Sign in

Ten Oaks

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Ten Oaks? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Ten Oaks

Ten Oaks Reviews (1)

Review: On May 2014, I purchased hardwood flooring from [redacted] for 2 levels (appx 2000 sq) of my house at a price of $23,000. Some months after installation, I started noticing that some of my floor boards were cracking, splinting big chunks of wood in edges, showing insect wholes where they were none before. I also noticed that boards throughout the two house levels had some kind beveling that was noticeable at the edge and middle of the board. I called the installer ([redacted]) to do an evaluation of these problems. After reporting these issues, [redacted] sent a series of inspectors that I believe came from the wood distributor ([redacted]) and the wood manufacturer, Ten Oaks, LLP.

When the [redacted] inspector first visited my house he said that there were some manufacturer issues in the beveling/dipping of the wood and they should have never installed those. However, in addition to the beveling or sanding of the wood, the boards have also cracked a lot and in the last year show insect wholes, and have large splinters that are present in 50% of my house. The certified surface and wood inspector I hired noted that the house did not have any problems that would cause the condition of the wood and stated that the installer should have never installed the boards that were in bad shape, which happened to be all around the house in different spots and makes it difficult to replace without affecting the floor look. He also stated that the wood had manufacturing issues because of these sanding problems. Given the amount of cracks and splinting, he further recommended that the floor be replaced since issues are present in more than 50% of the house. However, Ten Oaks offers in letters have not acknowledge the manufacturer and rapid deteriorating state of the wood or offer remedies for fixing that. The have only mentioned that is a finish issue problem and the remedy provided is to sand the floor and replace some boards (1-2 boxes). This remedy will not address theissue.Desired Settlement: I have waited a long time to file this claim thinking that things were going to be solved. However, I have not heard a proposal that addresses the floor continuous cracking and splinting problem while maintaining the warranty. The letters have also not acknowledged the cracking and board sanding issues and keep calling it a finish issue, which is an incorrect statement. While the first problem was that the installer installed some badly beveled/sanded boards, the floor has also shown manufacturer issues beyond installation issues. Therefore, both are at fault in this situation and should work together and cooperatively to solve this issue.

Since sanding and replacing some boards will not addressed the problem and I have not head a good solution, I would like to request full replacement of the floor with good quality wood in conformance with the recommendation of the wood inspector and for them to cover all expenses related to the installation. If an agreement cannot be reached, I w



As outlined in the attached files, there were limited problems with this floor. Ten Oaks does not agree that the problems are as extensive as the plaintiff alleges. If the problems have become worse in the time since the inspection on April 22nd, 2015 the plaintiff has provided no documentation of it.The industry standard for prefinished floors is that if there is a surface quality issue with flooring material, the installer is responsible for noting these at the time of installation and not installing the material. Most of the concerns raised by the plaintiff should never have been installed into her home; which even the carpet inspector agreed with ["stated that the installer should never have installed the boards" (from the complaint description)].The plaintiff disputes the inspection findings from both the [redacted] representative as well as Ten Oaks' representative, but has yet to have the floor inspected by an independent, NWFA-certified inspector. We do not call into question Mr. [redacted]'s expertise in the arena of carpet problems, but in this instance he wasn't inspecting carpet. However, we can definitively note that the inspection report is incomplete (lacking the referenced photographs) and shows evidence of an unfamiliarity with hardwood-specific industry practices. For instance: - Photograph #23 was presumably going to show "insect holes" without any explanation of nationally recognized flooring grade standards or referencing product literature describing acceptable floor character marks. - Photographs #33 & #38 might have shown sheen differences between the stair treads (where Ten Oaks' flooring was used and sloppily covered in more polyurethane) and stair nosings (which were not Ten Oaks' products and could not even have been made from Ten Oaks' material). - Photograph #32 might have shown peeling on the stair nosings (which again, Ten Oaks' did not and has never manufactured) without correlating this to either an environmental or installation issue. - The report lists "insect holes" as a defect that needs replacement. Worm holes are not only allowed, but a type featured character in this product; there are no infestation concerns. - The report states, "Neither will it have a lifetime finish warranty." The original product purchased by the plaintiff did not have a lifetime finish warranty either (nor do the vast majority of offerings in the prefinished flooring industry). This statement is more evidence that the inspector is unfamiliar with the particular flooring material he was inspecting in this instance. It also suggests that the product literature wasn't consulted, as every NWFA-certified inspector would have been trained to do. As an aside, Ten Oaks had offered to honor the factory finish warranty.The last statement of the report is very interesting because it addresses the subfloor, which is the structural panel system spanning the joists and providing support for the flooring. He notes that having already been nailed into twice, the structural integrity of the subfloor would be better if it were not subjected to being damaged again through another tear out and replacement process. This is a concern that Ten Oaks also addressed from its very first formal response to the plaintiff (paragraph 3, sentences 2 and 5).The plaintiff notes several times that the problem is one that continues to worsen. This is highly unusual for a wood flooring product that was installed correctly and is exposed to no undue environmental factors. The one fact that every inspector has agreed about most emphatically is that there is strong evidence of poor installation practices and that things should have been done differently when this floor was put into this house.Ten Oaks has been more than generous in standing behind its products and offering to fix problems that most likely never should have gotten to this point. The plaintiff has refused industry advice which would resolve her issues with the least inconvenience, provide the most valuable upgrade to her investment, and assure the structural integrity of her home. The plaintiff has also refused to get an independent hardwood flooring expert's opinion on the condition of her concern (to our knowledge). Ten Oaks does not feel it is the obstacle to a resolution to this complaint.*Please note: The references to the "plaintiff" are not meant to sound derogatory, but are merely an attempt to follow the guidelines about not giving identifying information about the complaint originator. The attached files are assumed to be for use only and the identifying information within won't be published. They are provided as they were originally sent to the various complaint stakeholders.



I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

Attached please find the report as requested by Ten Oaks from a certified inspector. Based on the inspector, the problem is a manufacturing defect and he stated that the issues are pretty noticeable throughout the house. In addition to the sanding problems that came with the boards, there are no environmental conditions (as stated in both reports) that would cause these issues of continued cracking and splinting. Perhaps maybe the wood having a 6 side seal maybe causing excessive dryness? There are also the bugs that came with it and have been coming out through several boards on both levels of my house.


Check fields!

Write a review of Ten Oaks, LLC

Satisfaction rating
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Ten Oaks Rating

Overall satisfaction rating


Address: 209 Progress Dr, Stuart, Virginia, United States, 24171


Show more...

Add contact information for Ten Oaks

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated