Hi, sorry to hear about your floors. The same happened to my floors about a month ago. Fortunately, we were home and able to get the water up quickly. Unfortunately, we had just had our floors refinished that same month! Ours cupped too. Did your homeowners offer Servicemaster or a similar company to help dry the floors? They bring in dehumidifiers and big fans to help dry them out out. We are not having ours ripped out even though the insurance adjuster believed they should have been. We are using the same floor company that initially did the floors and he believe he can save them. The meter used to check for moisture registered below 7 and is considered good from what we understand. Our floors had only been sanded and refinished once in most of the house. That will make a difference. Do you know if yours had been refinished several times? The floor company's main concern was having to sand so much to "uncup" the floors. Fearing they would be left thin. They may be able to only replace a few boards finger laying them and then refinishing them to match up. It may take a little time for them to dry out before your adjuster can make a assessment. It is a huge inconvenience for sure. They are starting our work on the 2nd. Good luck to you. It will eventually work out. Oh, BTW, if we wanted to leave the house during the process our homeowners would have put us up at a hotel.

I'd like to know how your brother fixed it too. I hope you took pictures or had an outside party witness anything that was found. I'm not sure what "pulling on" something means and that could be hard to prove. I think it's odd to favor a previous issue over a faulty install or dw in that the problem occurred or became apparent to the HO only after the new machine was installed. They were unaware of any leaks and the installer said and documented absolutely nothing. Now he claims there was an existing problem. So what idjut would simply install a new dishwasher over soggy flooring in need of repair or dry-out, without raising the issue of a leak with the HO first. I think that is negligent, irresponsible and wreckless on his part. If there was an active leak prior to install, why didn't he report it? I would think it would be SOP for an installer to run the machine to make sure it isn't leaking before leaving the premises, in order to check their work and that the machine was running properly. I wonder if LL had any discussions at all with the installer while he was there.

I had a similar situation with an icemaker line that damaged the hardwood in the kitchen and an adjacent hallway. The insurer paid for replacement of the entire downstairs because the hallway hardwood had been discontinued. The adjuster indicated that if it hadn't been discontinued, they might try to replace only a few boards. (I would have fought her if that was a serious proposal, but it wasn't.) I'll echo weissman's comment -- I sue insurers on claims like this for a living, and for a small claim it's not worth it. The insurer should have brought in fans/blowers immediately upon you reporting the claim. Sometimes the fans/blowers can work wonders with drying things out, esp. if you're on a raised foundation.

What are you concerned about - the remedial work needed to fix the issue or compensation done to your neighbor's apartment. I live in a high-rise condo and there was somewhat of the same situation. A bathroom was being remodeled and the plumber installing the fixtures in the shower removed a valve and broke a pipe. There was a tremendous amount of damage since this was a ninth floor unit and almost all the apartments in the same stack below suffered significant damage such that the owners had to move out of their units for several months while their apartments were fixed. The impacted homeowners put in claims to their insurance companies and then the insurance companies dealt with liability. My friend lives in one of the units and so through him I know that the building was sued for having old pipes; the plumber was sued and the homeowner was sued. In the end the plumber's insurance company was the one that actually was on the hook because he had done the work and in some kind of way caused the pipe to burst. First thing you should do is contact your insurance company if there is significant damage to your neighbor because of the water intrusion. If there isn't you would probably not want to make a claim since it would appear on your record and impact future premium rates. Then as others have posted, it comes down to negotiation and who has clout. It would appear that some degree of responsibility is shared by all - the plumber knew that pipes running against studs need to be shielded so he should have put in larger enough plates to full protect since he knew the purpose of the plates and could see that the size of the plates wasn't sufficient. The installer couldn't see the studs and would have assumed the pipes were sufficiently protected - perhaps someone can offer assistance regarding whether a prudent glass installer should have made this assumption without further investigation. And since you are acting as the GC in effect, you would also have some degree of responsibility. One of the reasons a GC earns their money is because they (and their insurance) take full responsibility for this kind of issue. It wouldn't matter who or what caused the damage - the GC would have the subs remedy it - whether he paid for it or he and the subs each ate a certain portion would be irrelevant to the homeowner.