engineered hardwood floor
November 23, 2011 10:06 AM Subscribe
Security Deposit & Home Improve Filter: We moved into a brand new house and when we moved out, there were some damages on the floor. Turns out these “engineered” hardwood floor that requires a removal of an entire area for a few inches of damage.
1) Is this actually required to fix engineered hardwood floors?
2) Is this legal to charge us for an entire section of undamaged area for inches of damage?
Pics inside.
This is in state of CA. Pictures of damages, each damage is in a separate room.
Each damaged part is about a few inches, at most. However, for each part, our landlord is replacing about 50 sq. ft. of mostly undamaged hardwood floor and completely undamaged wall trimming (baseboard). This means we’re paying for labor of removing old hardwood floor, cost of new materials, and cost of labor for.
This is due to the floors being “engineered” hardwoods and her contractor is telling her that sanding is out of the question.
For people with experience, is there no other way to repair the damages other than replacing mostly undamaged floors?
For legal question, is it legal for her to charge us for areas of mostly undamaged floor, even though it’s associated with cost of repairing the damaged parts?
Even though there are about 5 of us who rented the house together, the cost of repair is way over 50% of the deposit due to how much area our landlord is telling us that she needs to replace.
This is in state of CA. Pictures of damages, each damage is in a separate room.
Each damaged part is about a few inches, at most. However, for each part, our landlord is replacing about 50 sq. ft. of mostly undamaged hardwood floor and completely undamaged wall trimming (baseboard). This means we’re paying for labor of removing old hardwood floor, cost of new materials, and cost of labor for.
This is due to the floors being “engineered” hardwoods and her contractor is telling her that sanding is out of the question.
For people with experience, is there no other way to repair the damages other than replacing mostly undamaged floors?
For legal question, is it legal for her to charge us for areas of mostly undamaged floor, even though it’s associated with cost of repairing the damaged parts?
Even though there are about 5 of us who rented the house together, the cost of repair is way over 50% of the deposit due to how much area our landlord is telling us that she needs to replace.
Response by poster: RustyBrooks - is there any other method to repair the problem?
posted by vocpanda at 10:23 AM on November 23, 2011
posted by vocpanda at 10:23 AM on November 23, 2011
That looks like cheap product and the dent and scratches are absolutely normal wear and tear. I am not a contractor, but yes, that seems excessive replacement.
I assume the labor costs more than the wood pieces? Either way, I don't think you should pay a dime for the normal wear and tear damage.
I've been a landlord in CA and I've installed similar product. I would not charge you for damage I can barely make out in the photos. Except maybe for that one pic that looks like paint or something? What is that? I would charge you for that, but no more than $30 to $50 on the high end.
posted by jbenben at 10:27 AM on November 23, 2011
I assume the labor costs more than the wood pieces? Either way, I don't think you should pay a dime for the normal wear and tear damage.
I've been a landlord in CA and I've installed similar product. I would not charge you for damage I can barely make out in the photos. Except maybe for that one pic that looks like paint or something? What is that? I would charge you for that, but no more than $30 to $50 on the high end.
posted by jbenben at 10:27 AM on November 23, 2011
The problem with the engineered hardwoods (and other laminate flooring) versus traditional wood floor is that you cannot just cut out a small section to replace a piece of the board. The boards are often much wider than just one "slat" of wood (looks like it is at least two slats wide in the photo) and the entire piece of laminate must be removed for replacement. Also because of the way these boards "click" together, you may have to remove more than you think to get the replacement.
Have you tried goo-gone on what looks like some old adhesive in the first photo? Try it on a small test area first. The stuff is petroleum distillate so it may dissolve some of the finish. Also they may have some scratch repair stuff at the flooring store or Lowe's doesn't hurt to ask.
posted by sararah at 10:28 AM on November 23, 2011
Have you tried goo-gone on what looks like some old adhesive in the first photo? Try it on a small test area first. The stuff is petroleum distillate so it may dissolve some of the finish. Also they may have some scratch repair stuff at the flooring store or Lowe's doesn't hurt to ask.
posted by sararah at 10:28 AM on November 23, 2011
If they have to pull up the floor next to the wall they might have to replace the baseboard, but it seems likely they could re-use it.
