The original adhesive is stuck to the orignal tiles, and whatever he used is whatever is different and where he was working.
The same guy who testifies for you or writes you the affidavit can problably tell what each is by looking at it.
His measure of damages is the cost to put it back the way it was before he had this last repair. That alone could be more than 900. In fact the contractor says it's 1400. But he's also entitled to the benefit of his bargain that he paid 900 for, and if the new work that was done was damaged, since the repair guy won't do it as a warranty repair he's entitled to go somewhere else. In that case, it may cost more to get the originally contracted work redone, if it needs to be redone, than the orignal guy charged. No matter how you add it up, his total damages, assuming he wins, would be what it takes to put the tile back the way it was before the last repair, and to have the work agreed to in the last repair completed by someone else.
Sometimes it costs more than the original price to get work redone. Especially when a contractor bids less than competent people do because he knows he's not very competent. (Being somewhat incompetent and learning on the job is fine, if all it does is cost the contractor time, without substantially inconveniencing who has hired him. But not if it means finishing with an inferior job. )
They didn't want that role, but they needed to do it to keep customers (after I guess one such company started doing it.)
This is more detail than I saw you give before. Glue leakage is a lot more limited than damage. If it had said not responsible for damage to nearby tiles, some woudl have claimed that mean they could drop a tile cutter on the floor and if breaks a tile, they're not resonsiible. Or at least if he was chipping away at excess grout and broke the tile next to it, they weren't responsible.
But glue leakage? That sounds like spilling glue on other tiles or even the carpet next room.
Let's assume there was glue leakage and that they're not repsonsible for that. Glue leakage is not glue expansion, or glue dislocation of existing tiles. afa you've posted, there's notihing in the contract saying they're not responsible for that.
It's something like a contract that said not repsonsible for foul-smelling fumes the evening after the repair, and then someone in the house passes out and dies from the fumes. They may not be responsible for the fumes being there, or for foul smells, but they''re not released from liabitlity for products that make poisonous fumes.
Darn right. The guy who did my roof did a v. good job at a lower price than most others charge and two years later, I called him to do other work. His mother said he only did roofs. (His mother was his secretary. I think he lived "at home" and worked out of their home. But he had 3 other guys and a dump truck with him.
Plus I got his name from a neighbor and my friend got his name from me afterwards.
Maybe you can come back for a few days!
Only if you have spare matching tiles that you probably bought at the same time.
That all depends on your level of "handy man" skills.
Some folks don't need a contractor to build an entire house, others call a licensed electrician to change a light switch.
It's not only the choice of the product that makes the difference, it's the skill set/desire of the person wanting the job done.
When I bought my first house 30+ years ago I hired a plumber to swap out a concrete utility sink for a fiberglass one. Since then I've remodeled the laundry room and 2 bathrooms by myself. All three were gut jobs, including jack hammering the concrete slab to get to the drains. Tile, vinyl, drywall, subfloor, plumbing, you name it. I'm not bragging in any sense, just emphasizing my point that it's not a matter of tile vs laminate, it's skill sets, desire and learning ability that really matter.
Oh yeah...and finances too. At the time, I couldn't have afforded to have a contractor do the work, so I read and learned and asked questions in this very group.
When I bought my first house I was 20 and had minimal experience. I had an electrician at work come over and add a couple of new circuits. He not only put them in, he showed my how to do it. Now I can wire an entire house.
I found it easier to learn how to fix thing instead of paying a tradesman, though I have at times. Good to know your limits too.
re: Limits
I roofed my 8 x 10 shed but paid someone else to roof my house.
Some sage advice from Clint:
Right turn, Clyde.
Yea, I pretty much took them at their word that it was excluded. Then I actually read it and it's just not there.
I am sure the judge will find your case fascinating.
But not hardwood in the kitchen. And now more on the Real Estate agent before I get back to the laminate. She got badmouthed here because I said that she had recommended the tile repair company and I was wrong, mostly because I was trying to be concise and partly because I was just wrong.
The way it went down was that the inspector found tile issues and the seller got an estimate from a tile company for $500 to repair it. They asked (through the agent) that I defer having that done until after the sale because the old lady who owned the house didn't want a big mess. So they offered the $500 off the price. Being a nice guy, I said ok.
When I moved in, there was a ton of stuff going on and I deferred doing the tile until a month later when one of them actually started coming up. I called in the company that had given the estimate, but they said that too much damage had been done and now it would take $900. Since I thought that the real estate agent had recommended that company, I said ok.
The real estate agent is well known, respected, and lives within my
900 home community. She handles most of the house sales and is thorough and apparently quite honest. I emailed her about the kitchen two days ago and she immediately came by to see for herself.The first thing she asked was why I used that company, and I said that I thought she recommended them. No, that was the seller's choice and she said that they overcharged me. She then sent around her preferred tile guy.
