Dark Bowl/Waterline Ring - New Pebblesheen - HELP!
- Thread starter Wolf3412
- Start date
- Nov 12, 2017
- 11,932
- Pool Size
- 12300
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Pentair Intellichlor IC-40
I never said anything about deceiving the pool builder, and I would agree that is not appropriate. I'm suggesting he not contribute to any discussion about blame. The blame discussion is for another time, and should be done in writing. The meeting today should primarily be about expressing dissatisfaction and allowing the PB the opportunity to correct the issue. NOT "Well, I messed up. Can you help me fix my mistake?" Which was his original attitude when he first posted.
If his PB is a stand up guy, then all's well. But if he's looking for any way to get out of fixing an issue for which he is responsible (IMO), then we don't want to give him any ammo...
Sorry if I made it sound otherwise.
If his PB is a stand up guy, then all's well. But if he's looking for any way to get out of fixing an issue for which he is responsible (IMO), then we don't want to give him any ammo...
Sorry if I made it sound otherwise.
I would be more motivated to help someone that was candid about their actions then someone being deceptive or pretending to be oblivious.
Would it be the builder's responsibility to fix concrete that the homeowner walked on because the builder didn't say to not walk on wet concrete?
Would it be the builder's responsibility to fix concrete that the homeowner walked on because the builder didn't say to not walk on wet concrete?
- Nov 12, 2017
- 11,932
- Pool Size
- 12300
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Pentair Intellichlor IC-40
Respectfully...
I don't believe that to be an applicable analogy, at all. This is more like the builder poured wet concrete and then didn't put up any barriers or signs that would alert or keep a normal, reasonable person from walking on to it. If he had put up a sign and a barrier, and the homeowner jumped over the rope and walked on the concrete, that's one thing. That is not what happened here. It is not reasonable for a contractor to expect a consumer to understand and deploy proper pool startup procedures.
The OP can be cordial, and polite, but he should not be in the position of trying to persuade his contractor to help him solve some unforeseeable, one-in-a-million issue. This is pool contractor startup 101, and not something the average person would know about. It is, on the other hand, something the PB should have done himself, and been very clear about what to do and not do during a fill. It was negligence on the part of the PB, NOT the homeowner.
It seems that maybe you've had good luck with contractors and insurance reps and warranty administrators, etc. Good on ya. But more often than not, these people are highly motivated, and sometimes trained, to find ways to deny responsibility. Sorry to say, that is the world in which we live.
Again, I've suggested nothing that would imply the OP should aggravate the PB, or lie to him or deceive him. But being "candid" is not something I would suggest. This is a major mess-up, an upper-four-figure mistake, in a complicated, multi-part construction installation. While it's possible the PB is going to say "Hey, my bad, I'll just write a check for $8000 and this will all go away. Sorry for your inconvenience.", do you really think that's going to happen here? Again, I'm not suggesting deception, I'm suggesting the OP do, and only do, what is appropriate at this time: establish that the project is not acceptable, and establish that he is giving the PB the opportunity to correct the issue. All my other advice is along the lines of: do as little as possible beyond those two things. I'm attempting to prepare him for a very likely confrontational scenario, and that he should attempt to deflect from any sort of confrontation at this point in time.
And since the OP has yet to contribute to this morning's conversation, that would indicate that he's either not interested, or that the meeting with the PB is in progress, so this is mostly academic, isn't it?
I don't believe that to be an applicable analogy, at all. This is more like the builder poured wet concrete and then didn't put up any barriers or signs that would alert or keep a normal, reasonable person from walking on to it. If he had put up a sign and a barrier, and the homeowner jumped over the rope and walked on the concrete, that's one thing. That is not what happened here. It is not reasonable for a contractor to expect a consumer to understand and deploy proper pool startup procedures.
The OP can be cordial, and polite, but he should not be in the position of trying to persuade his contractor to help him solve some unforeseeable, one-in-a-million issue. This is pool contractor startup 101, and not something the average person would know about. It is, on the other hand, something the PB should have done himself, and been very clear about what to do and not do during a fill. It was negligence on the part of the PB, NOT the homeowner.
