ComplaintsforCDC Distributors Inc.

• Initial Complaint

  03/31/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I bought flooring from this company through a retailer in 2021. The flooring has since degraded badly to where it has areas that are cracking and peeling. The floor needs to be completely replaced. I have tried to file a warranty claim but the manufacturer refuses. The company’s policy to handle warranty issues to for the consumer to communicate to their distributor rep through their retailer and refuses to speak to me directly. An inspector was sent out (ordered by the retailer who claims to not have been influenced by CDC distributors at all) who just so happened to work for a Flooring Company owned by his family that sells the ******** ******* brand. The conflict of interest was never disclosed. The inspector provided an opinion that the issue was the fault of installation despite providing only facts that indicate the floor is faulty and cannot withstand the specifications as laid out in the warranty. The company refuses to pay for an independent inspector of my choosing and refuses (through the retailer) to honor its warranty. I am beyond frustrated, feel as though I am being scammed.

  Business response

  04/11/2023

  CDC Distributors, Inc. confirms that at the time of the inspection the independent inspector commissioned by Remodeling Room for the ***** *** installation of ******** ******* *** did work for his family owned retail store that sells ******** ******* brand products. As a certified inspector this in no way presents a conflict of interest for the ***** *** inspection. ******** ******* is one of many brands sold by this retailer. 

  
  Installation related issues of vertical deflection, movement and permanent fixtures such as cabinets or islands installed on top of the flooring were noted. The permanent fixtures will pin the flooring in place and prevent it from floating freely during expansion cycles. Restricting the floor from floating freely can result in stress on the locking profile and eventual failure. 

  
  CDC Distributors recognizes and accepts the inspector's findings of no manufacturing related issues. 
  CDC Distributors 
  

  
  

  Customer response

  04/14/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, reasons for rejection are included below.
  
  I have hired an independent inspector, who I have personally vetted for experience and ability to provide an impartial assessment, as was communicated to me by CDC Distributing representative Dan D*** (via co-owner of *** *********** ****, Scott E*****).  The inspection was performed on 4/13/23 and I am awaiting the final report.  This will be shared with CDC distributors upon completion.  Until then, I would prefer not to close this complaint.

  Regards,

  
  ***** ***
  

  Business response

  04/24/2023

  CDC Distributors:  Any new inspection report will be reviewed and re-evaluated for any new findings.  The inspector must be certified and accredited and show proper certifications.  

  Customer response

  04/27/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, reasons for rejection are included below.

  I commissioned an independent inspection of my own as the previous was paid for by the retailer.  This inspector analyzed left over shelf stock (something the original inspector did not do) and found material defects beyond the shadow of doubt.  I submitted this new inspection on Thursday, 4/20 and have not heard anything back in the past 7 days.

  Regards,
  
  ***** ***
  

  Business response

  05/01/2023

  The inspection report commissioned by ***** *** has been reviewed by CDC management.  CDC stands behind the original response of no manufacturing defects present.  The damage to the flooring is due to failure of the installer/contractor  to follow the installation instructions found in every carton.  It is apparent that the inspector, **** *****, did not request or read the installation instructions.  Had he done so he would have found several instances of installation errors that are consistent with the damage to the floor.  The instructions clearly state the following: 1) cabinets, heavy furnishings or other built ins must not be installed on top of the flooring. 2) baseboards and moldings require 1/64" space above the floor to allow for natural expansion and contraction.  3) The addition of asphalt paper underlayment voids the warranty as ******** ******* does not recommend and will not warrant the use of any type of additional underlayment on any ******** ******* products that currently have an attached pad.   All of these violations should have been addressed by the inspector.   The original inspection performed by **** ************ of ******** ********** ******** notes these installation violations thus voiding the warranty.  ******** ******* warranty does not extend to installation or site conditions.  Installation instructions can be made available for review.

  Customer response

  05/01/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, reasons for rejection are included below.
  

  This response is absolutely unacceptable.  

  The manufacturer is clearly grasping at straws in an attempt to forgo being held responsible for the fact that they have produced a defective product.  Perhaps the manufacturer needs to familiarize himself with his own installation instructions.

  1.  The ******** ******* installation instructions say nothing about hight of baseboards above product.

   2. The ******** ******* installation instructions make no reference to whether a felt underlayment is or is not acceptable.

  Regardless of any errors made by the contractor, the issues at hand were caused by product that was manufactured and sold with defects not readily apparent to the naked eye.  There is nothing that could have been done at installation or after with upkeep that would have prevented the floor from failing.

  The issue here is clearly with the manufacturer and I am confident a court of law would find in my favor.

  Regards,
  
  ***** ***
  

  Business response

  05/08/2023

  This is our third response for this claim.  An e-mail was forwarded to the Attorney General of **. *** **** ****** with detailed information regarding installation errors.   CDC maintains that the instruction were not read prior to installation.  Installations errors of : Cabinets installed on top of the flooring, metal transitions strips secured with fasteners through the flooring, base boards installed too tight on top of the flooring, the use of additional underlayment under the flooring.  These installation errors void the warranty.  The warranty can be found in every carton.  Further more, had the second inspector read the installation instructions prior to his inspection he would have found these installation violations.  

