ComplaintsforFlooring Inspections & Consulting Services

• Initial Complaint

  12/20/2021

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  The inspector (**************) reached out to us and set up an appointment date of June 19, 2021 to conduct his investigation - they commented that they did not want the installer to be present during the investigation, so installer ********** was not present to discuss concerns with the inspector. My wife and sister-in-law were at home during the investigation and watched what he did - it was very similar to what had already been done by the distributor representative - we are guessing this was a way to get a second opinion ? The inspector asked several of the same questions, and received the same answers that were presented to the distributor rep., however when the "certified" inspector filed his formal report, it was littered with false statements and lies that were clearly misleading to the manufacturer - and as a result, the manufacturer denied any responsibility for the flooring defects and stated the following as reasons (both lies) (See Manufacturer denial letter on page 9) 1) Customer stated that she cleans the floors with a wet rag a. Again, we only use the recommended Swiffer products - and a damp rag is only used to wipe up minor spills when they occur. One would expect that you should be able to wipe up a spill without damaging the protective surface of a wood floor. 2) Customer has no window coverings, thus the floor is exposed to direct sunlight a. Every window and sliding door in our home has retractable blinds except for the side-lites on both sides of our entry door. The only time direct sunlight shines on our floors is in the evening when the sun is setting - we typically drop the shades to block this until the sun sets - but again, we are concerned about delamination of the wear surface, not discoloration of the wood (we expect some fading over time, but have no fading issues of concern after over two years of exposure and use. And because of these false statements in his report, the claims department at OEM denied our claim

  Business response

  12/27/2021

  Hello,
  The first thing to understand about this flooring inspection is that Mr. ****** was not present during the inspection. He was golfing, and that was his own choice.
  
  The second thing to understand is that I am an independent flooring inspector. I was hired by the distributor of the flooring to perform the inspection. I am a Master Flooring Inspector. My job is solely to collect data from the installation and write a report. I turn in the report to the commissioning party, in this case it was the distributor. Mr. ****** did not hire me nor was he required to pay me.
  
  
  My job is to collect the data, and determine if the issues are manufacturing defects, installation errors, or maintenance related.
  
  In this case, the consumer's flooring has been exposed to liquid flooring cleaner, direct sunlight from uncovered windows, and damage from a maintenance device. Having window shades does nothing to protect the flooring if the shades are open during peak sunlight hours, which they were at the time of the inspection.
  
  His wife was home during the inspection, not Mr.******. The wife stated that she cleans the flooring with a Swiffer Wet Jet with liquid flooring cleaner and with a wet rag with water.
  
  
  You will have to read the report to understand the complete scope of the inspection.
  
  The issues observed during the inspection were directly related to wet cleaning the hardwood flooring. Hardwood flooring is hygroscopic and will expand and contract in relation to humidity and temperature. The raised grains and surface checking conditions are well known in the flooring industry as conditions that become more apparent with improper maintenance.
  
  I completely stand by my report 100%. There are no false statements in the report.
  Mr. ****** was not present for the inspection, and would only know what his wife says to him. And i specifically remember her saying that she cleans the floor with water and a rag, and sprays liquid floor cleaner on the flooring. I have photographic evidence attached in the report.
  
  In any case, if the consumer does not agree with the report they may choose to hire their own independent inspector at their expense. There were no installation errors or manufacturing defects observed. All of the issues were directly related to improper maintenance. Please read the report upon your resolution.
  
  First and foremost, the manufactures installation care and maintenance guides MUST be followed by everyone. The consumer must follow the directions, the installer must follow the directions, and even I must refer to the instructions and care guides when making a determination. I do not make opinions, the determination is made from facts presented to me at the time of the inspection.
  
  According to the manufactures instructions and the national wood flooring association. Mr. ******'s flooring issues are Maintenance-Relate. They are the result of improper maintenance, such as wet cleaning.
  
  I refer to the Manufactures Guidelines and the National Wood Flooring Association (NWFA) when writing a certified report. Here is what the NWFA has to say about surface checking:
  
  1.) The National Wood Flooring Association's (NWFA) Technical Publication No. C200, Problems, Causes and Cures of Hardwood Floors, Page 12 defines surface checks as:
  Surface-Checks - Surface checks are separations in the wood fibers that usually occur in, or adjacent to, the wood rays on the faces of plainsawn (flatsawn) boards. These separations occur during the early phases of the drying process where the external and internal stresses cause the wood to tear itself apart.
  
