Case Results

Findings That Hold Up.

A representative sample of investigation outcomes across residential and commercial projects. Cases are anonymized. Flooring types, dispute categories, and outcomes reflect actual investigation work.

Declined Claim ReviewLVT / Rigid Core
Residential

Issue

Widespread gapping and edge lifting throughout main living areas within 14 months of installation.

Manufacturer's Position

Claim denied — installer cited for failure to acclimate product.

Finding

Inspection revealed product was installed within manufacturer's stated acclimation window. Dimensional instability traced to a batch with inconsistent core density. Acclimation was not the cause.

Outcome

Claim reversed. Manufacturer authorized full replacement.

Defect InvestigationHardwood
Residential

Issue

Cupping across entire engineered hardwood floor within 8 months of installation.

Finding

Moisture testing revealed elevated subfloor moisture levels inconsistent with site conditions at time of installation. Review of installation records confirmed moisture readings were not taken prior to installation — a required step under manufacturer guidelines.

Outcome

Installer found liable. Homeowner received full replacement and installation costs.

Declined Claim ReviewCarpet
Residential

Issue

Premature fiber matting and crushing in high-traffic areas within 18 months.

Manufacturer's Position

Claim denied — normal wear and improper maintenance cited.

Finding

Fiber analysis and pile weight measurements confirmed the product did not meet the manufacturer's own published specifications for the grade sold. Maintenance records provided by homeowner were consistent with manufacturer recommendations.

Outcome

Claim upheld on appeal. Manufacturer replaced carpet.

Defect InvestigationCarpet Tile
Commercial — Daycare Facility

Issue

Carpet tiles delaminating from adhesive within 10 months of installation in multiple classrooms.

Finding

Adhesive spread rate and trowel notch size were inconsistent with product requirements. Subfloor pH testing revealed alkaline conditions that were not addressed prior to installation — a known cause of adhesive failure with this product type.

Outcome

Installation contractor found liable. Facility received full remediation at contractor's expense.

Defect InvestigationGlue-Down LVT
Commercial — Middle School

Issue

Widespread tile lifting, bubbling, and adhesive failure in corridors and classrooms within 12 months.

Finding

Moisture vapor emission testing revealed MVER levels significantly above the adhesive manufacturer's published tolerance. Concrete moisture testing was not performed prior to installation. Adhesive selection was also inappropriate for the substrate conditions present.

Outcome

General contractor and flooring subcontractor found jointly liable. District received full replacement with appropriate moisture mitigation system.

Pre-Installation ConsultationHardwood
Residential — New Construction

Issue

Builder proposed nail-down solid hardwood over a concrete slab in a Florida climate zone.

Manufacturer's Position

N/A — homeowner requested independent review before installation.

Finding

Concrete slab moisture readings exceeded acceptable thresholds for direct nail-down installation. Product specified was not rated for on-grade or below-grade applications. Recommended engineered hardwood with appropriate moisture barrier and adhesive system.

Outcome

Installation method changed prior to flooring going down. No failure occurred.

Defect InvestigationGlue-Down Commercial Carpet
Commercial — Middle School

Issue

Edge ravel at seams throughout multiple classrooms within the first year of installation.

Finding

Inspection found no seam sealer had been applied at any seam location. Without seam sealer, the cut edges of glue-down commercial carpet are unprotected and susceptible to ravel under foot traffic. The omission was a clear departure from CRI 104 installation standards and the manufacturer's published seaming requirements.

Outcome

Installer found liable. District received full re-installation at installer's expense.

Pre-Installation ConsultationGlue-Down LVT
Commercial — Office Renovation

Issue

Property manager requested independent review of proposed glue-down LVT specification before award of installation contract.

Finding

Proposed adhesive was not on the manufacturer's approved adhesive list for the specified product. Subfloor flatness in several areas exceeded the 3/16" in 10' tolerance required for glue-down LVT. Recommended adhesive substitution and targeted subfloor grinding prior to installation.

Outcome

Specification corrected before installation. Project completed without adhesive or flatness-related failures.

Need an Independent Investigation?

Available throughout SW Florida (Tampa to Naples) for on-site inspections. Remote consultation and report review available nationwide.