Floor failure in the gym

We are involved in a sports and recreation center. There is Solid Maple, Vinyl Composite Tile, and Carpet on the floors. The site is 4 years old, but the building opened 8 months ago. The wood flooring is showing early signs of expansion, and the VCT is de-bonding.
 
The evidence is that moisture vapor intrusion has been deleterious to the final product. The documents showed that Calcium Chloride tests (ASTM F1869) were taken at appropriate times. The wood-flooring manufacturer accepted the CaCl results, and gave the go ahead with the installation.
 
There is a controversy in the floor covering industry as to the proper test protocol for the moisture condition of concrete. F1869, the Calcium Chloride (moisture Dome Test) or ASTM F2420, Relative humidity test (probe test). There is a place for both protocols.
 
The Forensic Flooring Expert must opine as to who is at fault. This opinion becomes more convoluted, when it is discovered that the design of the sub-structure is contra-indicated by the manufacturer of the floor covering. The industry standards were inadequate and did not prevent this outcome.