Take your pics into a floor installation place and get a second opinion. (I highly recommend you do this!)
Or
If you can find out, post the name of the engineered wood product they used in thread so we can comment specifically. I've definitely installed similar product in apartments and replaced damaged bits easily, but the right answer for you really does depend on this particular product.
You could probably counter with a reasonable estimate from one of those floor installation places. I know reputable guys in LA. MeMail.
Have you moved out yet or are you still in residence?
Looking forward to your update.
posted by jbenben at 10:36 AM on November 23, 2011
Take your pics into a floor installation place and get a second opinion. (I highly recommend you do this!)
Or
If you can find out, post the name of the engineered wood product they used in thread so we can comment specifically. I've definitely installed similar product in apartments and replaced damaged bits easily, but the right answer for you really does depend on this particular product.
You could probably counter with a reasonable estimate from one of those floor installation places. I know reputable guys in LA. MeMail.
Have you moved out yet or are you still in residence?
Looking forward to your update.
posted by jbenben at 10:36 AM on November 23, 2011
Re. baseboard, they'll have to remove the wall trimming to get at the flooring. So the contractor will charge for labor for that, and maybe for materials as well (as they may pry the old stuff off and then the landlord will want new stuff laid).
I think if it had been the minor damage, it may have been overlooked, but multiple instances of damage may have made her decide to do the whole thing. I can't tell from the photos how the damage is related, but the contractor may have looked at it and said it was cheaper to do one large patch rather than four smaller patches. Remember, you're paying for labor for this and so you want the quickest/most efficient solution as well as the one that uses the least materials.
posted by carter at 10:38 AM on November 23, 2011
I think if it had been the minor damage, it may have been overlooked, but multiple instances of damage may have made her decide to do the whole thing. I can't tell from the photos how the damage is related, but the contractor may have looked at it and said it was cheaper to do one large patch rather than four smaller patches. Remember, you're paying for labor for this and so you want the quickest/most efficient solution as well as the one that uses the least materials.
posted by carter at 10:38 AM on November 23, 2011
Seconding that most of it looks like normal wear and tear. In our brand new townhouse we had engineered hard wood and it did ding pretty quickly--we were only there for 18 months--so I agree with RustyBrooks.
We had some more serious damage to our floor, a large splinter came off. It was fixed under warranty but here's what the guy did:
With a circular saw he very carefully cut out the affected sections and a piece either side and replace it with a cut to match part and then glued it in. You couldn't see the joins and it didn't take him long at all. So 50sqft seems overkill.
posted by NailsTheCat at 10:44 AM on November 23, 2011
We had some more serious damage to our floor, a large splinter came off. It was fixed under warranty but here's what the guy did:
With a circular saw he very carefully cut out the affected sections and a piece either side and replace it with a cut to match part and then glued it in. You couldn't see the joins and it didn't take him long at all. So 50sqft seems overkill.
posted by NailsTheCat at 10:44 AM on November 23, 2011
Response by poster: It's "white oak engineered flooring." All of the damages are in separate rooms (there was 5 of us living here).
My instincts are leaning towards 'wear & tear,' however, I do know the landlord wants to sell the house eventually and is probably trying to keep the house looking "new." We're already out of the place but I know she's renting it out to new tenants next month.
She did give us the option to fix these ourselves this week but there is no way we can do that with Thanksgiving coming up!
jbenben - thank you for the offer, unfortunately, we live in SF area.
posted by vocpanda at 10:50 AM on November 23, 2011
My instincts are leaning towards 'wear & tear,' however, I do know the landlord wants to sell the house eventually and is probably trying to keep the house looking "new." We're already out of the place but I know she's renting it out to new tenants next month.
She did give us the option to fix these ourselves this week but there is no way we can do that with Thanksgiving coming up!
jbenben - thank you for the offer, unfortunately, we live in SF area.
posted by vocpanda at 10:50 AM on November 23, 2011
Good grief, yes, this is normal wear and tear and that's ridiculous. Here's some repair product -- you can even color-match it to the exact flooring product if you know that. Find this or something similar at a big box store like Home Depot and get in there and it will be pretty much indistinguishable from new.