It seems that maybe you've had good luck with contractors and insurance reps and warranty administrators, etc. Good on ya. But more often than not, these people are highly motivated, and sometimes trained, to find ways to deny responsibility. Sorry to say, that is the world in which we live.
Again, I've suggested nothing that would imply the OP should aggravate the PB, or lie to him or deceive him. But being "candid" is not something I would suggest. This is a major mess-up, an upper-four-figure mistake, in a complicated, multi-part construction installation. While it's possible the PB is going to say "Hey, my bad, I'll just write a check for $8000 and this will all go away. Sorry for your inconvenience.", do you really think that's going to happen here? Again, I'm not suggesting deception, I'm suggesting the OP do, and only do, what is appropriate at this time: establish that the project is not acceptable, and establish that he is giving the PB the opportunity to correct the issue. All my other advice is along the lines of: do as little as possible beyond those two things. I'm attempting to prepare him for a very likely confrontational scenario, and that he should attempt to deflect from any sort of confrontation at this point in time.
And since the OP has yet to contribute to this morning's conversation, that would indicate that he's either not interested, or that the meeting with the PB is in progress, so this is mostly academic, isn't it?
I don't see it as deception. As far as the pb knows his client has not being informed that the fill cannot be stopped. If he or other contractors haven't mentioned it how was the po to know?
- Jan 4, 2016
- 5,290
- Pool Size
- 44000
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
It's a cooler time of year, which is helpful, but as far as I know it's physically damaging to leave the plaster above the bowl ring dry, especially if the sun was hitting it. So doesn't it seem that this is more than just cosmetic? bdavis would know if a couple days dry is harmful or not.
It's not so much that it was dry but that this was brand new plaster that had drastic differences in the curing environment within the first 48 hours of being applied. Plaster (or nearly any cementitious surface) achieves close to 90% of it's rated compressive strength within 72 hours of being mixed making the environment during that period absolutely critical for uniformity and strength (this is why the bicarbonate startup works).
The darker color seen on the plaster may fade with time but this will many several years if at all
- Nov 12, 2017
- 11,932
- Pool Size
- 12300
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Pentair Intellichlor IC-40
Brian, I am just now realizing that you are a contractor, and a builder of pools. And I want to apologize for being insensitive to that fact. I hope I didn't insult you personally. Some of my statements were clearly anti-contractor, and while I still feel they are justified, because, as in all businesses, there are too many bad apples out there, I didn't mean to insinuate that all contractors are bad apples. I acknowledge that any build should be a partnership between the builder and the customer, and that they are, to some degree, dependent upon each other for the ultimate success of a build. And that there should be some mutual trust going on. I can now better appreciate your perspective on how you would want a dissatisfied customer to deal with you. And what you may not know about me, is that I'm currently dealing with a pool contractor who destroyed my pool's plaster with an acid wash, and continues to refuse to make good the damage based on his position that it was somehow the plaster's fault. (I'll spare you any more of the ridiculous details.) So I am coming from the perspective of how I would want a contractor to deal with me. I used to be a CA contractor, but I still side with the prevalent attitude, shared by the State of California, that the responsibility for virtually all aspects of a construction project primarily rest with the contractor.
