Caulking Line above tile and below cantilever nose

[L. Wilson]

I currently live in AZ and I'm having a problem with a local contractor. They did subpar work and refuses to correct the issues. The major issue is with the uneven tile which caused his workers to put in about 1 inch of caulking. I contacted AZ Registrar of Contractors and they are making things difficult. They stated, "If the tile were out of level, it would be visible in the water line (the tile above the water line would vary throughout the pool) . The movement of your concrete deck is due to the soil in your area. When the pool was initially constructed, there was no gap. If there was, concrete would have flowed into it." Keep in mind, the tile looked like this since the pool was constructed. They also stated, "Please ensure your third party inspection includes information to support what items are not acceptable, ie NSPI standards, workmanship standards or code. If it is simply a contract to replace items, it will not be sufficient to reopen the complaint."
My main issue pertains to the tile being out of level as listed in the minimum industry standards pg. 45 attached. Am I wrong? How can I articulate this so it makes absolute sense.

Thanks for the help.

 

[jedigrover]

It’s hard to tell from the photos, but it seems that the tile itself might be level. If it is, then they did not level the bond beam of the pool before pouring the coping/deck.

 

[jedigrover]

What is the history here? Is it a new build? Re-tile & plaster?

The water will always be level, gravity ensures that. So they are correct in asserting that if the amount of tile exposed above the waterline is consistent, the tile is level. If that is the case and your claim was that the tile was out of level, that would be the source of denying anything. If the tile exposure above waterline is consistent (tile itself is level), then what is actually going on is the bond beam (top of pool shell) is out of level.

If this occurred after a re-plaster involving draining the pool, then one of 2 things happened:
1) the pool was originally out of level and the original tile job used scribe-cut tiles to cover the gap.
2) the pool started to float during work and is now out of level.

If new construction, they did a terrible job leveling the bond beam or it floated before tile.

 

[L. Wilson]

What is the history here? Is it a new build? Re-tile & plaster?

The water will always be level, gravity ensures that. So they are correct in asserting that if the amount of tile exposed above the waterline is consistent, the tile is level. If that is the case and your claim was that the tile was out of level, that would be the source of denying anything. If the tile exposure above waterline is consistent (tile itself is level), then what is actually going on is the bond beam (top of pool shell) is out of level.

If this occurred after a re-plaster involving draining the pool, then one of 2 things happened:
1) the pool was originally out of level and the original tile job used scribe-cut tiles to cover the gap.
2) the pool started to float during work and is now out of level.

If new construction, they did a terrible job leveling the bond beam or it floated before tile.

This is a brand new pool that I have been going back and forth with the contractor. There are other issues but this is the main one. My waterfall concrete wasn't done correctly and when it is turned on the moisture stains the concrete so we hardly use it. And, brown spots are accumulating in the plaster.

 

[L. Wilson]

This is a brand new pool that I have been going back and forth with the contractor. There are other issues but this is the main one. My waterfall concrete wasn't done correctly and when it is turned on the moisture stains the concrete so we hardly use it. And, brown spots are accumulating in the plaster.

And the concrete expansion joints were far from being straight. They rushed the job.

 

[kjdiver]

I’m just curious, what work did you pay the contractor to do? Hard to know what sub par work is without knowing what they were suppose to do.

edit: sorry I see you posted twice more …disregard my post…I got nothing since it is not a renovation which I have experienced.

 

[Cknitts]

Looks like your tile is straight and level, but your bond beam and cantilever coping is not and that's why you have an increasing gap. Also, think about sealer your coping and concrete, that'll help with the waterfall getting the concrete wet a little. That is a normal occurrence though FYI.

 

[jedigrover]

OK, so new construction. Their claim is that the deck pitched up at the beam of the pool. I have exactly that issue, but it's a 37 year old pool & we have expansive clay soils that have moved a lot due to the droughts the past 15 years.

In new construction, that's unacceptable.

Again, from you photos, it would be hard for me to argue that the tile is "out of level". The water surface is (and always will be) level. It is the one thing you can count on to be level. So there is no need to break out a spirit level to check the tile. Just go around and measure the distance from the surface of the water to the top of the tile (not to the deck / coping, to the tile). If that is within 1/4", then the tile is level.

The more concerning thing to me would be that SOMETHING is out of level. Either the deck/coping, the pool shell itself (beam). From the photos, it doesn't appear the culprit is the tile.

