A 25 year old house would have been subject to municipal codes in most states. I'd look up the original builder, and start some legal proceedings. A house this age is still a new house. He may have built on filled land, land fill, etc, which you can't do until nature does it's own compacting job usually taking decades. In any case, soil samples would have been taken making note of stability for footing sizes. On the problem in question, jacking the house isn't a huge job as it used to be, but you'll need to contact special companies that do it. A good one will leave you with a house with minor drywall cracking, that a few days work wouldn't fix. Also you'd have to handle the reconnection of wiring and plumbing and heat ducting. They'll set the house on two "I" beams and let you pour a new foundation, then for the second half of the work they'll come back and will slowly set it down on the foundation. Most will do both jobs. I know some codes allow piers for foundations. Again I would suspect pad sizes aren't to code, or posts, of wood, are not graded for continuous soil contact, or the fill problem mentioned earlier. I never liked the use of that fibre flooring and couldn't figure out why the stuff ever got the OK from the code people. It can't take moisture, bad(and dangerous) for bathrooms, and for roof sheathing deteriorates for a leaky roof. Andy

Thank you all, for commenting! You've given me some valuable things to think about! I think I've settled on a few points to help me make some decisions: 1) I can't decorate the room based on one piece of furniture, specifically, the table because it will eventually have to be refinished. (We plan on using it as an everyday table/harvest table.) 2) I have to be careful of making the room too dark. I've spent some time thinking about this and I think, in the end, what I really want when I'm done is walnut cupboards. I think I'm going to start with that point and look at some floor colours and counter top which will compliment walnut cupboards. So, although I'm back to the drawing board to choose some colours, I'm going to try a different approach. Trying to match/compliment the table only resulted in me having to possibly not have some colours that I really wanted to begin with. This is a huge reno for us for many reasons, so I'm trying to take my time and make sure that I get the look I really want. We plan on living with out choices for 10-20 years (minus paint!), so I need to be 100% sure!! :)

i'm sure the flooring guys could tape off the toe kicks, but sanding off the current color with those in place would be more difficult. I know your cabinet guy wants to finish, but is it really that much of a hassle for him that he can't come back after the floors are done to install them? would you be willing to pay him a little extra for his time if he does come back? I can understand his side of it. he's already there and wants to finish. to come back another day means extra hours and a trip he has to schedule. so, compensate him for it if that's the only issue. You can also ask your flooring guys if having the toe-kick in place is a big deal. they would know the answer to that better than us. Is the wood red oak, white oak? have you sampled any other stain colors?

It sounds like you have more than a few issues. First off, Loba Invisible is the only one that comes in 'matte' with the AT line. It appears there are some aesthetic issues with this product. Because the INVISIBLE matte is SOOOO matte, it 'polishes' when things 'slide' across it. Like a rigid dog nail + running and turning. Have you ever 'polished' up a car's finish? You are BUFFING the area to bring out MORE SHINE. Right? Now imagine the dog's nails as TINY polishing rags. Each time they put pressure on the finish, that LITTLE strip gets SUPER GLOSSY. Ahhhhhh....that's when it 'looks' like scratches (because they are linear and VERY narrow) but they are NOT. They are GLOSSY buffed out sections of the matte finish. I'm seeing TONS of those. In your middle pic I'm seeing indents (such as Timothy points out). Those are pressure issues. The finish is NOT damaged...but the wood underneath has been compressed = permanent. The finish is doing it's job (staying on the wood = protects from water). The middle picture has a WHITE SPOT that concerns me. This should NOT be there. It *could be an indication of adhesion failure. The fact that you can scrape off the finish with a finger nail is VERY concerning. Again, this could be adhesion failure (one layer of finish is NOT grabbing the other). Now my last question: when was the first WET/damp cleaning of this floor? What was used to clean it? Water? Hardwood floor cleaner? Mop/duster/vacuum? In a nut shell you have TWO concerns regarding adhesion failure (very concerning and must be addressed by Firm who did the work) and many 'polishing' issues with a MATTE finish. My personal option would have been: 1. First Coat WS EasyPrime (for white oak) 2. Coat of Loba 2K Supra AT - gloss 2.B. additional coat of Loba 2K Supra AT - Gloss 3. Coat of Loba 2K Supra AT - Satin Satin is as low as I go for low-gloss. It is MUCH easier to live with than ANY matte I've seen. And the 2K supra AT = SUPER TOUGH when used with THREE COATS of the actual finish. Three coats of Loba 2K Supra AT = $1-$2/sf MORE than what you *probably paid. Just be aware of that. To upgrade to three coats may require a snick more money. But the ADHESION FAILURE of your finish RIGHT NOW is going to be dealt with by the refinisher....at his/her own costs. The way to fix this = remove all finishes and start again with raw wood.