Email From 2004 Shows Fred Wanke Dishing On Mer-Kote’s Sealers and The Old Mer-Kote Warranty

Warranty signed by Krubinski as salesperson for Mer-Kote to the HOA where he owned a unit and was President of the HOA
Warranty signed by Krubinski as salesperson for Mer-Kote to the HOA where he owned a unit and was President of the HOA. Here we see that the original applicator has to perform the maintenance work, leaving the buyer with no choice as to using a lower priced Mer-Kote applicator. Looks dirty to me…what do you think?
I found the email below from 2004 while rifling through some files…
It shows Fred Wanke talking to a source of mine who got info from Fred on the “warranty” written by Mer-Kote.
With David Krubinski/Mazor as the “salesperson” for Mer-Kote, and as a hidden owner of Mer-Kote’s largest applicator-WICR Inc, Krubinski’s trap is set for unsuspecting architects and buyers to be lured in with the appearance of a “Ten Year Warranty”.
I put quotes around ten year warranty because I feel it is not a warranty but a maintenance contract. It’s designed to basically give the applicator a way to pry your money away, playing on your fear of losing your warranty. What it took away was freedom of choice to shop.
“SuperSpy Bill,
Good one.
I talked with Fred at WICR in San Diego last week, Mer-Ko’s biggest applicator and have even more juicy info.  Fred showed me Mer-Kos 10 year warranty and we talked about it at length.
Bottom line is that they write a 10 year warranty for the applicator who does the original job only (so he gets the maintenance contract), and that the warranty says you must reseal the decks every three (3) years for it to remain in effect.
Also the job must have been designed according to Mer-Ko’s published architectural details and substrate requirements for the warranty to be effective. 
This drives the architects to spec the product and design it for Mer-Ko so they can get the 10 year warranty.  This program is great for new or recon jobs but makes it impossible for them to give a ten year warranty on rehab/repair jobs.
Fred says Mer-Ko has made a living off of this warranty for years. (See sample warranty above) I have given the warranty to X for X’s information and am trying to get Fred and X together to discuss the issue. 
Another interesting point – Fred says the Mer-Ko topcoat must be resealed every three years because it completely burns up by then.  This is the most damaging testimony you can get about their sealer.  
Fred also wants to be listed as an additional insured on our liability policy to shield himself.  He says Mer-Ko does this.  He has discontinued business with Excellent Coatings because they will not list him as additional insuered and is now telling the architects he knows “why spec Excel Coat if they cannot list their contractors on their policy”.
This is how they are playing the game now.”
So we have evidence that Krubinski was a partner with Fred Wanke at WICR and is still a hidden partner/owner…
we know Krubinski was the salesperson for Mer-Kote while being a secret owner of WICR.
Krubisnki writes a warranty that drives sales of paint through WICR, bringing him income from that, as well as deriving income from WICR’s selling the job for labor and material costs. The applicator can pump a lot of residual income out of an HOA-they want to keep their “ten year warranty” so they continue to have to pay the original applicator (huh, strangely, WICR was Mer-Kote’s biggest applicator- what a coincidence hey?). The simple trap is the requirement to use only the original applicator…a seeming violation of Magnusson Moss Act?
This also seems to show that Fred knows the product he’s selling wasn’t very good-the paint burns up in three years, and he’s using Mer-Kote’s liability policy to shield himself. (Bet that ended with Krubinski’s being bounced out Mer-Kote’s door).
We also see evidence of Fred’s discussion about not using Excellent Coatings products because they wouldn’t list him as an additional insured. Well, why would they?
Lastly, we simply see Fred talking again, behind his bosses back…possibly because even Fred knew then that he was in what one might call an unethical situation…?
What do you think readers?

Tell Us Your Opinion!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s