He said that there just weren't enough spare tiles (three) to fix the damage, which I sort of suspected. He didn't say that he thought that the contractor screwed up, but did say that if he had done it the kitchen would probably be fine. But, he also added that the tiles are over 30 years old and I could probably expect more loose tiles over the next 10 years.
I asked about laminate and he said that it's not a bad idea and that many people use it in kitchens. It won't stand up to a real flood, llike a dishwasher disaster, but it's pretty easy to replace if that happens.
His estimated charge to remove the existing tiles (being careful to save as many as possible for future use) is $2 per square foot, $2 psf to install the laminate, and a $100 for the tile disposal fee. There's some extra trimming and saddle stuff, so the whole estimate is around $790.
The laminate is up to me, but he said that we'd need a moisture barrier and that it will either come with the laminate or will need to be bought separately. Either way, even the best laminate will be cheaper than the labor. It seems like a reasonable deal.
So, please don't blame the agent or assume she got a kickback. I like her and that isn't the case. And I'm sorry that I didn't get this all in at the beinning, but that post was long enough and now look at this one.
Anyway, let's speculate about why the seller asked me to defer having them do the tile. I never had tile floors so didn't know about the possible issues. One more thing. Two days ago, early morning, I saw a fox across the street. During the day I went across to my neighbor, who has a small dog that is often unleashed, to warn them about it. During the conversation I mentioned the tiles exploding. The woman told me that Ellie (the seller) had had problems with the tiles in the hallway.
So, I can assume that the real reason that they asked me to defer having the tiles done was because they suspected that there might be complications. Still, the kitchen shouldn't have exploded.
Ah, but that means lifting up the repaired tiles. I'd really prefer to avoid doing that.
They aren't very expensive so I'll do that. Whether I can maintain them so that they can be used down the line is a fair question. The only real storage space is the garage and it isn't air conditioned and this is Florida.
Yes, what I've learned over 25 years of home ownership is that I'm actually pretty good a learning/fixing things. The problem is that I usually make my mistakes the first time through. After that I'm good, but I've made the mistakes on my house.
I just posted a (long) explanation of the beginning of the disaster under a slightly different heading (something about Adjacent tiles lift after repair work. More on the Agent).
The agent was pretty blameless. I thought she had recommended them but she had just passed on an estimate that the sellers had received from someone they used, as part of the sales process.
I posted a map that was supposed to be the work that was actually done. It came right up to the start of the kitchen tiles but stopped just before the ones that actually started lifting.
Even if warned, I don't know what I could have done but had the repair attempted. Most of the house is those tiles, all connected. Actually, in a way, I got lucky - at least so far. The tiles that blew up were in the kitchen, and that can logically have a separate scheme from the rest of the house. If it had blow up towards the dining room, or towards the 2nd bedroom, or the tiles that head around the (carpeted) living room, that would have been a real disaster. Tiles switching to a different type of tile could be odd looking. I would probably have had to redo the entire house.
But this way, we salvage a lot of tiles from the kitchen. That way, if problems do creep up down the road, I'll have a lot of spares to deal with it.
They drilled a hole into the grout between the tiles that weren't being lifted and replaced, apparently the ones that sounded hollow when hit with a broom handle. They injected something, I'm assuming an adhesive, into those holes between the tiles. Then they somehow filled the hole in the grout, I didn't see how. The last tiles they treated like that were immediately adjacent to the ones that started exploding.
I'm sorry, I thought that that was a standard way of getting adhesive under tiles and figured that everyone knew about it. My guess is that they simply injected too much adhesive and the sideways pressure was more than the other tiles could take. But that must have been a lot of adhesive.
The tiles that are immediately adjacent to the work area are actually still on the floor so I can't tell if anything leaked under them. They're raised but I want a pro to remove them because I want to save as many as I can. Besides, it doesn't matter if adhesive leaked under them. The pressure of the adhesive under the other tiles must have been sufficient to push those tiles enough to break them loose. Something sure did.
Ah, disclosure law. I'll ask about that. In New York, the seller is supposed to sign a document stating that they have disclosed all the known issues. There is a $500 penalty, paid to the buyer at closing, for failing to submit that document. Any lawyer who suggests signing it rather than paying the $500 at closing would be sued for malpractice.
When I sold my house, I did not sign the document and paid the $500. It is simply part of the cost of selling the house.
But I'll check with the lawyer that I used to buy this Florida house. I don't recall getting $500 in lieu of a disclosure document. Of course, Florida might not have such a document at all.
This has got to be the most ridiculous waste of a thread I have ever seen in my life.
And so you full quoted?
- . Christopher A. Young learn more about Jesus .
No it doesn't. The ones that popped up, including iiuc there are broken ones, have plenty of the original adhesive on them. (Plus the floor underneath the ones that popped up has adhesive) And they are probably the very same ones that have some of the new injected stuff. The new stuff might still be softer than the old stuff, or bubblier if it's something that swells, or it might be in the valleys of the old adhesive, or maybe there's some reason it would be at the edges of the tile.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.