You need to read it again.

http://www.flooring.dupont.com/en/war.shtml

Notice the bold heading "Exclusions". The so-called defect warranty is
clearly an exclusion from the 30 year wear warranty. It follows from an
asterick under the Exclusions to the wear warranty.



"mm" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 19:00:07 GMT, "Art"
wrote:

I would invite you to read Mannington and Shaw laminate warranties. They
guarantee their product for a certain length of time. and don't cut off
the
warranty because the product turns out defective years later. Of course
you
are not supposed to install obviously defective laminate that is obviously
defective out of the box. That makes sense. But there is no out for them
that says... hey, the laminate is defective and because it is 6 years old
you get zilch.

I thought this was resolved an dyou two were fighting about something
else, but I guess not. YOU KEEP saying you get nothing after 6 months
if there is a defect, but that is not what it said. It said the
defects warranty is good for 6 months, but if it both wears out and
has defects, the wear warranty still applies.

It said, "In addition". That means nothing in the defects warranty
reduces the wear warranty. As I understand it, no one warrants
products for longer than they actually last**, but maybe if you had an
old man who shuffled on the floor all the time, or you slid a lot of
things, the it would "wear out" before 30 years was up.

**That's why commercial applications are usually excluded, because
instead of 4 or 5 or 8 people walking on or using something, you can
have 50 or hundreds.

Are you claiming that if it wears out, if the surface wears out
because too many people walked on it, or other kinds of sliding, etc.
that they will call it a defect, even though it is wear, and won't
honor the warranty they proclaim? Or are you in some other way
claiming they're lying and they won't live up to what they say? Are
you claiming this happened to someone you know or know of?

You haven't said any of that, so I can only conclude you are going by
the words of their warranty, and that you seem to misunderstand.



"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
t...

"Art" wrote in message
link.net...
Sorry but subject lines don't tell the whole story nor are they
required
to. Ever read a newspaper beyond the headlines? I guess not.


I don't expect the whole story, just some honesty instead of misleading
tripe.

I read the newspaper is some detail.