|
|
Review 10/30/2011
|
In 2007, we discovered a hot water leak under the slab in our powder room. We contacted several contractors to provide quotes to repipe our home. We chose CuraFlo to epoxy line the existing pipes, instead of repiping because: (1) there would be less damage to the home; (2) it would not require extensive repainting afterward: (3) we received what we thought was a better, 10 year warranty. Cost was not the primary consideration as we could have had the home repiped and painted for less money.
The workmen appeared courtious & professional while the work was performed.
In less than 4 years, I have sustained three failures of the epoxy lining, which has caused water damage in excess of $13,000. I can no longer trust the quality of the work and have been advised to replace all of the epoxy lined pipe with new copper pipe, to prevent further damage. Therefore, I believe Contractor (1) failed to test existing plumbing to determine if epoxy would be reliable for the 10 year warranty period, and/or (2) Contractor failed to properly coat the interior of all the copper pipe with sufficient epoxy to be reliable for the 10 year warranty period, and/or (3) Contractor used false and misleading advertising material which states this epoxy process is good for 50 to 70 years. Following is a chronology of events to this date:
December 13, 2007 – Contractor CuraFlo completed job of epoxy lining all existing copper pipe in home.
July 7, 2010 – Tested pressure in system to determine all is well. Found system would not hold pressure. Called CuraFlo to test for water leak. They found hot water pipe leak in guest bedroom, not previously epoxy coated. Defective line coated next day. Problem resolved. No property damage was found.
Sept. 6, 2011 – Carpet was found wet in Guest bedroom. Appeared to be leak in wall or under slab near pipe junction, where previous water problem occurred. I turned off main water line. I called CuraFlo, and reported the leak. Company confirmed problem that afternoon. CuraFlo recoated the defective hot water line the next day. Property damage included: carpet water-logged & stained, baseboard warped, and drywall wet. All damaged property removed to trash. Rental of dehumidifier and fans for 3 days, to reduce moisture below 20%. Replaced drywall, baseboard. Paint new drywall & baseboard to match. Replace carpet. CuraFlo did not offer to assist with recovery.
Sept.13, 2011 – While on vacation, Daughter visited home and found muddy water flowing from garage. Opened garage and found muddy water flowing from laundry room. She turned off water main and then found the muddy water flowing from under baseboard in laundry room. Called CuraFlo to report the problem and request repair. She also called a restoration contractor to remove muddy water and rent fans & dehumidifiers.
Sept 14, 2011 - CuraFlo came to perform repair. CuraFlo worked on the leak all day. They tried to recoat the defective line, but had to replace line instead. Water restored late 9/14. Property damage included: carpet soiled, all baseboard warped, and some drywall wet & damaged. All damaged property removed to trash. Rental of dehumidifier and fans for 3 days, to reduce moisture below 20%. Replace damaged drywall & baseboard. Paint new drywall & baseboard to match. Replace carpet. CuraFlo did not offer to assist with the recovery.
Sept. 26, 2011 – I called company owner Eric Weissmann to inform him that the cost to resolve the two plumbing failures will be more than $13,000. I asked what solution or settlement he might offer, since we could no longer rely on his workmanship, and decided to replace all epoxy lined pipe to stop further damage. He specifically offered nothing. I informed him my next step would be to go to the California Contractor License Board, to file a complaint. He acknowledged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|