The Saga of Purseque Carpet

Manufactured by Beaulieu and

Sold Exclusively by Home Depot

I purchased the Puresque "Lake Forest" line carpet June 3, 2007. It was installed August 22, 2007 over a 1/2' - 8 pound pad. My wife and I are the only two living in our house and we are both are over 70. The carpet for unknown reasons got so dirty it had to be cleaned within a year by professional cleaners. The cleaners could not believe how dirty the carpet had gotten in a year. For some reason the carpet had collected and absorbed dirt into the carpet. Ware in the traffic areas was unbelievable. The professional carper cleaner suggested that I have a manufactures representative come and take a look at the condition of the carpet. I worked with my local Home Depot to arrange an inspection and on the second attempt I was successful. The new carpet was almost in as bad of a condition as the 13 year carpet that it replaced. Photos of the new Puresque carpet are included at the end.

After several months of dealings with my local Home Depot and the main office Home Depot I filled the following complaint with the better Business Bureau which outlines the whole history of this SAGA. This formal complaint is a public record. After several months of dealing with the Home Depot "Resolution Expeditor" which is obvious had no intentions of resolving the issue in a fair and equitable manner. I gave up and agreed to settle for the $300.00 token Home Depot gift certificate that was offered for my dissatisfaction with the product. Sixty days have passed and I have yet to hear one word from Home Depot.

COMPLAINT ACTIVITY REPORT Case # 27085760 Better Business Bureau, Inc.

Consumer Info: Lovelace, William Herzig Business Info: The Home Depot

139 Madison Cir

Locust Grove, VA 22508-5529

770 433-8211

Location Involved: (Same as above)

Consumer's Original Complaint :

I received the following reply from Home Depot Customer Care Resolution Expediter to an issue which is detailed below with the history of the issue. 01/29/2009William Lovelace139 Madison Circle Locus Grove, VA 22508Dear Mr. Lovelace, We are writing to extend our most sincere apology for any inconvenience you may have experienced related to your Carpet Installation with The Home Depot store #4660. It is our goal to provide a positive customer experience.The business partners have reviewed your case closely. In doing so, we have determined that based on the findings of the carpet inspections the defect is not manufactured or installed related. We will not be able to offer any repair or replacement of your carpet. We can offer you 10% off as a one time courtesy on your next carpet order. We apologize for not meeting your expectations but we are unable to fulfill your request. Please be assured that The Home Depot values you as a customer and looks forward to servicing all of your future home improvement needs. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.Sincerely, Joycelyn GriffinResolution ExpediterCustomer Care1-800-654-0688 extension 76130770-384-3668This formal reply does not address the issue in question. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------My January 24, 2009 email complaint to Home Depot Customer Care. I have been working with my local Home Depot since September 10, 2008 to address and resolve an issue regarding Beaulieu Puresque Carpet. The issue as my independent inspector puts it as follows "Rubbing my hands across the installed carpet found it to have a slightly tacky hand. The evidence suggests that there is a residue on the carpet causing it to attract and hold onto soiling?. November 18, 2008 I hand delivered a letter to my local Home Depot addressing the history of my issue with specific request.

Desired Settlement ID: Replacement

Product or Service: Beaulieu Puresque Carpet

Date Service Started: 4660-484

Purchase Price: 5311.00

Consumer's Desired Resolution:

We hereby request that Home Depot/Beaulieu Residential remove and replace the Beaulieu of America Puresque Carpet sold exclusively by Home Depot with a comparable grade carpet of the owners choice.