  The second inspectors findings of material defects were not verified with any pictures or detailed measurements.  CDC maintains the issues/failures with this complaint are installation related and not manufacturing defects.   

  Customer response

  05/09/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, reasons for rejection are included below.
  

  With all due respect, this is the first time you have provided legitimate rationale as to why my warranty claim was denied.  *** ***** did include pictures but I didn't realize they were a separate document - they are attached here and the final few depict the defect in question.

  Allow me to summarize the situation for you-

  1. There were installation errors made by the contractor. 

       a. According to *** **********, those errors did NOT lead to the damage I am seeing

       b. I called *** ***** to ask why he did not include those in his report and his response was that they had nothing to do with the damage I am seeing.

           i. His exact quote was "If you buy a car and have an issue with the radio, the fact that you haven't changed the oil in the required timeframe doesn't make a difference."

       c. According to federal law, in order for the installation errors to void my warranty, the manufacturer must prove that they directly led to the damage.  In this case, they do not as attested to by BOTH inspectors

  2.  *** *********** measured a 'downward deflection' of no more that 1/8 of an inch.  He attributed this to the floor being out of flat, which he CANNOT actually measure without a destructive test.  If you would like to pay for a destructive test, I am happy to oblige but that is YOUR obligation according to the law.

       a. Even if the downward deflection of 1/8 was due to the floor being out of flat, your warranty and installation instructions clearly state that those are within specifications.

       b.  *** *********** states in his report that there was no attic stock available to analyze, which was not true.  In fact, he never asked.  I would have happily presented it.

  3.  *** ***** DID analyze the attic stock and found a material defect, which you now have evidence in the form of pictures.

       a.  The material defect has caused the flooring to break at the tongue and groove connection point.  

       b.  The 'downward deflection' of 1/8 inch is a result of the difference in thickness of planks + the extra movement due to the busted tongue and groove.

   

  If you have any more questions or concerns about *** **** ******* inspection, he has assured me that he will be happy to accept your call and talk through any and everything.  You can reach him at (573)701-3601, which can also be found on the inspection report I initially submitted.

  I hope this answers all of your questions and I look forward to hearing your response on a proposed resolution.

  Regards,
  
  ***** ***
  

  Business response

  05/15/2023

  Response to BBB letter dated May 2, 2023.  The installation instructions are attached.  The version attached is the appropriate time frame instructions for the ****** installation.  These instructions dated 2/2021 clearly state that cabinets must NOT be installed on top of the flooring.  Cabinets installed on top of the flooring restrict the floor ability to float freely causing planks to peak, break and eventual failure. Wall moldings and transitions should not be installed through the planks.  The original inspector noted fasteners penetrated the subject flooring.  *** ****** conveniently left that part out of his response.   The installation instructions also state the use of ANY TYPE of additional underlayment is not warranted.   This statement is written to prevent installers from adding anything they may think is appropriate to help smooth out a subfloor.  The original inspector even noted a clear sticking sound caused by the felt paper when the floor is walked on.  CDC maintains that the installation instructions were not followed leading to product failure not  a manufacturing defect.

  Customer response

  05/15/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, reasons for rejection are included below.

  CDC Distributors does not seem to have any intention of voluntarily honoring the contract that was entered into upon my purchase of their product, ******** ******* *** flooring.
  I purchased their product from a retailer that did not offer installation, so I had no choice but to hire an independent contractor for the install.  The contractor that I selected failed to follow the installation instructions and made mistakes expressly prohibited by the written warranty.  However, there was an underlying product defect found in 10 of 34 remaining flooring planks that I had left over from the initial installation.  According to both independent inspectors hired (first by the retailer, then by me) the installation errors made by the contractor did NOT lead to the floor failing; it would have failed even if installed precisely as the instructions said.  According to Federal Law, a warranty cannot be voided by installation/use errors unless those errors expressly lead to the damage at hand.  When the damage is caused by an underlying defect, the responsible party is the manufacturer regardless of anything else.  CDC Distributors is, hence, responsible for the price of the product + tax, the price of installation, and the price of the inspection they required to determine fault.  When this goes to court and I ultimately win, they will be required to pay my lawyer fees as well.
  I have proven my point AND offered them a critical step that could be taken to prove responsibility but in response, they have done nothing but repeat their initial standing.
  As evidenced by the failure to use my last name by the CDC Distributor representative in their final response to my complaint, the company is clearly dealing with multiple complaints thru the Better Business Bureau and is refusing to accept accountability in both (all??) cases.  There is also one active lawsuit for breach of contract pending against the company in the state of Missouri that is public record.  This is clearly not a company anyone should be doing business with.   
  

