Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hi all. I'm a first-time homeowner in a potential dispute with a big builder in town and looking for feedback from those who are more familiar with such situations.
My condo is under warranty. The builder messed up the design of my balcony so it was taking on water. The builder rebuilt it last year -- but then they messed up again, leaving a gap above an exterior wall unsealed. When Hurricane Harvey hit, water got in my walls and my upstairs hardwood floor. Huge pain to dry out and repair.
Our dispute is over the damaged hardwood floor in the bedroom. The exact style is no longer made, so it will be replaced with a different yet similarly priced style. The hardwood floor flows from the bedroom, out to a hall, into a small second bedroom and down the stairs. It's been explained to me by real estate agents that it makes no sense to replace only part of a hardwood floor and not the rest as a mismatched hardwood floor would look weird and potentially devalue the home. It only makes sense to do all of it. The builder is willing to pay for the replacement of most of the hardwood flooring -- the master, second bedroom and hall -- but not the stairs (which costs about $3600, one-third of the total cost to replace the flooring).
The builder's point: We are already replacing above and beyond the damaged area and what would be covered by warranty or insurance, so you should pay for the rest.
What others have pointed out who are not experts in these situations: I shouldn't have to pay for any of it since it was their fault, and doing all of the hardwood is the only thing that makes sense in terms of restoring the condo's value to pre-accident levels or higher.
What do you think? I'm willing to pay the cost if it's the right thing to do, I'm not trying to pull anything, but also don't want to be taken advantage of and I have no experience in these situations. Thanks!
... the only thing that makes sense in terms of restoring the condo's value to pre-accident levels or higher.
I would think that they are responsible for replacing anything that was actually damaged, not necessarily anything that wasn't damaged but "would look better if ...."
It seems to me that the "advice" you're getting from the RE agents is way too sensitive on the flooring transitions.
Consider that many houses have varying flooring materials from room to room, or area to area. Look at tile/carpet/wood transitions that are common. There's no absolute rule about everything must be perfectly identical and match. Colors, textures, and surfaces can be different as long as it makes sense for the utility of the area.
In your house, where the stairway is not damaged ... I think you'd be responsible for the change.
I agree with your builder that they're already going beyond what is normal and reasonable to replace as part of the damage claim.
... My condo is under warranty. The builder messed up the design of my balcony so it was taking on water. The builder rebuilt it last year -- but then they messed up again, leaving a gap above an exterior wall unsealed. When Hurricane Harvey hit, water got in my walls and my upstairs hardwood floor. Huge pain to dry out and repair.
... It's been explained to me by real estate agents that it makes no sense to replace only part of a hardwood floor and not the rest as a mismatched hardwood floor would look weird and potentially devalue the home. It only makes sense to do all of it. The builder is willing to pay for the replacement of most of the hardwood flooring -- the master, second bedroom and hall -- but not the stairs (which costs about $3600, one-third of the total cost to replace the flooring).
The builder's point: We are already replacing above and beyond the damaged area and what would be covered by warranty or insurance, so you should pay for the rest.
... What do you think? I'm willing to pay the cost if it's the right thing to do, I'm not trying to pull anything, but also don't want to be taken advantage of and I have no experience in these situations. Thanks!
Neither an RE professional or attorney ... I appreciate the perspective of the builder and the offer put forth, but what occurred and the resulting added restorative cost involved to avoid leaving you with mismatched hardwood flooring seems to me to be the controlling factor, and you are not responding in an unreasonable or greedy manner. I would stand your ground in this dispute because when a person is basically looking to be returned to a pre-damage state and not trying to gain any undue advantage, you do have a solid position and perhaps the high ground in this as well.
Given the fine art of compromise and the expense of pursuing other legal remedies that can surpass the $3,600 for the stairs that the builder wants you to shoulder, my recommendation is to stress that you are the party who has been victimized and you are not seeking one dollar more than to have your property back in its prior position. My final olive branch would be to offer to pay $1,000, not $3,600. I truly wish you the best.
Is the hardwood floor finished on site hardwood floors or the "snap together" kind of wood floors that are super popular today that are factory finished? It makes a difference.
A close match will get closer over time. I have seen 15 year old floors extended into other rooms, and it looked excellent. A good reminder to make sure workmanship passes the sanity test.
The builder's position seems the most likely one anyone should expect but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is the end of the conversation. If I was in your position, I'd talk with my insurance company and then with an attorney. I'd talk to the insurance company first to see if they will help but, even if they do, you still will have a deductible. If they don't, you have the entire rest of the repair. Either way, you will want to know before you talk with an attorney so you know the scope of work and/or the amount you want to contest.
Is the hardwood floor finished on site hardwood floors or the "snap together" kind of wood floors that are super popular today that are factory finished? It makes a difference.
Both are engineered hardwood floors. Since the original is bamboo -- and not really used anymore in Central Texas due to responding poorly to humidity over time -- the new kind will be hickory.
If you can get a similar look ant transition with a vertical piece across the threshold it probably isn't a big deal. But that's just my personal opinion. Check with an attorney for legal advice.
Normally an insurance company or builder, are only responsible for replacing the damaged areas. They are not only in your case, replacing the damaged floor, but the rest of the room that was not damaged.
The stairway, was not damaged, and it is a different area than the area that was damaged. As it is a different area though meeting up with the damage replacement area, it is not the builders responsibility to replace it. You want it changed for appearance reasons, and that would not be the builders responsibility. Normally in such situations, a Transition Strip, is used between the two areas.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
