Have any other contractors had issues with Marshalls Coach House paving slabs (specifically 'Heathland' colour)? Client liked the sample (grey-green), but now, when wet, they are a shiny pale grey with odd buff highlights (fine when dry). Is it something to do with the advertised 'Teflon coating', I wonder?
I've taken this up with Marshalls, but they are stonewalling. Are they usually so uncooperative?
Marshalls coach house paving
-
Tony McC
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8346
- Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:27 pm
- Location: Warrington, People's Republic of South Lancashire
- Contact:
-
Tony McC
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8346
- Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:27 pm
- Location: Warrington, People's Republic of South Lancashire
- Contact:
-
Tony McC
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8346
- Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:27 pm
- Location: Warrington, People's Republic of South Lancashire
- Contact:
-
lutonlagerlout
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15184
- Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 12:20 am
- Location: bedfordshire
-
ehfer
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 6:48 pm
- Location: Reading
-
Tony McC
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8346
- Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:27 pm
- Location: Warrington, People's Republic of South Lancashire
- Contact:
It's difficult to judge using photies. It's one of those issues where you really do need to see the flags at first hand to get a true sense of how the coating is affecting the appearance.
From what I can see in the photies provided, there's nothing all that unusual. The coating prevents the natural colour showing in the damp, but I can understand the manufacturer arguing that such an effect is intended and is part of the alleged 'appeal', whereas some folk would find it plasticky and unnatural.
It would be hard to counter the manufacturer's case. Clients, and contractors, are assumed to have familiarised themselves with the appearance of a paving product *in all weather conditions* prior to purchase and/or installation. This may seem harsh, but it is only fair: we shouldn't expect manufacturers, distributors, or even contractors, to accept liability just because the end user decides it's not turned out quite as they'd imagined. Obviously, if there are problems with poor installation or poor product resulting in an undesirable appearance, that's a different matter, but you have to be able to show that the appearance which is the subject of the complaint is radically different to that shown in promotional and advertising materials.
From those photies above, it's very had to make such a claim, I'm afraid. I have half a suspicion that the coating is a bit more 'generous' than usual, but that's not to say that such generosity is inherently a problem.
From what I can see in the photies provided, there's nothing all that unusual. The coating prevents the natural colour showing in the damp, but I can understand the manufacturer arguing that such an effect is intended and is part of the alleged 'appeal', whereas some folk would find it plasticky and unnatural.
It would be hard to counter the manufacturer's case. Clients, and contractors, are assumed to have familiarised themselves with the appearance of a paving product *in all weather conditions* prior to purchase and/or installation. This may seem harsh, but it is only fair: we shouldn't expect manufacturers, distributors, or even contractors, to accept liability just because the end user decides it's not turned out quite as they'd imagined. Obviously, if there are problems with poor installation or poor product resulting in an undesirable appearance, that's a different matter, but you have to be able to show that the appearance which is the subject of the complaint is radically different to that shown in promotional and advertising materials.
From those photies above, it's very had to make such a claim, I'm afraid. I have half a suspicion that the coating is a bit more 'generous' than usual, but that's not to say that such generosity is inherently a problem.
Site Agent - Pavingexpert