BBB Processing

02/12/2009 web BBB Case Received by BBB

02/12/2009 ih BBB Case Reviewed by BBB - Member

02/12/2009 Otto EMAIL Send Acknowledgement to Consumer

02/12/2009 Otto BBB Notify Business of Dispute - Member

02/27/2009 OttO BBB No response to first notice to member

02/27/2009 OttO BBB Consumer - Have You Heard From the Company

02/27/2009 OttO EMAIL Reminder of Dispute to Business - Member

02/27/2009 BBB MORE INFO RECEIVED FROM THE CONSUMER : Consumer indicated they have heard from the company, but the issue has not been resolved. Comments follow below:

Received phone call 2:41pm from Hope Depot customer Care dept, ref my BBB complaint. Wants HD customer Care rep look at carpet. Will get a call for appointment within 24-48 hours. Laruen will call back Tuesday to see if I have heard from anybody. She gave phone # and extension if I needed to contact her. She will be my contact on the carpet issue.

Called late Tuesday afternoon to tell her that no one had contacted me within the 24 to 48 hours as she promised. Also, let her know that I was still waiting for her follow up call on Tuesday to see if any one had contacted me. Lefty message on her answering machine.

Around 6:30pm received a call from Laruen (HD). Was still investigating the issue. Decided not to have a customer service come to home to look at carpet. Don't why. Would really like for them to see the carpet. She was talking about cause could be from the having the carpet professionally cleaned. That is a contentious issue and speculation. Requested me to fax letters and data that I had reference history of carpet. I faxed two packages. My information and that of the Lincoln, CA family, with identical issues with their carpet as I have with mine, late Wednesday night or early Thursday morning. Wanted her to have the info first thing Thursday morning. I

I am awaiting a response.

03/03/2009 otto BBB Consumer Requests Complaint Password

03/04/2009 WEB BBB RECEIVE BUSINESS RESPONSE : March 4, 2009

VIA EMAIL

Attn: Iris Harris

Resolution Dispute Specialist

Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Atlanta

503 Oak Place #590

Atlanta, GA 30349

Re: William Lovelace / Case Number 27085760

Dear Ms. Harris:

We acknowledge the receipt of your BBB case number 27085760.

On behalf of The Home Depot I apologize for any inconvenience Mr. Lovelace may have experienced in regard to his purchase and installation of special order carpet with our company.

The Home Depot has carefully reviewed all information pertaining to Mr. Lovelace's situation and would like to offer the following information. Mr. Lovelace was kind enough to submit several reports and correspondences to our office for review. The first report was from an inspection coordinated by the manufacturer and performed by a third party company on the 2nd of October, 2008. The results of this inspection were that ''There are physical and visual changes which occur through normal usage in addition to scuffing and are not considered deficiencies from manufacturing.'' It goes on to say, ''The carpet is performing up to industry standard.'' Understandably, the customer was not satisfied with this report (he expressed mistrust that it was coordinated by the manufacturer). Therefore, he hired a local inspector for a second opinion. This second report, from an inspection conducted the thirteenth of October, 2008, agreed that ''There were no manufacturing defects identified.'' However, as the customer has pointed out, this inspector did state that ''rubbing his hand across the installed carpet found it to have a slightly tacky hand. The evidence suggests that there is a residue on the carpet causing it to attract and hold onto soiling.'' At first glance, this might seem to appear to be a problem inherent to the carpet as the customer is suggesting, perhaps some sort of chemical misapplication. However, the next sentence in the report reads: ''The residue was not detected on the uninstalled piece of carpet.'' This means that something has to have happened to the installed carpet that has not happened with the uninstalled piece. The differences that come to mind between the installed carpet and the uninstalled carpet are that the installed carpet has been exposed to air, foot traffic, and a professional cleaning that (as the owner of the cleaning company has confirmed) included an application of two solutions (one alkaline and one acidic), which contained chemicals. The uninstalled carpet, on the other hand, has not been exposed to foot traffic or chemicals from cleaning, but has probably been exposed minimally to air.

