On Monday, September 7, 2015 at 9:35:28 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, September 7, 2015 at 9:05:00 AM UTC-4, dgk wrote:
On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 21:29:07 -0700, "taxed and spent"
wrote:


"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 11:15:24 PM UTC-4, taxed and spent wrote:
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
...
On 9/6/2015 8:06 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:


Another thing is no warranty of any kind on the contract? Sounds like
some thing is not right on workmanship or materials used.

Why would a warranty enter into this? The tiles repaired under the
contract are not the ones he is currently having problems with. In
addition, according to the OP, the contract specifically states that
the
contractor is not responsible for damage to nearby tiles.

This does not appear to be a warranty issue.


He said they added some adhesive to existing tiles. That makes them
part
of the new work. He is not giving any warranty on the work he is
doing,
but putting in an exception.

He is saying "I'll fix it, but if it goes to crap it is not my fault"

yes, I don't think it was ADJACENT tiles that are now popping up, it is
some
of the tiles the contractor did do SOMETHING to.

Are you saying the OP is wrong and/or lying? He specifically said that it
was the "adjacent" tiles that were popping and that there was clause that
said the contractor wasn't responsible for damage to "nearby tiles".

I am thinking the OP is talking about tiles popping that are adjacent to
removed/replaced tiles. But if the contractor injected stuff under those
now popped tiles, they are not adjacent tiles to the work the contractor
did, they are part of the work the contractor did.

I don't think this is worth pursuing with the contractor or in court. But
it would be good to get to the bottom of it.



No, he did no work on the tiles that came up. He worked on the tiles
right up to the ones that came up.

I thought you said he injected adhesive under the adjacent tiles
that came up? That's the assumption that everyone here is working
on. If he didn't, then I'm at a loss as to how the adjacent ones
could suddenly violently pop out.

Please don't include me in the "everyone here" assumption. I *never* thought that the contractor
(purposely) injected adhesive under the adjacent tiles. That is the reason I have been saying that
this may not be a warranty issue.

The warranty would cover the tiles he actually worked on and the contract exclusion would protect the contractor from being responsible for damage to nearby tiles. Now, I don't neccesarily feel that the "protection" clause is valid and that's the part I think that he should be fighting.