The pool constuction began October 2012. Our inground pool was completed in May 2013. Before completion we had multiple issues which were resolved such as the lack of two trenches; one for a gas line and one for an electrical line was not dug as per code. Our finished patio had to be re-dug in order to pass the project with the City. It had been stipulated in the contract that 2 trenches were required. We ordered an 8 by 10 feet concrete pad in order to place our cabana on it. AquaSpa/Royal Stone made the pad 6 inches too small and had to repair it as well. Once the pool was completed in May 2013 we had multiple issues with this company. Equipment was not properly taught to us and we were left contacting friends and family that had similar equipment for advice. Our biggest issue was that there were multiple stones left beneath the liner after AquaSpa/Royal Stone installed the pool. There was water buildup between the foundation and liner and AquaSpa/Royal Stone said there was no water builldup . The liner was removed twice by AquaSpa/Royal Stone in order to remove stones beneath the liner but the issues were never resolved. After many months of unresolved issues, multiple emails and calls we fired AquaSpa/Royal Stone. We consulted another pool company and the following was discovered•The liner was removed and multiple small holes caused by the stones beneath the liner were discovered. AquaSpa had not properly cleaned the foundation and tracking prior to installing the liner. Additional tears on the liner in the skimmer area that had been cut and apparently patched incorrectly by AquaSpa when liner was installed. This area was below water level and was a source where water had been penetrating. Two additional tears caused by an AquaSpa employee using our central home vacuum cleaner to vacuum the stones from behind the liner.• Multiple drill holes around the skimmer because the liner had been detached and reattached by AquaSpa twice prior after the first installation in order to remove stones from beneath liner. They were not able to rematch the existing holes causing the skimmer to not be sealed properly therefore causing water to penetrate• An abundance of calcification on the cement surface due to water buildup behind the liner• The cement foundation was compromised. There were holes in the cement base that had not been properly repaired by AquaSpa with hydraulic cement prior to installing the liner this also attributed to why there were stones under the liner.• Hayward LED lights were not installed as per the electrical building code.• The junction box is not waterproof and both are located below ground and too close to pool edge. The junction box should have been installed above ground. Corrosion of the wiring has occurred. The cord seal kit, which is part of the pool light installation, was not installed. Sump tube was constructed incorrectly. It should have been the depth of the pool however it is only 2 ½ feet in depth and our pool is over 4 feet in depth. The tube lacks a proper base plate and the top plate is held down to the ground with duct tape• The wrong anchors were used for the ladder installation. An interlock anchor should have been used instead of the ones present, which are concrete ones. We have incurred additional costs in order to repair the mistakes of AquaSpa/Royal Stone and the owner Pino should be held accountable for his errors.
- Approximate cost of services:
- $100,000.00
- Company Response
We at AquaSpa Pools & Landscape Design are dedicated to amazing customer service. We have extensive knowledge and experience designing and installing all types of inground pools. Unfortunately in this particular job we ran into very unusual disagreements with this customer. Despite this we returned a number of times in an effort to keep them happy, even replacing some damages done by them that were not under warranty. In a further effort to resolve our disagreements we arranged to have the manufacturer come to the site to meet with us and the homeowner to inspect that the pool was installed as per their specifications. The manufacturer never got the chance to do this inspection because at that point the homeowner refused the service and denied us access to the site. Some time later we received a demand for an unsubstantiated large sum of money and then we see this review that does not coincide at all with our records of this job. We feel we have made every effort to resolve this and are disappointed to see the homeowner has gone this route.