My brother bought a house with neglected hardwood floors. The previous owner had pets that urinated on the carpeting seeped into the hardwood in about 3 spots. Floor is 35 yrs old. The stains are the size of a volleyball, softball, baseball.

He paid to have the floors sanded to bare floor, and refinished with stain, poly. After the job, the 3 spots are STILL there. Maybe a little smaller. If he does this for a living, wouldnt you think he would know that the boards would have to be replaced? It is a top nailed floor. He put down a couple boards in a closet that was not finished all the way. 1 sqft of boards. So he had the boards.

What makes me mad, that the guy staining the floor just went ahead and went over the flawed areas thinking that it wouldnt be noticed. What CRAP! They should of inspected the floor after sanding and replaced those boards before finishing. The floor looks great except for those eyesores.

Do you agree that this contractor needs to comeback and replace those boards? Can they be stained and finished first before he installs them. Or does he have to redo the entire job? Any help would be appreciated.

I wasn't there to here the terms of the agreement between the previous owner, and his finisher, and neither were you. I know that people trying to sell their house tend to be a bit frugal, so maybe there was a mutual agreement to just resand, and hope for the best. Did your brother see these spots, AND butythe house, knowing they were there, without placing a provision in the contract? Seems a little late in the game to me.
How many times had the floor been refinished, prior to this last time? So many questions need answers before to go hanging the installer, who may have done exactly what he was paid to do.

Let me try to explain it better.

My brother bought the house with carpets. As soon as he settled, he pulled all the carpets up. He noticed hardwood flooring. Decided to get get them refinished. They have never been refinished before.

He was concerned of the urine stains that I described. He hired the contractor to repair damaged areas and refinish. If I am not mistaked he said that the urine stains would be sanded out. He added a couple boards in a closet. Sanded a few boards that cupped near a wall. Inspected the entire floor.

At the end of the day, the floor should look great and all the very obvious problems should be gone. Well the floor looks great, but the very obvious pet stains are still there which ruins it. It is in the family room.

He should of replaced those boards once the sanding didnt work before he stained etc. Cant miss the obvious defects.

My brother is on trip right now but when he returns, I will find out what the agreement was. I do know that he pointed out all the areas of concern to him. Those were the biggest.

If it was my house, the contractor would be called back.

IF the contractor's agreement was to replace all water and urine damaged flooring, then yes, he should have done that. Your brother would be in his rights to call the contractor back to fix/repair the work he agreed to do. Since none of us know what the arrangement was, it is impossible to make a judgement call.

When I have been presented with this same situation, I ALWAYS recommend replacement of the affected flooring because I know sanding will not remove the stains nor the smell. Occasionally, some customers do not want to pay for the repairs and agree to just accept the outcome, whatever it turns out to be.