To help us further determine the cause of the discoloration that the customer is unhappy with, we turned to the carpet cleaning report. The report says that ''Prior to cleaning carpet, heavy soils were found in all areas.'' Where did these heavy soils come from? One can only speculate, but let's look further at the report for direction. ''Carpet shows abrasions and wear in all traffic areas 'Traffic Lane Gray.''' According to article #265534 on ezinearticles.com:

Traffic Lane Gray is a condition where the traffic lanes in a home start to look darker than the rest of the carpet. It is different from regular soiling because the darkness is not caused by soil but by scratched carpet fibers that no longer reflect as much light as the rest of the carpeting. So if you have had your carpets cleaned and the carpet still looks dark or gray in the traffic areas you probably have Traffic Lane Gray.

This definition of Traffic Lane Gray was echoed by various websites, all of which confirmed that ''Traffic Lane Gray,'' the condition of the customer's carpet, is not caused by soils, dirt, or a chemical reaction, but by scratches on the surface of the carpet fibers. According to supersteamer.com, ''this usually happens first in the heavily walked on areas or traffic lanes.''

From all three of the above-referenced reports which the customer submitted to me, it is clear that the customer's dissatisfaction with their carpet's coloring is not a manufacturing defect. Going back to the customer's independently-arranged inspection, the report states ''The carpet shows the effects of the continual compressing of the pile attributable to foot traffic. That is to say that the carpet is shaded.'' This describes exactly the complaint that Mr. Lovelace was concerned about and also fits with the causes of Traffic Lane Gray. Unfortunately, according to many reports online, Traffic Lane Gray is not a reversible condition, as ''when these edges are worn down, through normal use, they do not reflect the same amount of light'' (from ezinearticles.com).

While we have been unable to locate any manufacturing defects which would warrant the replacement of the customer's carpet as requested, we have extended a 10% discount to the customer in the case that he would like to have his carpet replaced. We have also suggested an alternate resolution of a $300.00 Home Depot gift card to the customer. We have made these offerings not as an admission of guilt but as a customer service gesture and an act of goodwill. If Mr. Lovelace would like to continue researching the issue, as proposed in a letter to me dated March 2, 2009, he is welcome to do so. However, at the moment and until such time that contrary evidence is presented, The Home Depot has performed due diligence in this matter and considers this case closed.

Please know that it is The Home Depot's goal to satisfy all of our customers with our products and services. We look forward to assisting Mr. Lovelace with all of his future home improvement needs. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Lauren E. Regus

Resolution Expeditor

Customer Care

1-800-654-0688 x76473

03/05/2009 ih EMAIL Forward Business response to Consumer

03/06/2009 WEB BBB CONSUMER REBUTTAL TO BUSINESS RESPONSE : (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)

Attn: Iris Harris

Resolution Dispute Specialist

Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Atlanta

503 Oak Place #590

Atlanta, GA 30349

Re: Home Depot / BBB Complaint Case#27085760

Dear Ms. Harris:

I have read the March 4, 2009 response from Home Depot. I do not agree due diligence has been performed on the issue. The response is a rehash of my data and ignores the issue. It offers no factual data regarding the issue. Ms Regius briefly mentioned my March 2, 2009 letter to Home Depot and noted that I could continue researching the issue. My position is detailed in the March 2, 2009 letter which addresses the issue. It proposes a fair, factual and equitable resolution to the issue at a minimal cost.. Is Home Depot concerned what the results might yield? Think you for your assistance in this matter.

To: The Home Depot

Atlanta Consumer Affairs Dept.

2455 Paces Ferry Rd SE # B # 3

Atlanta, GA 30339-1834


Attention: Lauren R.


Subject: BBB Complaint Case#27085760(Ref#77-4588-27085760-3-210)


Dear Lauren,


I have been advised to propose the following options in order to resolve this carpet issue in a fair, reasonable, and equitable manner.


Stick to the issue, which is: ''Rubbing my hands across the installed carpet found it to have a slightly tacky hand. The evidence suggests that there is a residue on the carpet causing it to attract and hold onto soiling. The residue was not detected on the uninstalled piece. There were no manufacturing defects identified''. ''Prior to cleaning the carpet, heavy soils were found in all areas.''