  Please reference the attached files for evidence-
  Inspector Nick *********** Cover Letter to Inspection Report.jpg
  Easy to read (laymen’s terms) cover letter emailed by Nick *********** with his Inspection Report attached in which Nick clearly states that the kitchen island installed on top of the flooring, nailed down transition strips, and added underlayment, while unadvised, DO NOT lead to the damage at hand.  The damage at hand, according to Nick, is caused by an unlevel subfloor, which he expressly states cannot be guaranteed without removing the flooring and evaluating the actual subfloor (destructive test).
  Nick *********** Inspection Report – Conclusions.jpg
  Not so easy to read conclusion of Nick from his Inspection Report that state much of the same as his cover letter.
  Tony Polus Inspection Report – Conclusions.jpg
  Nick *********** was hired by the retailer and had communication with CDC Distributors personnel prior to inspecting my flooring issues.  This along with other concerns/inaccuracies of his report, caused me to dispute his results.  CDC Distributors then communicated to me (via the retailer) to hire my own independent inspector, which is where **** ***** comes in to play.
  Tony Polus took his investigation a step further than Nick *********** and analyzed attic stock of product to look for product defect.  Nick simply stated in his report that there was no attic stock available which he never inquired about.
  Tony Polus found clear discrepancies in product thickness (10 of 34 remaining planks) of up to 21% when comparing the thickness at the middle of the plank to the thickness at the end or thicknesses of one plank vs another completely.  These varying thicknesses is what caused the symptoms leading the prior inspector to believe the subfloor is out of level.
  Product Defect – Plank Thickness Differences.png
  Pictorial evidence of product defect.  Picture of 2 planks from the same set of attic stock that measure 2 different thicknesses using a precision caliper measuring device.
  Federal Law RE Product Warranties and Waiver of Standards.jpg
  Federal Law (that extends to State Law) as downloaded from the website for the US House of Representatives concerning Consumer Product Warranties
  Highlighted text demonstrates how the manufacturer cannot void a warranty because an item was used/installed outside of specifications IF those errors did not directly lead to product failure when an underlying product defect is proven.
  As a result of this clause, I CANNOT, in a court of law, hold the contractor at fault.  By not owning their product defect, CDC Distributors is forcing me to bare the responsibility of my failed floors when I am an innocent consumer in the middle of a battle that should be handled between the manufacturer and the contractor.  My only option is to sue both parties and allow the court to decide.
  
  Regards,
  
  ***** ***
  

  Business response

  05/22/2023

  The homeowner acknowledges that the installation instructions were not followed.  

  Due to the size and format of the printed instructions, a copy of the installation instructions found in each carton will be mailed to: BBB Southern Ohio, 1 E. 4th, Suite 600, Cincinnati, Ohio  45202.  

  Business response

  05/26/2023

  Copy of Installation Instructions added to file.

  Date Sent: 5/22/2023 1:54:01 PM
  The homeowner acknowledges that the installation instructions were not followed.  
  
  Due to the size and format of the printed instructions, a copy of the installation instructions found in each carton will be mailed to: BBB

  Customer response

  05/26/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, reasons for rejection are included below.
  
  

  The CDC Distributors representative again fails to address my finding of a product defect.  They were quick to disregard the product defect when they thought there was no evidence but since evidence was presented, they have conveniently ignored that part of the dispute altogether.
  
  The juvenile game of “gotcha” that the representative is now playing is not professional nor will it hold any weight in a court of law.   Neither will the opinion of an office worker of the defendant that is directly opposed by 2 independent inspectors.
  
  At this point, I have to question whether the representative from CDC Distributors is actually reading my responses.  Regardless, they do not  appear to be taking this process seriously.

  
  Regards,
  
  ***** ***
  

• Initial Complaint

  01/13/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Bought ******** ******* hardwood flooring by CDC Distributors from ******* ******** at **** ***** ****** ** *********** ** that came with a 25 year warranty. Had a lot of back and forth with ******* ******** so my invoice was lost and ******* ******** permanently closed. I have no way that I know of to get a copy of my invoice so CDC Distributors/******** ******* will not honor the 25 years warranty on my flooring.

  Business response

  02/14/2022

  February 9, 2022 
  

  *** ***** **** 
  C/O BBB 1 E. 4th, Suite 600 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 
  

  RE: ***** **** ID # ******** 
  

  *** ****, 
  I am responding to your letter dated January 23, 2022, regarding a situation which ***** **** is experiencing. We have been in contact with ***** previously and have requested the necessary information from her to support her claim. We have asked ***** to provide us with documentation that her product was purchased from an authorized dealer who obtained the material from us. This is necessary as proof of purchase is required and the foundation for all warranty claims to be considered. As of yet, ***** has not provided the needed information. 
  

  Unfortunately, without any documentation supporting a warranty claim for our product, we cannot begin to assist her with the situation. In the event ***** can provide us copies of her paperwork regarding the purchase and installation of the product, we would be able to begin to research and assess her warranty claim. 
  

  Sincerely, 
  

  John P. S. Chief Financial Officer CDC Distributors, Inc. 
  

  
  

*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. ↩