Warped engineered oak flooring boards delivered.

[imk]

Hello,
I took delivery today of the 44m2 of engineered rustic brushed and oiled oak flooring size 18/5x120xRandom lengths. My intention is to lay it as a floating floor on a concrete sub floor with a DPM and a good quality underlay.

I opened one of the boxes just to compare the finish and colour to with the sample that the vendor sent to me. Well the finish was ok, but looks a little patchy in places. Basically it looked like the boards that where laid face to face in the box had printed through to each other. (Or maybe had had moisture (condensation) between them at some time)

What is more alarming thought is that some of the boards in the box I opened are warped by as much as 20mm over a 1m length. That is to say that if you lay a 1m board on a flat floor (Face Up) and press down on one end, the other end is 20mm off the floor.

I sent the seller an email about this warping and this was the response.

It is very common for boards to bow along the length particularly longer boards, but these will settle down very quickly when laid. the boards surrounding will all pull each other down and the floor will settle. Our fitters lay many floors and this bowing is often present, and always settles down. please do not hesitate to contact me should you require further help

Now I laid a floating engineer floor some years ago and none of those boards were warped. So what to do? Is the above reply BS? Or will this flooring sort its self out.

imk

Untitled

• imk
• 16 May 2012
• 1

 

[Burnerman]

The boards won't 'unwarp' - but if they have a tongue and groove, other planks may accommodate the warp and help them lay flat - to some degree.
Often its an idea to use the worst planks for cuttings, and use them up that way. With timber being a natural product, some movement has to be expected.
Only my opinion! Lets hear what the others say.
John

 

[AronSearle]

Well there is a standard for engineered floorboards.

It has "very" tight tolerances for most characteristics, but none whatsoever for bow.

Generally the approach is that if it can be pushed flat, then does bow matter?


Now if the floor is to be floated, and is sold as suitable for such, and the degree of bow means it cannot be properly laid as it pushes the boards up, then you could argue they are not suitable for their intended use. I would guess though that you can still push them flat together.




As to it being common, well.... All I can say to that is a great number of manufacturers manage to make engineered boards without them bowing.

 

[mointainwalker]

Since the purpose of having a backing of stable woods in (probably ) two or three differentcrossed layers, is to give you a very stable product, then I personally would say that the product is defective out of the box and I wouldn't want to try and fit it, as any marks will then be used as a further excuse to refuse any refund.

Since you intend to lay them floating, it would be necessary to sort them to ensure you don't lay two warped ends together or they will stand up. You shouldn't need to do this. I would return them as not fit for purpose.

Bit puzzled about

boards that where laid face to face in the box had printed through to each other

as I can't understand how that could happen with wood. Printed surfaces yes.

With timber being a natural product, some movement has to be expected.

But John, this is not a natural product like a floorboard, it is engineered

 

[WoodYouLike]

With timber being a natural product, some movement has to be expected.

But John, this is not a natural product like a floorboard, it is engineered

Eh, "engineered" from natural products = definitely a natural product, but more stable than a solid floorboards.

 

[AronSearle]

I would return them as not fit for purpose.

You should be more careful using this term as it's a specific legal term.

Technically they might be "fit for purpose", even if most people would call them rubbish.

 

[mointainwalker]

If you buy a product to make a flat floor and it won't because it is warped, please tell me how it is incorrect -legally or any other way - to say it is not fit for purpose.

@WYL

The important thing about engineered wood is that the backing wood is fixed at right-angles to the grain of the face . This is completely unnatural and has been designed so that the stress in the different layers nullify each other.

TO that extent i wouldn't call it a natural product anymore than I would call a piece of steel made from iron ore natural

 

[WoodYouLike]

The matter here: natural product with reactions to changes the house climate.
The crossed backing of engineered boards (backing made of wood) will still react to this natural effect, therefore the statement is correct: wood-engineered reacts (less) to this natural effect too.

 

[AronSearle]

If you buy a product to make a flat floor and it won't because it is warped, please tell me how it is incorrect -legally or any other way - to say it is not fit for purpose.

If the boards can be pushed flat (and chances are they can), then it's not appropriate to say they are not fit for purpose.

It may not matter, unless you decide to go to small claims court, in which case you are on a hiding to nothing, because then you have to show they are unfit for purpose, which as above.

 

[mointainwalker]

If the boards can be pushed flat (and chances are they can), then it's not appropriate to say they are not fit for purpose

.

And if they won't stay down, for example if you get two or more warped boards joined together ?

In this case I disagree entirely with your judgement and believe that photos of the lifting boards would be absolute proof of the lack of quality .