Home Depot alleges this issue results from the way the carpet was professionally cleaned. No creditable data has been presented to justify this conclusion. I contend the carpet was cleaned in accordance with The Institute of Inspection, Cleaning and Restoration Certification (IICRC) guidelines. Let's stay with the issue and not throw spaghetti at the wall in hopes something will stick. Such as ''the traffic line gray'' issue that you brought up in our conservation on 2/28/2009.


Option one. I propose we have an independent lab, such as Independent Textile Testing Service, Inc. (ITTS) or other mutually agreeable lab, test a piece of the carpet in question to determine the composition of the residue and how it was created using all applicable industry testing standards. I will share half of the testing costs with Home Depot.


Option two. I propose we have a professional carpet cleaner, of mutual agreement,

clean one room of carpet. This cleaning should remove the residue that attracts and holds onto soiling, and you would no longer have the tacky hand when you rub the carpet. Have your local Home Depot customer service rep at the time of the cleaning review the process and results. I will share half of the cleaning costs with Home Depot. If the residue is not removed and the hand remains tacky when rubbing the carpet it would suggest that it is an issue with the carpet.


Either option would provide creditable and factual data to resolve the issue. If Home Depot is correct in their assumption I will withdraw my complaint and consider the issue resolved. On the other hand if there is an issue with the carpet Home Depot would agree to would remove and replace the Puresque Carpet with a comparable grade carpet of the owner's choice. I welcome any alternatives Home Depot may propose toward a fair, factual and equitable resolution.


Sincerely,


William H. Lovelace, Sr.


03/06/2009 ih BBB CONSUMER REBUTTAL TO BUSINESS RESPONSE : Dear Ms Harris,

I just tried to look at the web page for this complaint to check on the status. Much to my surprise I found the message "PAGE NOT FOUND". This issue has NOT been resolved and should remain open. I am in the process of talking with Home Depot, but no resolution has been reached. As of 2/28/2009 Home Depot told me they had until 3/4/2009 to respond to my BBB Complaint Case#27085760(Ref#77-4588-27085760-3-210). Please allow me to use the ONLINE COMPLAINT system to view the details of my case. Many thanks

William H. Lovelace, Sr.

139 Madison Circle

Locust Grove, VA 22508

email: gezzer15@comcast.net

Desired resolution: Remove and replace the carpet with a comparable grade carpet of the owners choice.

03/06/2009 ih MAIL Manually Forward Consumer Rebuttal to Business

03/11/2009 WEB BBB RECEIVED BUSINESS' ADDITIONAL RESPONSE : March 11, 2009

VIA EMAIL

Attn: Iris Harris

Resolution Dispute Specialist

Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Atlanta

503 Oak Place #590

Atlanta, GA 30349

Re: William Lovelace / Case Number 27085760

Dear Ms. Harris:

We acknowledge the receipt of your BBB rebuttal number 27085760.

On behalf of The Home Depot I apologize for any inconvenience Mr. Lovelace may have experienced in regard to his purchase and installation of special order carpet with our company.

The Home Depot has carefully reviewed all information pertaining to Mr. Lovelace's situation and would like to inform you that we contacted the customer for a sample of the original carpet to be chemically tested. However, the customer does not have any of the original carpet in its uninstalled state (he has since had it installed); therefore, we do not have a pure sample of the original carpet in the state in which it was sent to the customer. Testing a piece of the installed carpet would not be indicative of what was originally sent to the customer, as it has been exposed to foot traffic and chemicals from cleaning. We have also communicated with the manufacturer to see if any of the original bolt of carpet exists, and unfortunately it doesn't. We apologize that we will therefore be unable to perform a chemical test on the original carpet that was sent to the customer as he had requested.

We do value Mr. Lovelace as a customer, and as a customer service gesture, we would like to extend the offer of a partial refund in the amount of $300.00, or a 10% discount on a new carpet order if the customer would like to take this route.