  The publication further lists some of the possible CAUSES as:
  Checks may become apparent with improper handling and maintenance practices, such as: - Inoperable or lack of RH control within the structure, reducing the humidity levels to below the manufactured tolerances. - Excessive moisture used to clean the floors. Excessive moisture would be described as steam or standing water/solution remaining on the floor or able to seep between the boards during the cleaning process.
  Checks may develop or become apparent with improper management of direct heating sources, such as radiant heating systems, surface heat from uncovered windows, or heat registers.
  
  The publication further lists its CURES as:
  Checks are permissible in all flooring grades at the time of manufacture. Check with the manufacturer's grade standards and recommendations for addressing. No repairs may be necessary.
  Maintain the environment within the flooring manufacturer's requirements. When conditions are not specified by the manufacturer, maintain temperature between 60º-80ºF (15.6º-26.7ºC), and relative humidity between 30%-50%.
  Correct or redirect heating sources from the flooring.
  Increase the moisture levels within the facility to reduce the visible appearance of the checks.
  Isolation repairs such as wood filler, color-matched putties, or slivers may be used to address aesthetic concerns.
  Replacement of affected boards may be necessary.
  
  
  
  You will have to read the report and view the photos to resolve the complaint.
  
  As previously mentioned... I am an independent inspector. My job is to collect data and create a report. The report details whether the issues are installation related, manufacturing related, or maintenance/site related. There will always be one party not happy with the report. It is the point of getting an inspection to determine the cause and responsibility for the issues. In this case, it was the ******'s improper maintenance.
  
  

  Customer response

  12/29/2021

  (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
  **** ********* / BBB - I am basing my complaints solely on the false comments that you made in your report that clearly mislead the distributor and manufacturer. My following response will be quoting your responses, and my comments will follow. I will also be attaching a copy of your report, as well as the response from the manufacturer to support my concerns.
  My presence, and the fact I was "golfing" that day during the inspection is irrelevant (this clearly displays your professionalism) - When the appointment was made, we asked if the installer should be present, but we were told NO ... they preferred that the installer was not present during the inspection. If the installer was present, several of your other comments in your report could have been answered and resolved.
  Your comment - "In this case, the consumer's flooring has been exposed to liquid flooring cleaner, direct sunlight from uncovered windows, and damage from a maintenance device. Having window shades does nothing to protect the flooring if the shades are open during peak sunlight hours, which they were at the time of the inspection."
  So first and foremost, the only floor cleaner we have ever used is what is recommended by the manufacturer (Swiffer Wet-Jet and Wood cleaner "Quick dry formula") - Our use of this cleaner is maybe a time or two a month depending on traffic and necessity.... So that cancels your first "Exposure comment". Direct sunlight is not a concern in our home until late evening when the sun is setting - when this occurs, we lower the shades, however, our concerns are not related to UV or direct sun exposure - if this were the case, we would have these issues more prevalent in the exposed areas, but this is not the case. Again, your comment as stated above states "direct sunlight from uncovered windows - and the manufacturer stated the same comment in their denial letter which stated "Failure to offer any sort of window coverings has exposed the floor to excessive sunlight and temperature over time"
  Clearly your false comment about window coverings and sun exposure led to one of two denial comments by the manufacturer. I guess you are both implying that the floor should never be exposed to natural light, thus we must live in darkness throughout the day to protect our floors ....Really !!! Your comment was "No protective window coverings were observed" - again, a lie - all of our windows and sliding doors have shades on them. We have flooring defect where the sun never shines on the floor.
  Your next comment was "and damage from a maintenance device" What exactly does this mean ? Are you implying that we use some kind of scraper on our floors to clean them ? Again, we only use the Swiffer Wet-Jet system to clean our floors.
  Now, your comment about using a "Wet rag" to clean the floors - again, this statement in your report also was used against us by the manufacturer (see denial letter attached). Like most home owners, yes, we use a damp rag to clean up any spills that may occur - this does not imply that we soak the area and leave it to dry on its own - rather like all home owners, when a spill occurs, a damp rag or damp paper towel is typically used to clean up the spill - if this is enough to damage a high-end floor like ours, then it should not be on the market and boast that it is designed for residential and light commercial use. And by the way ... the manufacturer recommends in their "Routine Maintenance" section the following - 2. Blot up liquids with a clean dry cloth as soon as practicable. Most spills and splatters can be cleaned up with a clean dry or damp cloth.
  Now I will list the additional false statements in your report in no specific order:
  Installer present during inspection - Again, we were told he was not to be there. You made several comments in the report about No Documents, such as copies of invoice, work order receipts to substantiate the exact date or other pertinent information to establish an accurate timeline. If you needed this information, then you should always recommend that the installer be present for your inspections. Our installer could have answered all your questions and concerns, but again we were told not to have him present.
  Your report states that our home is 10 - 15 years old - Our home was approximately two years old at the time of your report. However, we started to have issues about 3 months after we moved in.
  Your report states that we have a crawl space - you failed to elaborate that we also have the entire crawl space insulated and wrapped with a High-end vapor barrier system to prevent moisture and humidity in our home.
  Your report states that we only had four (4) floor vents - We actually have 13 on the main floor alone.
  Your report states that there were no protective window coverings observed on the sliding glass doors in the living room at the time of inspection - We actually had, and have, power blinds on all of our living room window and sliding doors. You also commented that the damages you witnessed were much less severe in other rooms that were not subjected to direct sunlight. The fact that the damages can be witnessed in almost every room would support that sunlight is not the root cause of this issue
  Your report stated that most of the "checks" were observed in main traffic areas - we agree, the finish on this flooring is simply not robust enough to handle normal daily traffic and required maintenance. What you call "checks", I call delamination - the finish is simply peeling off the substrate throughout the house.
  Your report explains methods of repairing the defects with the use of a "grey furniture touch-up marker" - this marker does not exist in the recommended markers from the manufacturer. We ordered a complete set of the markers that were recommended for our floors, and have found them to be useless - the markers simply do not penetrate the wood and repair the defects that we have in our flooring.
  Your report included Industry Standards from the NWFA that list the possible causes for "checks" such as: Lack of humidity control - We have a new home with a high efficiency furnace and A/C with Humidity control - we also have three zones throughout our home that are all monitored by Smart thermostats for temperature and humidity - your readings during the inspection confirmed that these were all withing the acceptable ranges.
  Your report stated that "the home owner stated that she cleans the hardwood flooring 1 -2 times per week with a wet rag and water"
  And finally, if the above is not enough .... Your conclusion was "The surface checks and end checks observed were consistent with improper maintenance of the flooring, and direct heat from uncovered windows. And you concluded that the these are all maintenance-related issues.
  