To know what it is, we'd need to see underneath that big plug of mastic. Is the deck up off the beam? Or is the deck on the beam and the gap between the tile and the top of the beam is that big?

They are not supposed to tile right up to the coping. The top of the tile should end just below the top of the beam, and a mastic fills between the top of the tile and the coping / deck.

So if the tile is within 1/4" (can't tell just by looking at photos, but it doesn't look too off to me), then the issue is that corner--either the deck sank away from the pool, pitching it up off the beam, or the beam was not level to begin with. Either of those are much bigger issues IMO.

See Structure #3 on page 44 in your document.

My guess is the deck pitched away, there was a large gap, and about the only thing the tile guys could do cosmetically was to fill it with mastic. They cannot tile right up to the deck, and they cannot put their tile over empty space. It would be sure to fall off in short order. What they likely did (what I would do) is setup a laser level to strike a line for the bottom of the tile and tiled off of that. That would guarantee the tile is level. If you then have a big gap at the top, the only thing they can do is fill with mastic--something that is not going to push the tile off the wall if/when the deck moves again.

I agree with you that the appearance of the concrete work for the deck looks sub-par. I see a pretty wobbly expansion joint that tells me they didn't use a square and a straightedge when striking it.

If it is the deck, then the good thing is that the pool is likely level and the tile is likely level. The bad news is there is not much I could see in that document that gives you a lot of recourse. Did they show you examples of work? That is the only thing I saw where you would have a good case to make them come and demo / re-pour the deck.

It would make me angry too--that's just poor workmanship to have the soil pull away from the decking right after building and the deck pitching.
If it is the pool being unlevel, then it's even worse.

But you need to know what is under that mastic patch. Concrete? Or air?

 

[jedigrover]

I'm not sure there is any way to stop the water from the waterfall seeping into the concrete. Concrete is porous. That's going to happen with such a design.

Which corner is the one that you show the picture with the big mastic patch?

The concrete work looks like they eyeballed a lot of it and hand sculpted a lot rather than building proper forms and checking everything for square before pouring.

Do you know how they prepped the base before they poured the deck? With a cantilever design like that, they darn sure better have had the ground well-leveled to prevent concrete from forming a lip at the edge of the beam, which would cause a stress fracture in the beam with movement over time. If it was the deck that pitched this soon, then they likely didn't compact the base very well.

 

[jedigrover]

Also, can you post a photo of the plaster spots you're talking about?

 

[L. Wilson]

OK, so new construction. Their claim is that the deck pitched up at the beam of the pool. I have exactly that issue, but it's a 37 year old pool & we have expansive clay soils that have moved a lot due to the droughts the past 15 years.

In new construction, that's unacceptable.

Again, from you photos, it would be hard for me to argue that the tile is "out of level". The water surface is (and always will be) level. It is the one thing you can count on to be level. So there is no need to break out a spirit level to check the tile. Just go around and measure the distance from the surface of the water to the top of the tile (not to the deck / coping, to the tile). If that is within 1/4", then the tile is level.

The more concerning thing to me would be that SOMETHING is out of level. Either the deck/coping, the pool shell itself (beam). From the photos, it doesn't appear the culprit is the tile.

To know what it is, we'd need to see underneath that big plug of mastic. Is the deck up off the beam? Or is the deck on the beam and the gap between the tile and the top of the beam is that big?

They are not supposed to tile right up to the coping. The top of the tile should end just below the top of the beam, and a mastic fills between the top of the tile and the coping / deck.

So if the tile is within 1/4" (can't tell just by looking at photos, but it doesn't look too off to me), then the issue is that corner--either the deck sank away from the pool, pitching it up off the beam, or the beam was not level to begin with. Either of those are much bigger issues IMO.

See Structure #3 on page 44 in your document.

My guess is the deck pitched away, there was a large gap, and about the only thing the tile guys could do cosmetically was to fill it with mastic. They cannot tile right up to the deck, and they cannot put their tile over empty space. It would be sure to fall off in short order. What they likely did (what I would do) is setup a laser level to strike a line for the bottom of the tile and tiled off of that. That would guarantee the tile is level. If you then have a big gap at the top, the only thing they can do is fill with mastic--something that is not going to push the tile off the wall if/when the deck moves again.

I agree with you that the appearance of the concrete work for the deck looks sub-par. I see a pretty wobbly expansion joint that tells me they didn't use a square and a straightedge when striking it.

