Hallmark Installation

[Ernesto]

These guys may have the most concise installation instructions I have yet to read. I'll be doing the Heirloom Collection, sawn face engineered, 1,500 sf about this time next month.

http://www.hallmarkhardwoods.com/downloads/installation-instructions-2012-WEB.pdf

 

[FloorMaven]

Don't cha think the MVE specs are a bit ambiguous?

 

[Ernesto]

Don't cha think the MVE specs are a bit ambiguous?

The CME kinda threw me but then they do say;

"NOTE: Refer to adhesive manufacturers required testing
methods. Adhesive manufacturer’s offer moisture
warranties that may be conditional. Follow their directions
closely to ensure compliance and full warranty coverage"

I like the wood substrate part with the 2% from top to bottom.

 

[FloorMaven]

They recommend Bostiks Ultra-set for radiant heat though bostik lists no spec for MVE. I guess they're confident in their product. Mapei lists 15#. Anything I've seen that got anywhere near 10# showed visible signs of moisture.

That guy you gave my number to last week has a complete failure of this brand from the silverado collection. I haven't seen it but he claims it's only a month old and is cupping throughout.

 

[Ernesto]

They recommend Bostiks Ultra-set for radiant heat though bostik lists no spec for MVE. I guess they're confident in their product. Mapei lists 15#. Anything I've seen that got anywhere near 10# showed visible signs of moisture.

That guy you gave my number to last week has a complete failure of this brand from the silverado collection. I haven't seen it but he claims it's only a month old and is cupping throughout.

Yea, and you'll probably never see a MVE spec with Bostik anymore. I always check anyones site for moisture tolerences before I use glue. I remember there being a limit for insitu of 85% which is the industry norm. But thats gone from the spec sheet as well. As long as you do not see any visable signs of water on the slab your good to go.

You won't find any on SikaBonds T-55 or T-21 either.

That guy up there said the installer/contractor did no moisture testing either, maybe a CME but has no documentation and glue is oozing out the planks. Learned lesson. And I do not know what adhesive they used either.

I do know one thing, wood cups because of too much or to little moisture; moisture imbalance. And if you have ooze that automatically tells me something and it ain't the woods fault.

Did you demo part of it yet?

 

[FloorMaven]

I do know one thing, wood cups because of too much or to little moisture; moisture imbalance. And if you have ooze that automatically tells me something and it ain't the woods fault.

Did you demo part of it yet?

I haven't seen it...it's under warranty so I walked him through getting the ROC involved. He actually said buckling not cupping. Not that he would know the difference. Contractor is blaming the failure on a slab leak so H/O had a plumber inspect for slab leaks and none were found.

 

[Ernesto]

I haven't seen it...it's under warranty so I walked him through getting the ROC involved. He actually said buckling not cupping. Not that he would know the difference. Contractor is blaming the failure on a slab leak so H/O had a plumber inspect for slab leaks and none were found.

Warranty? So what, it still needs to be cut apart for a proper inspection. Go make some money!

 

[FloorMaven]

... it still needs to be cut apart for a proper inspection...

Why do you say that?

 

[Ernesto]

Why do you say that?

Proper trowel size, CSP -2 -3 and maybe a probe or three. Hey , why not go into the kangaroo court armed with indisputable evidence?

 

[FloorMaven]

I think that's premature. The installation contractor has dibs based on due process. If he fails to make the ordered corrections that leaves the door open to collect evidence for a hearing. Until then, asking the H/o to pay for something they may not need is a bit opportunist.

 

[Ernesto]

I think that's premature. The installation contractor has dibs based on due process. If he fails to make the ordered corrections that leaves the door open to collect evidence for a hearing. Until then, asking the H/o to pay for something they may not need is a bit opportunist.

Well it seems to me the contractor is making excuses. I think the manufacturer and consumer has a say in this as well. I know what the rules are for allowing the contractor to make amends. But like I said, he is not going that direction is he?

I guess you could wait to see what excuse he comes up with next other than the leaky pipe. Maybe the ole "let it relax, it will fix itself" excuse may be next.

 

[FloorMaven]

The ROC is inspecting at no cost to the H/O.

 

[Ernesto]

The ROC is inspecting at no cost to the H/O.

I wouln't call what they do an inspection, but they will tell the contractor to fix it in a long dragged out manner.

 

[FloorMaven]

...they will tell the contractor to fix it...

And that's the goal, right?

 

[Ernesto]

And that's the goal, right?

Pretty much. But the man will probably have to send out an inspector anyway to prove it is not their wood.

Meanwhile the consumer suffers emotionally. I do them all the time and consumers get flippent towards the whole game thats played out and usually at the manufacturer even though they are not responsible.

Do you know what adhesive they used?

 

[FloorMaven]

Do you know what adhesive they used?

No idea.

I set the H/O with some realistic expectations. They'll be fine and i'll help guide them if needed.