This is probably going to be the new "spackle the plaster" now that people are basically using adhesives to hang posters.
posted by dhartung at 11:23 AM on November 23, 2011
This is probably going to be the new "spackle the plaster" now that people are basically using adhesives to hang posters.
posted by dhartung at 11:23 AM on November 23, 2011
Normal wear and tear but perhaps consider a cabinet shop approach to use a flat bottom drill bit [ forstner bit ] to remove the "damage" combined with a same size plug cutter on a drill press to create insert ready plugs? Really seems like a lot of effort for a tiny issue. Research the method and see where that takes you?
posted by Freedomboy at 11:55 AM on November 23, 2011
posted by Freedomboy at 11:55 AM on November 23, 2011
The intent of the deposit is to allow the landlord to basically have the unit back in the same condition as he or she rented it, minus "ordinary wear and tear." I would argue, if I were you, that everything but the rust is definitely ordinary wear and tear. The law in CA (I'm not a lawyer, this isn't legal advice) is that you have to receive, within 30 (?) days, an itemized list of charges for actual repairs made. The landlord is not (again, as I understand it) allowed to simply pocket the money and not do the repair. Since this is on the order of $1000 (right?) it might well be worth your while to file in small claims if the repairs were excessive. If you think you might do that, be sure to get a blizzard of pictures/video, not just of the dings but the whole house. There is no need to inform the landlord in advance that you're thinking about suing.
One other thing you might look into is if the manufacturer of the flooring product has any guidelines about what a typical lifespan is. They're likely to be overly optimistic, but if the rest of the floor is in really good shape (and some of these wood products are so flimsy that plain old trimmed dog toenails can shred the finish), you would have a strong argument for "ordinary wear and tear."
posted by wnissen at 12:52 PM on November 23, 2011
One other thing you might look into is if the manufacturer of the flooring product has any guidelines about what a typical lifespan is. They're likely to be overly optimistic, but if the rest of the floor is in really good shape (and some of these wood products are so flimsy that plain old trimmed dog toenails can shred the finish), you would have a strong argument for "ordinary wear and tear."
posted by wnissen at 12:52 PM on November 23, 2011
I think this really comes under wear and tear. If your landlord is trying to keep the place looking "new" for sale she should not have tenants living in it.
If you don't want to take her to court you could at least make the case that this level of damage is to be expected given the flooring product used, and use the threat of small claims to negotiate a smaller chunk of your security deposit.
posted by The Elusive Architeuthis at 1:04 PM on November 23, 2011 [1 favorite]
If you don't want to take her to court you could at least make the case that this level of damage is to be expected given the flooring product used, and use the threat of small claims to negotiate a smaller chunk of your security deposit.
posted by The Elusive Architeuthis at 1:04 PM on November 23, 2011 [1 favorite]
Your landlord is within their rights to charge you - that said, they're likely charging you too much.
There are depreciation schedules landlords can take advantage of to help defray the (expected) costs of upkeep. Obviously, anything above and beyond that upkeep or "normal wear and tear" would be out of the tenant's security deposit. I'm not seeing anywhere a description of how long you all lived there? 5 years? Landlord should probably look into the appropriate tax write offs and go ahead with the repairs without taking from your deposit. 1 year? Six months? Expect to get charged.
You need to figure out how much of the damage is excessive relative to normal wear and tear, then balance that against how long you lived there and how much your landlord wants to charge you. If there's a difference between your estimation of what that number should be and your landlord's you now need to weigh that difference against hassle of small claims.
Short version: it's likely not worth your time, but if your time is cheap and money is tight and you get real value out of spite - go for it. At this point, the money's likely gone anyway, so what have you got to lose?
posted by NoRelationToLea at 1:05 PM on November 23, 2011
There are depreciation schedules landlords can take advantage of to help defray the (expected) costs of upkeep. Obviously, anything above and beyond that upkeep or "normal wear and tear" would be out of the tenant's security deposit. I'm not seeing anywhere a description of how long you all lived there? 5 years? Landlord should probably look into the appropriate tax write offs and go ahead with the repairs without taking from your deposit. 1 year? Six months? Expect to get charged.
You need to figure out how much of the damage is excessive relative to normal wear and tear, then balance that against how long you lived there and how much your landlord wants to charge you. If there's a difference between your estimation of what that number should be and your landlord's you now need to weigh that difference against hassle of small claims.
