It can mean that they take responsibility for the recommendation they made. It can also mean they feel responsible for both their own end customers and their own brand. It certainly shouldn't mean that as soon as something goes wrong, they immediately distance themselves from the person they themselves recommended, leaving the customer of their own product they recommended out in the cold.MathiasS said:
A company that acts that way is acting really poorly, IMO.
You have a way of interpreting things as if you read the Bible like the devil.thomasx said:
And I assume it's my post you're commenting on since you're quoting parts of it.
What I'm saying is that just because a manufacturer, who doesn't deliver or perform the work themselves, asks or recommends the customer to contact any of the companies in the customer's area that normally trades with the manufacturer, it doesn't necessarily mean they're recommending this company over other companies in the industry.
I believe it's quite common in our Swedish language and in many similar cases to express something like recommending contacting the nearest sales point, companies representing their product, or similar expressions.
It's rare and unusual for a manufacturer, if there are even such cases, to guarantee or take responsibility for a reseller's or contractor's work. It falls entirely on the one who sold and delivered to provide this guarantee, which is in full accordance with applicable law.
I don't know, any more than you do, how specifically the recommendation was made and the details of its implications.
Possibly the manufacturer can answer that.
Agree with thomasx that if a manufacturer is to recommend a contractor, the manufacturer should also have some knowledge that the contractor maintains a certain quality in their work; not just that the contractor buys their products.
We can keep arguing about this for a long time. There might be more people who will read the thread ...........
If we're going to be picky, the manufacturer only writes that the company "mostly got good references," not that the manufacturer has good experiences with the company. Since you're picky with words, let's continue with that.....
If we leave for a moment what the manufacturer "should" do and instead stick to the facts, guarantees should be directed at the craftsman who did the job. And here we go again, blaming someone else than the one it actually concerns.
Why doesn't the OP expose the craftsman who delivered a poorly executed job instead, which would be the most correct thing.
For example, if a tiler uses LIP's products and installs them incorrectly with leakage as a result. Should we then expose LIP and demand that they replace and redo the job? (just a comparison)
Perhaps after all, we should try to stick to the rules we have in Sweden and let the responsibility fall where it belongs. Then maybe the OP should have reacted and done a bit more to get the executing craftsman to take their responsibility earlier.
As an OT point, I personally don't understand why one would use this mass/surface on stairs because it doesn't look nice even in perfect execution. But that's another matter.....
If we're going to be picky, the manufacturer only writes that the company "mostly got good references," not that the manufacturer has good experiences with the company. Since you're picky with words, let's continue with that.....
If we leave for a moment what the manufacturer "should" do and instead stick to the facts, guarantees should be directed at the craftsman who did the job. And here we go again, blaming someone else than the one it actually concerns.
Why doesn't the OP expose the craftsman who delivered a poorly executed job instead, which would be the most correct thing.
For example, if a tiler uses LIP's products and installs them incorrectly with leakage as a result. Should we then expose LIP and demand that they replace and redo the job? (just a comparison)
Perhaps after all, we should try to stick to the rules we have in Sweden and let the responsibility fall where it belongs. Then maybe the OP should have reacted and done a bit more to get the executing craftsman to take their responsibility earlier.
As an OT point, I personally don't understand why one would use this mass/surface on stairs because it doesn't look nice even in perfect execution. But that's another matter.....
"2. We have recommended the contractor in Stockholm,
...
at the same time we can announce that the contractor in question has not had or does not have any connection to our company."
Nice contradiction there, they have no connection at all to a contractor they themselves recommended. So bad!
One thing we now know for sure, a contractor recommended by DuraCoat is not to be trusted, therefore neither is DuraCoat. Harsh, but true.
Then a lot of questions arise about TS's actions. How has it been complained, has any complaint been made to ARN? Why has TS allowed the decay to continue for four years without taking action to save the staircase?
Of course, it is the one who sold the product and the one who installed it on TS's behalf that has the responsibility towards TS. This "contractor" (read scammer) should of course be exposed at least as much as DuraCoat.
That DuraCoat then does not take action and ensure that a contractor they recommended corrects an incorrectly installed product is bad. That DuraCoat in a case like this cannot even consider providing new material for repair is even worse.