Your most recent post (IMO) virtually proves my point. "Plaster (or nearly any cementitious surface) achieves close to 90% of it's rated compressive strength within 72 hours of being mixed making the environment during that period absolutely critical for uniformity and strength..." That is exactly the kind of thing a contractor should know, and observe/protect, and that a consumer would not likely have the slightest clue about. I stand fast by my position that, for that reason alone, let alone color variation issues, the OP's contractor was completely negligent for turning over the fill to the consumer, even if he had explained things better than the OP is claiming. It seems to be a common practice (it was done to me), but that doesn't make it right, it just makes it common. Maybe if enough of us put the resulting bad outcomes back onto the contractors that perpetrate them, this practice will become less common! You wouldn't let your customer work the gunite, would you? That'd be ridiculous, right? At what point in the process is it reasonable and prudent to turn a pool over to a consumer? Just before the fill? Half way through? After it's over? A day/week/month after? And what should be mandated (legislated) the consumer be made aware of, in terms of pool startup, pool care, etc. I'm of the opinion that all of this is currently all too lax. And I suspect, when most of this lack of "best practice" actually shows up is at the pool's end-of-life, at a point in time when the startup process would not be suspect (and the negligent contractor is long gone). They are just now doing studies for this reason, testing long misunderstood practices, and those studies are long overdue.
If the OP wants to live with the color issue, fine. Or take a discount to resolve it, fine. But if he wants it redone (and apparently there might be more reasons to want that other than just a color flaw), then I believe he is within his right to demand and expect it of the PB.
I also stand by my position that if this goes south, and the PB baulks, there are things the OP can do now to set the stage for a successful outcome in his favor (sorry, I'm not rooting for the contractor in this case). Clearly expressing dissatisfaction, and first allowing the PB the opportunity to correct the issues himself, without interference by the consumer or another contractor, are fundamental steps to a resolution, and required here in CA (and I don't expect it would be any different in any other state). I didn't even mention the need for this all to be in writing, in the spirit of PB/consumer relations. But if his meeting didn't go well yesterday, that is the next step.
So I didn't mean to come after you in any way, but rather to arm the OP for the possibility of a worse case scenario. Some missteps at this juncture cannot be undone (such as trying to fix it himself). And I am not an authoritative source. I am speaking from my experience alone, and from what I've learned since I started my resolution process.
Let's first hope it's a simple fix, and if not, that his PB will be a stand up guy. But just in case, the OP should be preparing and proceeding appropriately, and intelligently...
Your most recent post (IMO) virtually proves my point. "Plaster (or nearly any cementitious surface) achieves close to 90% of it's rated compressive strength within 72 hours of being mixed making the environment during that period absolutely critical for uniformity and strength..." That is exactly the kind of thing a contractor should know, and observe/protect, and that a consumer would not likely have the slightest clue about. I stand fast by my position that, for that reason alone, let alone color variation issues, the OP's contractor was completely negligent for turning over the fill to the consumer, even if he had explained things better than the OP is claiming. It seems to be a common practice (it was done to me), but that doesn't make it right, it just makes it common. Maybe if enough of us put the resulting bad outcomes back onto the contractors that perpetrate them, this practice will become less common! You wouldn't let your customer work the gunite, would you? That'd be ridiculous, right? At what point in the process is it reasonable and prudent to turn a pool over to a consumer? Just before the fill? Half way through? After it's over? A day/week/month after? And what should be mandated (legislated) the consumer be made aware of, in terms of pool startup, pool care, etc. I'm of the opinion that all of this is currently all too lax. And I suspect, when most of this lack of "best practice" actually shows up is at the pool's end-of-life, at a point in time when the startup process would not be suspect (and the negligent contractor is long gone). They are just now doing studies for this reason, testing long misunderstood practices, and those studies are long overdue.
If the OP wants to live with the color issue, fine. Or take a discount to resolve it, fine. But if he wants it redone (and apparently there might be more reasons to want that other than just a color flaw), then I believe he is within his right to demand and expect it of the PB.
I also stand by my position that if this goes south, and the PB baulks, there are things the OP can do now to set the stage for a successful outcome in his favor (sorry, I'm not rooting for the contractor in this case). Clearly expressing dissatisfaction, and first allowing the PB the opportunity to correct the issues himself, without interference by the consumer or another contractor, are fundamental steps to a resolution, and required here in CA (and I don't expect it would be any different in any other state). I didn't even mention the need for this all to be in writing, in the spirit of PB/consumer relations. But if his meeting didn't go well yesterday, that is the next step.