  In closing, I am not satisfied with your report or your reply. Your report is littered with false statements as defined above, and you pulled two of your false statements to the forefront to discredit our concerns. You state that you are an Independent Inspector ..... however, based on the inaccuracies in your report, and the carefully chosen comments ..... you clearly worked harder to support the distributor that hired you, vs. the consumer with the quality concern. I am a Quality Engineer by trade, and I completely understand data collection, documentation, and the quest for the root cause of a problem - as far as I see it, you have failed miserably at defining the root cause, thus your conclusions are all false and misleading to your customer and the consumer. To be truly Independent, you must submit a report that is accurate and factual, and not litter it with twisted false statements that only supports the person that hired you.
  
  We were denied by the manufacturer for the following:
  1. Failure to offer any sort of window coverings has exposed the floor to excessive sunlight and temperature over time - FALSE AND NO DATA TO SUPPORT. MUST BE RETRACTED FROM THE REPORT
  2. A maintenance routine consisting of a wet rag and water 1 - 2 times per week - FALSE, THIS STATEMENT IMPLIES THAT THIS IS THE ONLY WAY WE CLEAN OUR FLOORS. Damp rags are recommended by the manufacturer for quick clean-up's, and that is what was stated by my wife, but twisted by your statement.
  
  You have not complied with the request I sent to the BBB, which stated : Remove false statements and lies from the report, and provide the manufacturer with honest facts about the hundreds of delamination defects.; Provide facts, pictures, and credible data of the flooring defects; Demand that the manufacturer investigate this issue personally and reach a resolution with customer as requested in document attached
  

  Customer response

  01/13/2022

  (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
  **** ********* must understand that "Words Matter" - The fact that my wife wipes up small spills with a wet cloth, does not imply that we wash our floors by hand with a "Wet Rag". Your statement in your report implies this, and as a result, the manufacturer took your words and used them to decline our quality concerns. Your statements are based on opinion, with no physical analysis done to back up your opinion. You fail to explain why we would have issues throughout our home, in areas that are not exposed to direct sun light, and have never had anything spilled on them, nor have they been subjected to anything more than normal use traffic, yet the finish is peeled off our floor (explain that with facts and data .... not opinion)
  
  We will be seeking a second opinion, from what I hope is a more reputable inspector that works as an independent inspector, vs an inspector that is clearly in business to support the manufacturer vs. the customer.
  
  I hope others homeowners with flooring issues consider this before they hire you in the future.

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