We recently purchased a home built in 1904 with maple hardwood floors on the first floor. As part of the remodel we had a wall removed that was dividing two areas with hardwood floor so they had to patch the area that was under the wall. The reason that we removed the wall was to have a more open floor plan (one large great room instead of smaller rooms). The patch where the wall was is running the opposite direction as the rest of the flooring on the whole first floor. Like if you are looking at the floor and all the boards are running horizontal then the patch is running vertical. So the patch (about an 8 foot by 1 foot section) creates the effect of there being a big stripe that is running through the middle of our floor. It is also a different color of wood. I think it's maple but it is newer so it is brighter. So we have a big bright stripe running through the middle of our floor. We asked the contractor about this and he said that there was nothing he could do about the color change because of the difference in the ages of the wood. He also said that it wasn't standard practice for a 1 foot by 8 foot patch to try to patch in the boards going all the same direction. The language in the contract reads, "Supply and install hardwood threshold at new opening" so we assumed that what we were paying for would be something where you wouldn't notice the patch unless you really looked closely. The contractor said that if we wanted it patched like that then it would have cost a lot more money. Maybe we were wrong in assuming what a "standard" patch would be. As part of the remodel we also had all the hardwood floors sanded down and re-sealed and re-finished (including the patch).

I'm wondering if having the wood running the opposite direction and a different color is standard or if this is something that we should be asking them to re-do.

Thanks for your time. Sorry if this was already asked in another post.

Thank you,
Cara

Yea it would have cost more and the color is usually lighter with the new wood but the contractor is a ditz for not fixing it right. Especially since the floor was getting a total resand and finish. Was this the flooring/finish contractor or a general contractor? Why didn't the flooring/finish contractor say something?

The general contractor is the one who did the the demo of the wall that was there and the underlayment as the hardwood floor prep. The flooring contractor who did the sand/seal/finish on the whole floor was a hardwood floor subcontractor of our general contractor so we didn't have direct contact with him (we weren't living here while the floors were being done because we moved in after the whole remodel was complete). We aren't sure if the general or subcontractor was the one who actually installed the patch. I'm not sure if the flooring subcontractor said something to the general contractor or not. If so, we were not a part of those conversations.

I'm sure it would have cost more to cut the patch pieces to patch it so that all the wood was running the same direction (I'm talking the whole boards here, not the grain or anything). I guess I'm asking if the contract language read, "Supply and install hardwood threshold at new opening" if by industry standards it could be assumed that the boards would all be running the same direction (existing floor and patch) vs the patch running perpendicular to the existing floor. We thought what we were paying for with the, "Supply and install hardwood threshold at new opening" was a patch that was running the same direction and *very* close to the same color so that it would not stand out like an eye sore. I'm just wondering if maybe our standards were too high and what we were picturing it looking like would never have been a reality or if what we were hoping for should have been done and they just did a botchy and lazy job and we should be asking for them to fix it or a partial refund or something.

Thanks,
Cara

Cara,

A treshold always runs across the opening, in other words; in your case it is installed as contracted.

If you had wanted the floor to be done with the boards "weaved in" it would have been substantially more. Still, to be blended in properly the maple would have to be hand picked for color and still could not have been guaranteed for a perfect color match.

Johannes.

Exactly what I was going to say. If it were to be running in the same direction it would have been stated ad woven or fingered in. To run across in the opposite direction I would have stated header strip. I always discuss the 2 options with my customers first. But to weave in every row would have turned your 1 X 8 repair into approximately a 8 X 4 repair as you have to remove full boards on either side of the opening for each row in the majority of the rows ( very time consuming) Then you would still see the difference in color unless you bur a ridiculous amount of extra material to hand pick matching boards.

I figured you didn't have contact with the flooring guy. But my question and yours would be, "Why wouldn't anyone explain the different options unless they just wanted in-n-out." A reputable contractor would have offered you options. Just my opinion I guess. I call it being low-balled. And being taken advantage of by a contractor who hopes you don't know the difference.

It sounds like we got what we paid for as far as the wording in the contract. We just didn't get what we thought we were buying. I looked up pictures of hardwood floor thresholds online and it seems like most of the time they are used as a transition, not going up the middle of a room. I put a picture in the "Problems/Solutions" gallery so that you guys can see the color difference (the title of the picture is "Floor patch running perpendicular and different color"). It seems like finding wood to match the exact color would be very difficult, but what about staining the patch? Is that commonly done? I should mention that when we had the floors sanded and refinished we used one coat of the sealant Bonaseal and three coats of the finish Bona Traffic HD. The floors otherwise are not stained.

Thanks again,
Cara

Cara,

OMG, I'm sorry to say it this blondly but that is bloody embarrassing; I was thinking that just a single board was installed. Not that many!
I have done a single board between rooms were a wall was opened up; but never like this. This is the worst I have ever seen to be honest and the GC is wholly responsible: this kind of “butcher-work” is absolutely unacceptable. My argument would be “why would I hire a professional for such shoddy and certainly UNPROFESSIONAL appearing workmanship”. Sure it is functional but the appearance is crap!

The GC should pay for getting this done the right way! I don’t even understand how he can find this acceptable!

The real problem is; is it possible to find matching wood? Ideally period wood from a demolition would be suitable. If the wood appearance can not be matched close than that would look poor also if it would be woven/feathered in. At least the new maple should be stained trying to get the color to "match" as good as possible. Also tinting of the finish is an option to achieve a closer color match.

Johannes.

I'm glad Johannes said that first. lol Boy, you got some serious gappage there in that old plank.

