MANUFACTURER: Image Carpets, Inc.
NUMBER on BACKING: Not Applicable
ROLL & INVOICE NUMBERS: Not Given
STYLE NAME & NUMBER:
COLOR NAME & NUMBER: Not Given
ID METHOD: Chemical & Burn
FIBER COLOR: White
CONSTRUCTION: Conventional Tuft
YARN STYLE: Saxony
SQUARE YARDAGE: 118.6
BACK SYSTEM: ActionBac
PRIMARY BACKING: Polypropylene
SECONDARY BACKING: Polypropylene
DEALER: Not Given
INSTALLER: Not Given
TYPE LOCATION: Residential
DATE INSTALLED: 2001
CUSHION: 7/16 Inch Rebond
SUBFLOOR: Concrete Slab
AREA INSTALLED: Livingroom, Familyroom, Hallway, & Bedrooms
USE & MAINTENANCE STATISTICS AT THE TIME OF THE INSPECTION
LITERATURE RECEIVED WITH PURCHASE: Not Determined
ADULTS: 2 - CHILDREN: 0 - PET(S): 0
DO THEY SMOKE?
SPOTTING AGENTS: Unknown
TEMPERATURE: 73.2F - 22.8 C RH 37%
VACUUM TYPE: Upright
VACUUM FREQUENCY: Weekly & More
SOIL: Slightly Soiled
HEATING TYPE: Forced Air Gas
COOLING TYPE: Central - Electric
CLEANING: Never Been Cleaned
This dwelling is in the Mojave Desert approximately one mile north of the
The dwelling is an owner-occupied, freestanding, single-story house located in a
subdivision with other similar houses. Furnishings were neat and orderly at the
time of the inspection.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION MADE TO THE INSPECTOR
According to the claimant, one year ago water-damage necessitated the
replacement of their then one-year-old carpet. The general contractor supplied a
new carpet and hired the installers to lay it. During the installation, there
were disagreements about seam locations. Approximately six months afterwards,
the carpet seemed to be ‘wearing out’. In addition, it did not recover from
indentations made by furniture. Wear patterns were more noticeable compared to
the previous carpet. Finally, they report that there has been excessive
shedding. The claimant’s theory is that the carpet is not of the same kind and
quality of his previous carpet and that the carpet and its installation are
DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM AREA BY THIS INSPECTOR
Looking at the livingroom and family room, the areas most frequently traveled
appeared darker; yarns were crushed and pile directions were not the same as in
the non-affected areas. Brushing the carpet did not raise the nap nor change the
pile distortions. Rubbing the carpet did not make excessive fuzz. The yarns had
no slippage, no significant loss of twist or tips blooming.
Most seams were immediately noticeable, but there were no gaps or yarn-slippage
in the seam. There were two main panels in the familyroom and a six-inch wide
fill-in piece parallel with the door to the attached garage. The seam between
the two main panels appeared to be depressed. However, there was a parallel
cushion seam found within two inches of this carpet seam. Panel widths were
eight feet nine & half inches and 11 feet six inches. There was a one-inch gap
between the cushion panels.
The latex of the carpet did not appear to be sparse or brittle. Tuft bind of the
faceyarns did not appear to be weak. Untwisting yarns that were pulled free from
the carpet did not reveal a lack of retention of twist.
ON-LOCATION FIELD TESTING
The pile direction tests were done with an ordinary piece of paper and a writing
pen. This test is common or ordinary to most inspections and in this case, the
test had recognizable results.
An ultra-violet light was used to draw a reflection from substances with
fluorescent dyes. Yellow reflections will come from most urine stains while blue
or lavender reflections will come from inappropriate detergents. Seaming
adhesives in most but not all cases will have a reflection but the results of
this test revealed that there were no reflections.
Numerous moisture tests were performed using a Delmhorst Moisture Sensor that
would indicate the presence of moisture locked-up in the same compounds
mentioned above, but there were no moisture readings either.