As I said...
...
at the same time we can announce that the contractor in question has not had or does not have any connection to our company."
Nice contradiction there, they have no connection at all to a contractor they themselves recommended. So bad!
One thing we now know for sure, a contractor recommended by DuraCoat is not to be trusted, therefore neither is DuraCoat. Harsh, but true.
Then a lot of questions arise about TS's actions. How has it been complained, has any complaint been made to ARN? Why has TS allowed the decay to continue for four years without taking action to save the staircase?
Of course, it is the one who sold the product and the one who installed it on TS's behalf that has the responsibility towards TS. This "contractor" (read scammer) should of course be exposed at least as much as DuraCoat.
That DuraCoat then does not take action and ensure that a contractor they recommended corrects an incorrectly installed product is bad. That DuraCoat in a case like this cannot even consider providing new material for repair is even worse.
As I said...
No Thomas, what you now know is that a contractor recommended by Duracoat can make mistakes. No other conclusions can be drawn from this.thomasx said:
Moreover, this statement implies some reverse logic that is also not true. Just because a recommended contractor makes a mistake doesn't mean everyone else Duracoat recommends does too...?
And what do you really expect these companies to have in terms of connection other than that one works with the other's products? Being some sort of official reseller can hardly be a requirement just because one works with a manufacturer's products? This builder surely does much else too, beyond stair renovation.
If I had sold a product and then recommended a craftsman who messed up, I would definitely make sure to fix this for the customer.
From that, I would have learned a lesson. Either I stop recommending him and only recommend companies that I know are reliable. Because they do exist. Everyone can make mistakes, but reliable companies make it right when they make a mistake. Alternatively, I would stop recommending companies altogether. But I would at least make sure the customer got a decent staircase.
In my opinion, Duracoat has no idea what they are recommending and just use someone who has bought a lot of products from them. They have done a poor job and should have checked the company better that they recommended. Help the end customer and do better research next time is my advice.
If the company had a bit of backbone, they would have participated in the discussion here. They created a user, made two posts, received some backlash, and asked the moderator to insert their arguments instead and had several critical posts deleted.
From that, I would have learned a lesson. Either I stop recommending him and only recommend companies that I know are reliable. Because they do exist. Everyone can make mistakes, but reliable companies make it right when they make a mistake. Alternatively, I would stop recommending companies altogether. But I would at least make sure the customer got a decent staircase.
In my opinion, Duracoat has no idea what they are recommending and just use someone who has bought a lot of products from them. They have done a poor job and should have checked the company better that they recommended. Help the end customer and do better research next time is my advice.
If the company had a bit of backbone, they would have participated in the discussion here. They created a user, made two posts, received some backlash, and asked the moderator to insert their arguments instead and had several critical posts deleted.
If you hire a contractor recommended by DuraCoat, you cannot rely on getting a contractor who applies the product correctly or who makes it right when something goes wrong. Turning to DuraCoat leaves you empty-handed. We've now seen that. In my world, this means you cannot trust DuraCoat.MathiasS said:
How you can conclude that all contractors make mistakes just because DuraCoat's recommendations are not trustworthy is probably the biggest logical flaw in this entire thread. You might very well get a good contractor if you choose one recommended by DuraCoat, but you cannot rely on it.
You're welcome to think that a contractor who does a lot of business with a supplier, and is recommended by the supplier, has no connection to that supplier. I think precisely the opposite because they have a business relationship, and the supplier gives the contractor work through recommendations. To me, that's a strong connection.
Hi, it's unfortunate that the company didn't fix the faults and issues with your stairs.E Ejduratrapp said:
From the images, I see that it's too thickly coated with epoxy, and the stairs weren't cleaned properly, which is why stones have come loose, and parts have cracked. Very sloppily done work.
Then this needs to be addressed immediately, which becomes a more difficult process, and for that reason, a visit was missed.
Wet surfaces adhere poorly, as do dust and unevenness. If you coat these surfaces, it comes off like patches and even cracks. Water finds its way underneath, loosens, and causes even more damage.
Sad.
For other readers, I advise reaching out to Duracoat with pictures so they can contact the contractor and hold them accountable, and refer you to another serious actor.