Please know that it is The Home Depot's goal to satisfy all of our customers with our products and services. We look forward to assisting Mr. Lovelace with all of his future home improvement needs. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Lauren E. Regus

Resolution Expeditor

Customer Care

1-800-654-0688 x76473

Reference: SAP 5285763

03/19/2009 ih EMAIL Send Business' Rebuttal Response to Consumer

03/25/2009 WEB BBB CONSUMER SUBSEQUENT RESPONSE : (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)

March 25, 2009

Attn: Iris Harris

Resolution Dispute Specialist

Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Atlanta

503 Oak Place #590

Atlanta, GA 30349

Re: Home Depot / BBB Complaint Case#27085760

Dear Ms. Harris:

Research of the subject carpet reveals, in July 2006, Home Depot introduced a new line of carpeting, Puresque, which has salts that are chemically bonded to its fibers. The carpet is manufactured from recycled plastic bottles. During the manufacturing process, the backing and fiber is imbued with an organic salt solution. This solution continually reacts to the pressure from walking on the carpet and the organic compounds released neutralize odors without allegedly pulling odors into the fabric of the carpet. The new technology is supposed to chemically absorb and decompose gases from the source of the odor over a period of time. Home Depot says the salts "act like magnets to trap and destroy odors''.


Ms Regus did contact me for a sample of the original carpet to be chemically tested. It is unreasonable to assume an original sample would be retained for testing purposes after this length of time. An original sample of the carpet was tested by the manufacturer and our independent inspector in October 2008. Both found no ''Manufacturing Defects''. However, the original carpet had not been exposed to how the organic salt solution continually reacts to the pressure from walking on the carpet and how the organic compounds released neutralize odors without allegedly pulling the odors into the fabric of the carpet. This was the rationale for chemically testing a sample of the installed carpet, which Ms Regus rejected.

Ms Regus noted our carpet cleaning report stated "Prior to cleaning carpet, heavy soils were in all areas". Then she poses the question; "Where did these heavy soils come from?" I would also like to know the answer to her question. We are not dirty, filthy people as may be implied. My wife is 73 and ambulatory, I am 75. We pay a lady $75 weekly to clean our home. In addition we purchased/installed a $9700 Trane energy efficient HVAC system from Home Depot May 2008, which included the ''Trane Clean Effects'' whole house air filter system.

Our independent inspection report states ''Rubbing my hands across the installed carpet found it to have a slightly tacky hand. The evidence suggests that there is a residue on the carpet causing it to attract and hold onto soiling. The residue was not detected on the uninstalled piece.'' Ms Regus suggest this issue was caused by the carpet cleaner. Truck-mounted hot-water extraction method was used to clean the carpet. This method is designed to wash away contaminants such as; soils, carcinogens and other pollutants within your carpet to promote a healthier environment without leaving a sticky residue that can cause rapid re-soiling.

Research reveals hot water extraction, often referred to as "steam cleaning", is the required method for deep, restorative cleaning Beaulieu of America carpets the manufacturer of subject carpet. Professional cleaning was performed according to the professional Institute of Inspection, Cleaning and Restoration Certification (IICRC) Carpet Cleaning Standard S001 using carpet care products that have been tested and certified by the Carpet and Rug Institute's Seal of Approval Program as required by the manufacturer. The manufacturer warranty requires their carpet be professionally cleaned by hot-water extraction every twelve (12) to twenty four (24) months. Certainly the carpet manufacturer would not make inconsistent requirements for cleaning their own product. The facts do not support Ms Regus allegations that cleaning the carpet in accordance with manufacturer directions contributed to the issue in the original complaint. Our professional opinion and real time experience with this carpet leaves us to conclude the odor absorbing chemical reactions in the carpet absorbs and holds onto soiling and residues.