A test using Baby Oil was used to determine if fluorochemical soil protectant
was present. The results of this test revealed that the oil did not beaded on
the yarn indicated no fluorochemical present.
A test using baby oil was used to determine if fluorochemical soil protectant
was present. The results of this test revealed that the oil did not bead on the
The questions that I have been asked to address are:
1. Is the carpet defective?
2. Are there flaws in the installation?
3. Is the carpet in question of the same ‘Like-Kind & Quality as the previous
GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE ISSUE
CRI is The Carpet and Rug Institute of Dalton, Georgia. It is a national trade
association representing the carpet and rug industry. Their membership makes-up
95% of all the carpet made in the United States. Their publications include
standards for residential and commercial installations, areas of responsibility
for manufacturers, dealers, and installers, and a manual for making claims with
a carpet producer. The accepted standards for this installation would be the
CRI105-1995 and the manufacturer’s installation specifications.
INDUSTRY STANDARDS & DEFINITIONS
According to the CRI105, it says this about seam locations:
Cushion is to be installed in the longest continuous lengths possible. The
cushion seams should not be installed directly under the carpet seams.
Generally, they should be placed at right angles to the carpet seams. When this
is not practical, shift the cushion so that seams are at least 6 inches (150 mm)
to one side of the carpet seams.
THE INSPECTOR'S ANALYSIS
Is the carpet defective?
The carpet in question might have one flaw with respect to fluorochemical
protection, depending upon its specifications. Most but not all residential
carpets have a fluorochemical protection. This one appears not to have a
fluorochemical protection. Fluorochemical can be added to the carpet after the
Shedding is normal for staple filaments and generally lasts for approximately
six months after the installation. Although there are reports of excessive
shedding, testing did not indicate a problem. Fuzzing is a similar problem where
filaments stay attached to the carpet; however, it was not found either. If
shedding or fuzzing were issues, then there would be suspicions of problems in
the latex and the latex was found to be of an average or above average quality
compared to most carpets in the market place.
Are there flaws in the installation?
The installation has errors. Among these are improper power stretching and
sealing of the seams. Although these two items are required by the CRI105
standards, it is very common to find that they are not done in most residential
Placing a cushion seam under a carpet seam is not a common error. Given that it
was found in the livingroom, it would likely be found throughout the
installation. CRI105 standards require that cushion seams run perpendicular to
carpet seams or when it is necessary to run the cushion in the same direction
and should be at least six inches away from carpet seams. However, this problem
can be fixed by replacing a significant portion of the cushion to comply with
Finally, the six-inch fill-in piece next to the garage door appears to be the
result of poor planning. CRI105 standards require that a drawing be made and be
agreed upon before the installation begins. Reportedly, this did not happen.
Given the lack of seam sealer and the cushion lay out problem, unless there is a
replacement panel suitable for replacement, there may be no way to fix this
Is the carpet in question of the same ‘Like-Kind & Quality as the previous
Polyester is like nylon in that it is a soft synthetic fiber. In addition, the
new carpet appears to be of the same if not better quality of the previous.
However, Polyester in not of the same ‘Kind’ as Nylon. Polyester is the second
least resilient of all yarns; nylon is the most resilient of synthetics. This
would account for the darkened areas. In addition, the crushing problem would be
related to the shading and/or pile direction distortions. The claimant’s wear
problem is due to crushing inherent in the nature of polyester. In addition,
polyester loses its crimp created in manufacturing; thus, it looks less bulky
with time compared to nylon. Thus, this too would gives polyester carpet a ‘worn
look’ significantly before nylon would take on this appearance.
There again, polyester does have advantages over nylon. It is naturally stain
resistant and will not lose this characteristic. Its colors are often more
vibrant and it does not fade like nylon.
Based upon background information, observations, and field-testing done at the
time of the inspection, it is the inspector’s professional opinion that:
1. The carpet in question is not defective.
2. The installation has repairable errors.
3. The carpet in question is like the previous and is of the same quality, but
is not the same kind.