck repair, and seam transition.
The first major storm arrived while the hotel was nearly full. Neither of the former leak rooms reported moisture, and the drain cleared without the ponding seen before replacement. The installation mattered, but the room-by-room coordination is what allowed the building to remain operational.
  
 
 
 
 
 
 Posted on Google  
 
  
 
 
 Pryme TymeVEVO 
 
71 days ago
 
 
 Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. 
This repair involved the HVAC technician almost as much as the roofers. Refrigerant lines serving a rooftop unit had been resting directly on the EPDM membrane, and years of movement wore through the surface at one contact point. Another section was being stretched by a support that had shifted.
The roof itself was approximately nine years old and remained dry outside the damaged path. Moisture testing did not support complete replacement. The recommended approach was to repair the membrane and have the mechanical lines raised on compatible supports.
Scheduling the two trades took longer than the physical repair. The first appointment had to be moved when the HVAC technician became unavailable, which was frustrating because we had already cleared access. A coordinated date was confirmed before the second attempt.
The lines were temporarily lifted without disconnecting or pulling on the equipment connections. Wet insulation beneath the puncture was removed locally, and the area was rebuilt with matching material and compatible EPDM patches. New supports and walkway pads now keep service traffic away from the vulnerable area.
I asked for pictures after the lines were lowered onto the new supports, not just while everything was moved aside. Those final photographs showed that none of the repaired membrane was carrying the line weight. The patch is visible, but its edges remain flat.
A later HVAC service visit followed the marked walkway and did not disturb the repair. Rain has not produced another stain in the room below. The solution worked because the source of the membrane damage was corrected along with the hole.
  
 
 
 
 
 
 Posted on Google  
 
  
 
 
 Pretti Girl 
 
75 days ago
 
 
 Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google. 
A windy night took off three ridge-cap shingles and loosened several more. From the ground it looked like we might be heading toward a full replacement, but the field shingles were only about seven years old and still in good condition. The damage was concentrated along the ridge. The inspection found that part of the ridge vent and cap had not been fastened securely enough. Simply replacing the three missing caps would have left the same weakness farther down the ridge. We approved removal of the affected ridge caps, replacement of the damaged vent section, and installation of new caps with the proper fastening. They also checked the attic beneath the ridge for signs of water entry. A small damp area was found below one missing cap, but the decking remained solid and did not require replacement. Photographs were taken before the new material went on. The replacement shingles were the same general color but looked darker because the existing roof had weathered. That was explained before the repair. The crew arrived about 30 minutes earlier than expected, which caught us off guard, but they waited while we moved our cars and unlocked the side gate. Everything was completed in one visit. The yard and planting beds were swept with a magnet, and the loose ridge material was removed from both sides of the house. Several windy days have passed without movement or noise from the ridge. I was glad the repair addressed the fastening problem without turning a limited failure into a full-roof proposal. The color difference has already become less noticeable, and the attic area remained dry during the next rain.
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Verified by Trustindex  
Trustindex verified badge is the Universal Symbol of Trust. Only the greatest companies can get the verified badge who has a review score above 4.5, based on customer reviews over the past 12 months. Read more