Mr. Douglas Cummimg, 201 Wyatt Ct., Lincoln, CA 95648, purchased the same Purseque carpet, invoice #5040881, PO # 71505565, June 6, 2007 from Lincoln, CA Home Depot. My carpet was purchased, June 6, 2007, in Virginia. Mr. Cummings experienced the same identical issue with his carpet prior to and after professional cleaning. The local Home Depot in Lincoln, CA acknowledged his complaint and agreed, to what Mr. Cummings considered, a fair and reasonable settlement. Ms Regus is aware of this issue. However, she has chosen to ignore it. I faxed Ms Regus all the inspection reports, carpet tests, and other pertinent correspondence that I have received from Mr. Cummings, who is an attorney. Other similar cases may exist which we are not aware of.

Our local Home Depot carpet department manager agrees there is an issue with the carpet performance. He has been very cooperative and is sorry he couldn't be of help since he recommended the Purseque carpet. It was the first purchase of Purseque carpet, a new product, sold at their store. He suggested we contact Home Depot main office for help with the issue. My first contact with the main office was a very unpleasant experience. The issue was rejected very quick, without due diligence, by a very rude lady stating the problem was caused by the professional carpet cleaner, then refused to discuss the issue further and hung up the phone. At this point I filed my complaint with the Better Business Bureau. It appears all the resolution folks at Home Depot sing the same song 'It's the Carpet Cleaner''.

In view of the foregoing undisputable facts we contend removal and replacement of subject carpet with a comparable grade carpet of the owner's choice is a fair and reasonable request.

Sincerely,

William H. Lovelace, Sr., PE

03/25/2009 ih MAIL Manually Forward Consumer Rebuttal to Business

03/27/2009 WEB BBB RECEIVED BUSINESS' ADDITIONAL RESPONSE : March 26, 2009

VIA EMAIL

Attn: Iris Harris

Resolution Dispute Specialist

Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Atlanta

503 Oak Place #590

Atlanta, GA 30349

Re: William Lovelace / Case Number 27085760

Dear Ms. Harris:

We acknowledge the receipt of your BBB rebuttal number 27085760.

On behalf of The Home Depot I apologize for any inconvenience Mr. Lovelace may have experienced in regard to his purchase of special order carpet with our company.

The Home Depot has carefully reviewed all information pertaining to Mr. Lovelace's situation. While we regret that the customer is unhappy with the condition of his carpet, all reports have declined to indicate any manufacturing defects of any sort in the carpet. Perhaps if the inspections or the carpet cleaning report had stated that there were manufacturing issues with the carpet, we might be more inclined to honor the customer's request to replace the carpet. However, at this point, all information points to no manufacturing defects. Our firm and final offer to the customer is either a $300 Home Depot gift card for his dissatisfaction or a 10% discount on another carpet order, should he choose to have his carpet replaced.

Please know that it is The Home Depot's goal to satisfy all of our customers with our products and services. We look forward to assisting Mr. Lovelace with all of his future home improvement needs. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Lauren E. Regus

Resolution Expeditor

Customer Care

1-800-654-0688 x76473

04/02/2009 ih EMAIL Send Business' Rebuttal Response to Consumer

04/07/2009 WEB BBB CONSUMER SUBSEQUENT RESPONSE : (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)

April 8, 2009

Attn: Iris Harris

Resolution Dispute Specialist

Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Atlanta

503 Oak Place #590

Atlanta, GA 30349

Re: Home Depot / BBB Complaint Case#27085760

Dear Ms. Harris:

We acknowledge receipt of Home Depot's March 26, 2009 rebuttal. We reject this offer as non responsive and intentionally ignoring the issue of the original complaint. We will proceed with all legal avenues available to resolve this issue. It is inconceivable how Ms Regus can make a decision sitting in an Atlanta, GA office far removed from the product. A Google search revealed several Home Depot carpet complaints. All were rejected because no manufacturing defects were found. It sounds like Home Depots standard basis for rejecting carpet claims. There was never a good faith attempt to resolve this issue. Let the history of this complaint speak for itself.

