Homeowner came into Delta Showroom and Slab yard to selectan Italian white marble (natural stone) for their project. Customer agreed to contract price quoted,terms and standard qualifications. AfterDelta measured their cabinets, and as is customary and stipulated in ourqualifications,
client was offered an opportunity to come in to inspect theslabs they had selected and to do a template layout. The customer refused to come in to do that asthey wanted their job expedited. Thisprocess would have revealed to them the natural variations, fissures, andinclusions that are inherent in natural stone, and they would have had theopportunity to avoid or include them or to select different slabs for theirproject. Initially the customer complained about some natural whiteveins she claimed looked like cracks. We assured her those were naturally occurring and could have been avoided duringthe template layout process, had she taken the time to come inAfter tops were fabricated and installed, we requestedthat the customer come in and look at other slabs from the same lot to prove all slabs had naturally occurring fissures. Out of deference to the client wewent ahead and replaced the larger of the two pieces she complained about at at our expense (some $2,500)She said if we would just make flush and polish thewhite vein in the smaller piece (utility room) she would be happy. We did that and she was not happy (eventhough her husband urged her to drop that complaint)Later she complained webroke the sink portion of the counter top when we drilled the faucet hole. We have photographs of that top after wedrilled the hole and there is no evidence of a crack at the time we completedthat portion of the work. We do, however, have an eye witness that was at the house next to the kitchen at thetime that crack occurred and we had no employees there that day. In fact our witness said it was the plumber(or the contractor) as he tightened down the nut on the faucet that caused the crack. That does happen from time totime. Then the customer complained we did not cut the island piece tight enough to the wood column coming through theisland. As is customary, we had sent our scaled/dimensioned shop drawings to the customer before fabricating the tops andshe approved them. She had the opportunity to check our dimensions and note any discrepancies at thattime. She approved our shop drawings"as is"Additionally, her contractor, instructed our installers to install that top exactly as it is now. Next the customer complained about a patch made on an edge of the marble island that became chipped through the manufacturing process. She had a legitimate objection to theaesthetic quality of the repair. We sent our top fabricator from our shop to the repair and it looked excellent. She then complained in theprocess of the repair we created a film over the island. It was not in fact a film all over the islandbut a slight differential in finish (polish quality) in a relatively small area surrounding the repair. We had our besttechnician re-surface that area and correct that as well. She then went back and decided she did notlike the re-repaired chip. It was atthat time we decided there was no way we were going to please this customer. I offered to provide her with a brand newslab ($1,cost) free of charge, but informed her we could not do any morework for her. The project was at that point 100% complete, so we insisted upon a payment of the balance due in exchange for the free slab. Homeowner has not responded to this offer to date
Homeowner came into Delta Showroom and Slab yard to selectan Italian white marble (natural stone) for their project. Customer agreed to contract price quoted,terms and standard qualifications. AfterDelta measured their cabinets, and as is customary and stipulated in ourqualifications,
client was offered an opportunity to come in to inspect theslabs they had selected and to do a template layout. The customer refused to come in to do that asthey wanted their job expedited. Thisprocess would have revealed to them the natural variations, fissures, andinclusions that are inherent in natural stone, and they would have had theopportunity to avoid or include them or to select different slabs for theirproject. Initially the customer complained about some natural whiteveins she claimed looked like cracks. We assured her those were naturally occurring and could have been avoided duringthe template layout process, had she taken the time to come inAfter tops were fabricated and installed, we requestedthat the customer come in and look at other slabs from the same lot to prove all slabs had naturally occurring fissures. Out of deference to the client wewent ahead and replaced the larger of the two pieces she complained about at at our expense (some $2,500)She said if we would just make flush and polish thewhite vein in the smaller piece (utility room) she would be happy. We did that and she was not happy (eventhough her husband urged her to drop that complaint)Later she complained webroke the sink portion of the counter top when we drilled the faucet hole. We have photographs of that top after wedrilled the hole and there is no evidence of a crack at the time we completedthat portion of the work. We do, however, have an eye witness that was at the house next to the kitchen at thetime that crack occurred and we had no employees there that day. In fact our witness said it was the plumber(or the contractor) as he tightened down the nut on the faucet that caused the crack. That does happen from time totime. Then the customer complained we did not cut the island piece tight enough to the wood column coming through theisland. As is customary, we had sent our scaled/dimensioned shop drawings to the customer before fabricating the tops andshe approved them. She had the opportunity to check our dimensions and note any discrepancies at thattime. She approved our shop drawings"as is"Additionally, her contractor, instructed our installers to install that top exactly as it is now. Next the customer complained about a patch made on an edge of the marble island that became chipped through the manufacturing process. She had a legitimate objection to theaesthetic quality of the repair. We sent our top fabricator from our shop to the repair and it looked excellent. She then complained in theprocess of the repair we created a film over the island. It was not in fact a film all over the islandbut a slight differential in finish (polish quality) in a relatively small area surrounding the repair. We had our besttechnician re-surface that area and correct that as well. She then went back and decided she did notlike the re-repaired chip. It was atthat time we decided there was no way we were going to please this customer. I offered to provide her with a brand newslab ($1,cost) free of charge, but informed her we could not do any morework for her. The project was at that point 100% complete, so we insisted upon a payment of the balance due in exchange for the free slab. Homeowner has not responded to this offer to date