So I didn't mean to come after you in any way, but rather to arm the OP for the possibility of a worse case scenario. Some missteps at this juncture cannot be undone (such as trying to fix it himself). And I am not an authoritative source. I am speaking from my experience alone, and from what I've learned since I started my resolution process.
Let's first hope it's a simple fix, and if not, that his PB will be a stand up guy. But just in case, the OP should be preparing and proceeding appropriately, and intelligently...
I'm just wondering if the pool owner may have signed off on some sort of checklist, a laundry list if you will, of acceptance or awareness of *completion of this stage* of the build and in excitement missed the detail about keeping the water running continuously?
I've had to sign things like that and felt like yeah-yeah-yeah... lets get it over with so I can go play with my new toy!!!
That would have protected the builder from claims if the owner missed that detail in writing?
Just wondering.....?
Maddie
I've had to sign things like that and felt like yeah-yeah-yeah... lets get it over with so I can go play with my new toy!!!
That would have protected the builder from claims if the owner missed that detail in writing?
Just wondering.....?
Maddie
- Nov 12, 2017
- 11,932
- Pool Size
- 12300
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Pentair Intellichlor IC-40
I'm just wondering if the pool owner may have signed off on some sort of checklist, a laundry list if you will, of acceptance or awareness of *completion of this stage* of the build and in excitement missed the detail about keeping the water running continuously?
I've had to sign things like that and felt like yeah-yeah-yeah... lets get it over with so I can go play with my new toy!!!
That would have protected the builder from claims if the owner missed that detail in writing?
Just wondering.....?
Maddie
Those concepts have caused, may cause, me problems... I was so eager to get my CYA in the water, I glazed over both the bottle's and Leslie's instructions and ended up staining my new plaster!! So human!
And my contractor's second defense (in addition to his claim that it's my plaster's fault for not withstanding his acid wash attack!), is a document I signed (which I did take care to read, but didn't fully understand the full implications of doing so in advance) that he now claims alleviates his liability. It was presented to me on the day they started the acid wash, describes in detail the inherent risks of emptying a plaster pool of water, but only describes that an acid wash won't cure all of a plaster's ills. Fortunately for me (I hope) the document was not accompanied by any sort of contract, or three-day clause, so that might render it moot. And in no way does the document prepare someone to understand that their plaster can be destroyed by an acid wash. So I think I'm good, but ya never know (I'm nervous about it, as it's really the only thing resembling any sort of out for this guy.)
Point is: the issue could be very dependent on how the document reads, how it was presented and how a judge interprets it. And even if it is all hunky-dory, I believe (and am hoping in my case and for the OP) that there is nothing a contractor can have you sign that alleviates all his liability for any reason under any circumstance. In other words, no matter what you sign or agree to, I'm thinking it wouldn't protect a contractor from blatant negligence on his part. He can't claim, well, no matter what I did, or how bad I did it, I don't have to make it right because you signed this. (The despicable-ness of that aside!)
If I'm right about the negligence thing, the trick, for me and the OP, is to be able to prove the negligence. I think I will be able to do so for my case. (If you pour acid on a pool surface in such a way that it destroys the pool's surface, how is that not negligent? But I digress.) Was turning the fill over to the OP negligent? And if not, was doing so without giving the OP the proper guidelines negligent? I'm sure that's what the argument will be. But you're right, if it's in the contract, or a supplement, then that's a problem for the OP. It's the first thing I asked of him, if the contract had anything about start up in it, and he said he'd check, but he never got back to us on that.
In fact, he's disappeared! So we've (I've?) either blown him off this thread by sheer volume of comments, or he's got his solution and forgot about us, or he hates everything he's hearing, or the contractor and him are still duking it out in his backyard, 24-hour-cage-match style!! Oh, the suspense!!
It's not just how the judge reads the contract, but if it goes to trial, how a jury reads it.