February 12, 2009, we filed BBB Complaint Case#27085760. The issue of this complaint, identified by our independent inspector, was ''Rubbing his hands across the installed carpet found it to have a slightly tacky hand. The evidence suggests that there is a residue on the carpet causing it to attract and hold onto soiling. The residue was not detected on the uninstalled piece. There were no manufacturing defects identified''. We wish to state, for Ms Regus purposes, manufacturing defects were never an issue in this complaint. The issue is the performance of the carpet after being installed and exposed to chemical reactions in the carpet caused by foot traffic, daily elements, and the manufacturers required professional cleaning.

February 21, 2009, we received phone call from Ms Regus reference BBB complaint. Ms Regus wanted a customer care representative to inspect the carpet. She stated we would get a call for appointment within 24 to 48 hours.

February 25, 2009, we called Ms Regus to inform her no one had contacted us within the 24 to 48 hours as she promised. We left a message on her answering machine.

February 26, 2009, received call from Ms Regus. She was investigating the issue and elected not to have a Home Depot customer service representative come to our home to inspect carpet. She concluded the issue was caused from the carpet being professionally cleaned. She requested a fax of all letters and data we had reference history of carpet. I faxed two packages, my information and that of a Lincoln, CA family, with same identical Home Depot carpet issues.

March 2, 2009, we faxed Ms Regus a letter suggesting two options which might be used to resolve this issue. The letter was ignored.

March 4, 2009, Ms Regus responded to BBB Complaint Case#27085760. The response contained a summary analysis of letters, inspection reports, and data faxed Ms Regus February 26, 2009, reference history of carpet. It mentioned our March 2, 2009, letter. From this analysis Ms Regus concluded after due diligence the issue resulted from professionally cleaning the carpet, and there were no manufacturing defects which would warrant replacement of the carpet.

March 6, 2009, we responded to BBB Complaint Case#27085760 dated March 4, 2009. We did not agree due diligence had been performed on the issue. Ms Regus briefly mentioned my March 2, 2009 letter to Home Depot and noted that we could continue researching the issue at our pleasure. My position was detailed in the March 2, 2009 letter which addresses the issue.

It proposes a fair, factual and equitable resolution to the issue at a minimal cost. Ms Regus response did not address the issue. Manufacturing defects were never an issue in this complaint. We again directed Ms Regus attention to the issue of this complaint, identified by our independent inspector ''Rubbing his hands across the installed carpet found it to have a slightly tacky hand. The evidence suggests that there is a residue on the carpet causing it to attract and hold onto soiling. The residue was not detected on the uninstalled piece. There were no manufacturing defects identified''. Ms Regus alleged the issue results from the way the carpet was professionally cleaned. We included in our March 2, 2009, letter two options which might be used to resolve the carpet cleaning issue. This was included for the official BBB record, and for official response from Ms Regus.

March 11, 2009, Ms Regus responded to BBB Complaint Case#27085760 dated March 6, 2009, stating ''The Home Depot has carefully reviewed all information pertaining to Mr. Lovelace's situation and would like to inform you that we contacted the customer for a sample of the original carpet to be chemically tested. However, the customer does not have any of the original carpet in its uninstalled state (he has since had it installed); therefore, we do not have a pure sample of the original carpet in the state in which it was sent to the customer. Testing a piece of the installed carpet would not be indicative of what was originally sent to the customer, as it has been exposed to foot traffic and chemicals from cleaning.'' (For Ms Regus information the carpet was purchased to be installed not to set in storage.) The uninstalled carpet sample had been tested two times. Once by Home Depot, and once buy our independent inspector. The intent was to test a piece of carpet that had been exposed to normal wear and a cleaning process to obtain data regarding residue found on the carpet.