You can hardly tell they did a patch LOL. It looks like they did a nice job on the install and finish but definitely should have spent some time trying to find the right material. As for weaving it in, it's hard to say but it doesn't look like the rows line up (could be just the angle of it pic).

It sounds like from the responses here that the direction of the wood was installed as contracted (since the contract says "threshold"). The fact that it is running perpendicular is ugly and stands out like a sore thumb in the middle of the room but asking them to re-do it with "weaving it in" would be above and beyond what we had in the contract with them (even though it would look much nicer). So we are probably stuck with that (unfortunately).

So the issue that remains is just the color of it. We asked for a small deduct ($250) from the general contractor because of the way the patch looks (this is among many other deducts that we are asking for from them because of shoddy work or contracted work that they didn't do). The dollar amount that we are asking for probably wouldn't cover the cost of having the patch sanded down, stained, and re-sealed/re-finished but we thought we should at least get something from them since the patch is ugly. They responded in writing (about the color): "The flooring over time has aged to the color of amber (yellowing), with the new floor we cannot match this color as it comes from the age of the tree when cut, old growth lumber vs. the new lumber available today. With all of that said the two areas will be of different color, as the new floor ages it will amber out to match the existing flooring. We cannot stain this area due to the fact that the new area would darken faster and never match anyways. This application is an industry standard." They then went on to say that they would not give us any money back for the patch (or re-do it).

Is what the general contractor responded above true about the color? Will the new patch yellow out over time to match the older existing flooring? If so, any idea on how long that will take (I mean are we talking a few years or several decades)? Or are there ways to stain the patch where the colors will remain very close to the same over time as they both age? Is how they installed it really "industry standard" (as they state)?

Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Thanks again for your time,
Cara

The new wood in the patch will darken with age, but it takes a long time and will always be "off" from the original maple.

A weave would have been a better solution if it was possible, but you need to understand there is no perfect solution in your case. A weave might not have been possible because if the courses are off by even just a little between the two rooms, you can't do it. Maybe remove the wood in one of the rooms (the smaller one) and use it in with new wood to weave into the room you kept. Also the gaps are problematic; new install would genearlly have no gaps so you keep losing width when you need to gain.
Lots of if's and but's.

I'm thinking the way they installed it was probably the best way, but I would have tried to get some color in there with stain. Reclaimed period wood would be the best solution, but who's going to pay for finding it? Craigslist might have some.

Pat,

I have woven in new boards in a gappy floor by using lawn trimmer line and formica strips between the strip to match the gapping. In this case it appears that the boards line up, but yes, that can be a challenge. The new gaps can than get partially filled with tinted filler to simulate/"match" the old floors appearance.

I was also thinking your good alternative solution to lift up the smaller room and weave in with new wood.

It is possible to stain the new maple with waterborne stain in a light/mixed tint by taping of the boards, the sealer could have been tinted a bit also for a much appearance even if it would not be a perfect match. The older wood (hard to see if it is for sure maple but likely it is since it is in the "Northern Woods" area) will be a different color than the new wood which will never blend in as it will not change color that much with a waterborne finish applied to it. They were at least correct stating the difference between old growth and new growth timber.

Johannes.

All that response from the builder still does not excuse them from not offering them an alternative to select from besides the horrid looking patch. If they realized that from the get go they should have told you.

The boards on either side of the patch do line up (it is hard to tell from the picture), because the wall that we took out had a doorway in it so the two rooms were connected in the flooring through the doorway.

So it sounds like from the discussion here that they should have put some sort of a waterborne stain on the patch wood prior to sealing and refinishing (correct?). We understand that the colors will never match completely but something at least closer in color wouldn't stand out so much. And I agree that even as the new wood ages, the old wood will continue to age so the colors will never match. That makes complete sense.

They also mentioned in their written explanation that, "The install of the floor was discussed with the owner throughout the process and they agreed to the installation and finishing of the floors." We (obviously) did NOT agree to have our floor patched the way that the final outcome looks. We chose the brand of the seal and finish of the floors (Bona) but assumed that the patch would be close to matching prior to them sealing and finishing the entire floor (including the patch area). Taking out the wall and putting in the patch was in one area of our contract with them and sanding/sealing/finishing the floors (including patch area) was in a separate part of our contract. So we thought that putting in matching wood or staining the patch to match was part of the "installing patch" part of the contract and not part of the "finishing the floors" part of the contract. So we didn't pick out a stain for the patch because we didn't want the entire floor stained and we only picked out products for the "finishing the floors" part of the contract. I hope this makes sense! And the whole thing was complicated by the fact that we weren't living here while they were doing it so we couldn't stop them and say, "Hey, what are you doing? That looks ugly!".

So at this point in the game should we press them further to come out and fix the patch area (sand it down, apply stain, reseal, refinish) or ask for a monetary equivalent? Or should we just give up and live with an ugly floor? I just don't know what else to say to them except to point out that the explanation that they gave isn't true (the colors won't match in time; that how they did the patch is NOT industry standard; and that we NEVER would have agreed to have our floor look like this - regardless of what they are saying). I didn't think that asking for a $250 deduct from them was unreasonable for how our floor looks but they said they wouldn't give us any money back or fix it. Any suggestions as to what to do next? Is what we are asking for unreasonable?

You guys have given lots of good solutions/alternatives here but we are reluctant to pay another hardwood floor contractor to come out here and fix it unless we can get some money back from the contractor who installed the patch. It seems like we shouldn't have to pay twice for the same patch.

Thanks for your help!

-Cara