I sat on a jury in a real estate contract dispute. In the end, based on the Judge's instructions and refusal to provide us with even a definition of a few terms we were unsure about, we were asked to interpret the contact as WE, the jury read it, not based on the intent or dictionary definition of the words (this was in TX). We had the right definition of the terms we were unsure about in the end (thankfully we had a few smart folks that were able to define the words from memory), but the Plaintiff was upset when we didn't uphold a clause in the contract about dumping - in fact, there had been hazardous materials dumped on the property but (in the Jury's opinion), not with the knowledge of the Defendant. Since the Contractor who dumped the materials was not party to the lawsuit (Plaintiff had no standing to sue the contractor, who performed the work prior to the sale of the property and therefore harmed the Defendant and not the Plaintiff), and the defendant was told just prior to the sale that the plaintiff planned to dig a pond on what turned out to be a dump site (the defendant would have backed out of the sale had he known about the mess right?), we didn't hold the former property owner defendant liable for a claimed $300,000 cleanup.
Contracts can be very interesting in court. You may be surprised at the result.
I sat on a jury in a real estate contract dispute. In the end, based on the Judge's instructions and refusal to provide us with even a definition of a few terms we were unsure about, we were asked to interpret the contact as WE, the jury read it, not based on the intent or dictionary definition of the words (this was in TX). We had the right definition of the terms we were unsure about in the end (thankfully we had a few smart folks that were able to define the words from memory), but the Plaintiff was upset when we didn't uphold a clause in the contract about dumping - in fact, there had been hazardous materials dumped on the property but (in the Jury's opinion), not with the knowledge of the Defendant. Since the Contractor who dumped the materials was not party to the lawsuit (Plaintiff had no standing to sue the contractor, who performed the work prior to the sale of the property and therefore harmed the Defendant and not the Plaintiff), and the defendant was told just prior to the sale that the plaintiff planned to dig a pond on what turned out to be a dump site (the defendant would have backed out of the sale had he known about the mess right?), we didn't hold the former property owner defendant liable for a claimed $300,000 cleanup.
Contracts can be very interesting in court. You may be surprised at the result.
- Nov 12, 2017
- 11,932
- Pool Size
- 12300
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Pentair Intellichlor IC-40
Well in my case, and likely the OP's, if either of us gets that far, there wouldn't be a jury (unless we wanted one by pushing this to superior court). The solution for both of our plaster issues is under $10K (mine is, anyway), which means I can go to small claims (not sure about FL). So my case will be heard be a judge. But before that, he'll make us go out in the hallway to see if we can mediate. And the Contractors Board (the current phase of my dispute) will make us mediate first, too.
But you're right, there's no way of knowing before hand what a judge or a jury might do, so settling beforehand is preferred. And if I remember right, in CA, if you're the plaintiff in a small claims court, there's no appeal. I keep telling myself I have a slam dunk, but there's no such thing.
And that's my problem. My contractor must know he's in the wrong, he knows he should pay for my fix. But he's got nothing to lose by riding this out. He'll likely push this all the way to court, hoping for some kind of miracle from the judge. He's probably counting on just showing up and BSing his way out of this, or maybe getting some sort of reduced settlement. He thinks he's only gambling the court costs, which is nothing. Meanwhile, I have the burden of proof, I have to do all the paperwork and groundwork, etc. Errrr.... But I try to remain positive and grateful that at least there are any avenues of resolution (CA Board, mediation, court, etc). Not all countries have such things...
I had issues with spots in my finish and they drained and did an acid wash. After the wash they used polishing bits attached to a weed eater and buffed the finish to make it smoother. Ended up smoother than the original finish without the spots as well. This could be on option.
- Nov 12, 2017
- 11,932
- Pool Size
- 12300
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Pentair Intellichlor IC-40
Glad to hear your acid wash worked out for your pool. I, personally, would not be satisfied to pay for a mistake like the OPs with some number of years of plaster/pebble longevity. I just found this, and wish I had before my pebble was installed with the acid wash method. (Will I ever know everything I need to know about my pool? And will I ever learn it all before I need to!?!)
Why Acid Wash New Quartz Pool Finishes?