March 25, 2009, we responded to BBB Complaint Case#27085760 dated March 11, 2009. We presented facts relating to Home Depot's introduction of the new Puresque carpet which has salts chemically bonded to its fibers. How the carpet is manufactured from recycled plastic bottles, and during the manufacturing process, how the backing and fiber is imbued with an organic salt solution. How the solution continually reacts to the pressure from walking on the carpet and the organic compounds released neutralize odors without allegedly pulling odors into the fabric of the carpet. The new technology is supposed to chemically absorb and decompose gases from the source of the odor over a period of time. We addressed the technology used in hot water extraction cleaning, often referred to as "steam cleaning"; the required method for deep, restorative cleaning of Beaulieu of America carpets the manufacturer of subject carpet. Professional cleaning was performed according to the professional Institute of Inspection, Cleaning and Restoration Certification (IICRC) Carpet Cleaning Standard S001 using carpet care products that have been tested and certified by the Carpet and Rug Institute's Seal of Approval Program as required by the manufacturer. The manufacturer warranty requires their carpet be professionally cleaned by hot-water extraction every twelve (12) to twenty four (24) months. We stated facts that do not support Ms Regus allegations that cleaning the carpet in accordance with manufacturer directions contributed to the issue in the original complaint. We presented data, which Ms Regus has copies of, relating to Mr. Douglas Cummimg, 201 Wyatt Ct., Lincoln, CA 95648, who purchased the same Purseque carpet, invoice #5040881, PO # 71505565, June 6, 2007 from Lincoln, CA Home Depot, and experienced the same identical issue with his carpet prior to and after professional cleaning. We informed her that the local Home Depot carpet department manager agrees we should not experience this problem.

March 26, 2009, Ms Regus responded to BBB Complaint Case#27085760 dated March 25, 2009. Ms Regus ignored the technology used in the manufacturing process and the manufacturers required professional cleaning criteria. Apparently Ms Regus could not defend her argument that the professional carpet cleaner caused the carpet issue in view of the facts presented in our March 25, 2009 response. She refused to acknowledge Mr. Cummings experienced the same issue with his Puresque carpet. Ms Regus ignored her own local Home Depot carpet department manager who felt the carpet should be replaced.

Sincerely,

William H. Lovelace, Sr., PE

04/08/2009 kh EMAIL Forward Consumer Rebuttal to Business

04/13/2009 WEB BBB RECEIVED BUSINESS' ADDITIONAL RESPONSE : April 13, 2009

VIA EMAIL

Attn: Iris Harris

Resolution Dispute Specialist

Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Atlanta

503 Oak Place #590

Atlanta, GA 30349

Re: William Lovelace / Case Number 27085760

Dear Ms. Harris:

We acknowledge the receipt of your BBB rebuttal 27085760.

On behalf of The Home Depot I apologize for any inconvenience Mr. Lovelace may have experienced in regard to his purchase and installation of special order carpet with our company.

As previously stated in our correspondence on March 26, 2009, The Home Depot and our business partners have carefully reviewed the chronology of events surrounding the purchase and installation of the special order carpet, and have verified that the carpet does not have any manufacture defects per the independent inspections reports. Based on our findings, Mr. Lovelace's request for the carpet to be removed and replaced is being respectfully denied. As a final offer, The Home Depot is offering the Mr. Lovelace a 10% discount on a carpet reorder or a $300.00 Home Depot gift card for his dissatisfaction with the product. We apologize if this offer does not meet Mr. Lovelace's expectations.

Please know that it is The Home Depot's goal to satisfy all of our customers with our products and services. We look forward to assisting Mr. Lovelace with all of his future home improvement needs. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Lauren E. Regus

Quality Assurance Associate

Customer Care

1-800-654-0688 x76473

04/15/2009 ih EMAIL Send Business' Rebuttal Response to Consumer

04/22/2009 WEB BBB DISPUTE RESOLVED- WITH LETTER : (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

My attorney advises me to accept the $300.00 Home Depot gift card. He advises it would cost more to pursue a legal path than what we would recover. He states it is a crying shame that the little person has very little recourse against a large corporation such as Home Depot. They can do anything they want and get away with it. The customer be damned

William H. Lovelace, Sr. PE

04/23/2009 OttO BBB Inform Business - Case Closed RESOLVED

04/23/2009 OttO BBB Case Closed RESOLVED