If it is the deck, then the good thing is that the pool is likely level and the tile is likely level. The bad news is there is not much I could see in that document that gives you a lot of recourse. Did they show you examples of work? That is the only thing I saw where you would have a good case to make them come and demo / re-pour the deck.

It would make me angry too--that's just poor workmanship to have the soil pull away from the decking right after building and the deck pitching.
If it is the pool being unlevel, then it's even worse.

But you need to know what is under that mastic patch. Concrete? Or air?

I'm nervous about cutting out the mastic patch due water getting behind it and making everything worse. When I push on it I feel nothing in the back and it has been like that from the very start. The gap between the tile and the top of the beam is about an inch. What kind of caulking should I use if I want to cut it out and take pictures? The picture I just attached is what the brown spots look like in the plaster. I probably have four of them in the pool. Also, this is just me complaining now because of the other work but they didn't even brother to clean the caulking off the tile. This picture is the far right portion of the pool, the far left has the big gap.

 

[ajw22]

The gap is supposed to be there with cantilevered coping. The gap must not be filled with any rigid material that couples the deck to the pool.

Flexible mastic is okay but the gap is designed to be open.

Read Expansion Joints and Coping - Further Reading

 

[L. Wilson]

The gap is supposed to be there with cantilevered coping. The gap must not be filled with any rigid material that couples the deck to the pool.

Flexible mastic is okay but the gap is designed to be open.

Read Expansion Joints and Coping - Further Reading

Agreed but look at the entire thread. I have a 1 inch gap on the left side of the pool and it gets smaller from left to right.

 

[L. Wilson]

OK, so new construction. Their claim is that the deck pitched up at the beam of the pool. I have exactly that issue, but it's a 37 year old pool & we have expansive clay soils that have moved a lot due to the droughts the past 15 years.

In new construction, that's unacceptable.

Again, from you photos, it would be hard for me to argue that the tile is "out of level". The water surface is (and always will be) level. It is the one thing you can count on to be level. So there is no need to break out a spirit level to check the tile. Just go around and measure the distance from the surface of the water to the top of the tile (not to the deck / coping, to the tile). If that is within 1/4", then the tile is level.

The more concerning thing to me would be that SOMETHING is out of level. Either the deck/coping, the pool shell itself (beam). From the photos, it doesn't appear the culprit is the tile.

To know what it is, we'd need to see underneath that big plug of mastic. Is the deck up off the beam? Or is the deck on the beam and the gap between the tile and the top of the beam is that big?

They are not supposed to tile right up to the coping. The top of the tile should end just below the top of the beam, and a mastic fills between the top of the tile and the coping / deck.

So if the tile is within 1/4" (can't tell just by looking at photos, but it doesn't look too off to me), then the issue is that corner--either the deck sank away from the pool, pitching it up off the beam, or the beam was not level to begin with. Either of those are much bigger issues IMO.

See Structure #3 on page 44 in your document.

My guess is the deck pitched away, there was a large gap, and about the only thing the tile guys could do cosmetically was to fill it with mastic. They cannot tile right up to the deck, and they cannot put their tile over empty space. It would be sure to fall off in short order. What they likely did (what I would do) is setup a laser level to strike a line for the bottom of the tile and tiled off of that. That would guarantee the tile is level. If you then have a big gap at the top, the only thing they can do is fill with mastic--something that is not going to push the tile off the wall if/when the deck moves again.

I agree with you that the appearance of the concrete work for the deck looks sub-par. I see a pretty wobbly expansion joint that tells me they didn't use a square and a straightedge when striking it.

If it is the deck, then the good thing is that the pool is likely level and the tile is likely level. The bad news is there is not much I could see in that document that gives you a lot of recourse. Did they show you examples of work? That is the only thing I saw where you would have a good case to make them come and demo / re-pour the deck.

It would make me angry too--that's just poor workmanship to have the soil pull away from the decking right after building and the deck pitching.
If it is the pool being unlevel, then it's even worse.

But you need to know what is under that mastic patch. Concrete? Or air?

This is what the framing looked like.

 

[L. Wilson]

Here are more pictures during the construction

 

[jedigrover]

Not awful, but it's tough to pour right on sand like that and get something that stays in place. I grew up in the desert & saw lots of that kind of thing. Did you get a photo when they were pouring the concrete? It's important to see if they put down 4 mil plastic or a double layer of roofing felt over the top of the beam before they poured.

I see they did use forms. The waviness in the formwork is what I see as waviness in the pool edge of your coping.

I think in this case pre-cast coping and an expansion joint to an adjoining deck would've been better.