It is never comfortable to receive a negative review, luckily for us as a business it is very rare. Sometimes we will encounter unreasonable people too, who despite all the evidence just can’t accept they might be wrong. In this case we won’t have ‘denied’ ever fitting the door, but when dealing with a warranty claim we do ask for the original order number or support documentation to enable us to find the installation among the thousands of records we hold. Once this was supplied, we despatched an engineer to inspect immediately. On each installation we provide an Operation and Maintenance manual. It explains clearly what must be done, bearing in mind our coastal location, customers are advised to regularly wash down door fittings and furniture to avoid a build up of salt that leads to corrosion. If this is done regularly the product just won’t corrode. The condition of the door furniture was purely due to salt corrosion, and therefore not replaceable under warranty. Insisting you have carried out the required cleaning regime is understandable, but not supported by the evidence. As stated we are on the coast, we have been fitting products here for thirty years, the thousands of positive reviews we have on Checkatrade and other forums doesn't support any problems with the quality of the products we fit or our service. Properly maintained they will last far longer than the ten years we warranty them for. The DGCOS provide our IBG to customers, a legal requirement for home improvement companies, they also offer free to customers arbitration, mediation and referral to the Ombudsman. The fact they didn't agree with Mr. T view doesn't make them powerless or useless, if they had upheld his viewpoint I am sure he would think them a marvellous organisation!
With regard to offering to source replacement product on a 'cost plus' basis. I am confused as to how there can be more than one understanding of this phrase? We offered to the customer the opportunity to pay us what the parts cost us to buy, what was required isn't available from our regular suppliers. The advertised cost on the internet was neither retail or trade, just the cost, as it was we didn't add any margin, the plus, and offered to fit the product for free, despite not being at fault? I struggle to see how any of that is unreasonable or likely from a company that doesn't want to look after customers. I have no idea why Mr T has felt the need to make this personal, but clearly having not gotten his own way he has had the energy to complain to every available forum. If the measure of good service is reliant on giving product and service away, even when the simplest of maintenance hasn't been carried out, leading to the product being damaged, then I will gave to accept the criticisms, and put my faith in the judgement of more reasonable people, who on reading the thousands of reviews we have compared to this one sided account will make up their own minds.