Short version: it's likely not worth your time, but if your time is cheap and money is tight and you get real value out of spite - go for it. At this point, the money's likely gone anyway, so what have you got to lose?
posted by NoRelationToLea at 1:05 PM on November 23, 2011
I'm unclear how rust falls under "normal wear and tear."
posted by DarlingBri at 1:18 PM on November 23, 2011
posted by DarlingBri at 1:18 PM on November 23, 2011
This is wood with a poly coating. It doesn't rust. The rust is residue from something else, and will likely come up easily with some CLR or (milder) household vinegar solution. (Try a closet corner first, of course.) Heck, I bet most of it would come off with a scrubber sponge and dish detergent.
posted by dhartung at 6:07 PM on November 23, 2011
posted by dhartung at 6:07 PM on November 23, 2011
I can't speak to the legal side of things, as I'm not familiar with CA landlord/tenant stuff. I can explain some of the labour side of it, though; I do renovations for apartments (and have seen suites left in much, much worse shape. *Shudder*).
The baseboards should be reusable, provided they don't break while being pried off. There might be more nail holes after the job's done, but that's nothing that some paintable silicone and a coat of paint won't fix.
I haven't tried any of the floor-fillers or laminate refinishers out there. If I recall correctly, The Boss tried some once and was not impressed by the results. So, no idea how well those could work.
Laminate flooring like that clicks together. At each of the seams between the planks, one plank overlaps the one before and snaps into it. So there is a definite directionality to how the floor is laid and, consequently, to how it has to be taken up.
If the floor is laid very tight to the walls (not giving one a lot of room to try to unsnap it 'backwards' -- a very tricky endeavour at best), and the damaged sections are at the opposite end of the floor's laid direction, then it will have to _all_ come up to replace the damaged planks.
Some brands of flooring have more resilient snap-strips than others. If those little strips of compressed sawdust tear while unsnapping them, both planks are ruined. This makes unsnapping laminate a nerve-wracking thing when you have a limited number of replacement planks hanging around.
If it's any consolation, at least they aren't putting you on the hook for an entire floor. I've had to scrap floors that are 99% fine due to not being able to find matching flooring to replace the bad 1%.
posted by CKmtl at 8:37 PM on November 23, 2011
The baseboards should be reusable, provided they don't break while being pried off. There might be more nail holes after the job's done, but that's nothing that some paintable silicone and a coat of paint won't fix.
I haven't tried any of the floor-fillers or laminate refinishers out there. If I recall correctly, The Boss tried some once and was not impressed by the results. So, no idea how well those could work.
Laminate flooring like that clicks together. At each of the seams between the planks, one plank overlaps the one before and snaps into it. So there is a definite directionality to how the floor is laid and, consequently, to how it has to be taken up.
If the floor is laid very tight to the walls (not giving one a lot of room to try to unsnap it 'backwards' -- a very tricky endeavour at best), and the damaged sections are at the opposite end of the floor's laid direction, then it will have to _all_ come up to replace the damaged planks.
Some brands of flooring have more resilient snap-strips than others. If those little strips of compressed sawdust tear while unsnapping them, both planks are ruined. This makes unsnapping laminate a nerve-wracking thing when you have a limited number of replacement planks hanging around.
If it's any consolation, at least they aren't putting you on the hook for an entire floor. I've had to scrap floors that are 99% fine due to not being able to find matching flooring to replace the bad 1%.
posted by CKmtl at 8:37 PM on November 23, 2011
Just pointing out that the OP said it was engineered hardwood--not laminate. It's still likely tongue and groove but is probably floated or glued.
posted by NailsTheCat at 9:42 PM on November 23, 2011
posted by NailsTheCat at 9:42 PM on November 23, 2011
This thread is closed to new comments.
50 square feet seems like a lot for each of those areas. Depending on how it was put down, it may be hard to pull back up. It may only really be plausible to replace entire rows, for the full width of the problem, I dunno.
It seems reasonable for them to charge for replacing 50 sq ft, even if you only damaged 1 sq ft, if that's what has to be done to repair the problem. I can't comment on what is legal.
posted by RustyBrooks at 10:12 AM on November 23, 2011