Carpet Manufacturer Warranties

[Austin Willoughby]

So fun fact I just started working for a flooring store that sales flooring and ironically talked with one of the reps today and found out most flooring manufacturers require "hot water extraction" atleast once every 18 months or it voids any warranties. Residential that is. So for all you non hot water extraction guys make sure you're careful with repercussions if a customer had to file a warranty claim.... Also the 1 specific company that we have sales a proprietary carpet that can't have a protectant applied or it voids warranty. So make sure yall keep those things in mind also. Just thought this info would be interesting for anyone who cares lol

 

[FredC]

lol

 

[Mikey P]

Thank you young lad..


(been the case for decades)

 

[Austin Willoughby]

Thank you young lad..


(been the case for decades)

Just thought I'd spark an old argument for all the vlm and encap guys. Specifically for the reasons that flooring has changed a lot over the recent years and a lot of people have this big idea that so should the cleaning methods but that's not always the case especially for carpet

 

[Mikey P]

Just thought I'd spark an old argument for all the vlm and encap guys. Specifically for the reasons that flooring has changed a lot over the recent years and a lot of people have this big idea that so should the cleaning methods but that's not always the case especially for carpet

Heavy foot traffic voids warranties too.


Dont worry about it, 92% of homeowners have no idea that their carpet was sold with a (worthless) warranty

 

[Mikey P]

yes, I made that number up, and am being generous..

 

[Austin Willoughby]

Heavy foot traffic voids warranties too.


Dont worry about it, 92% of homeowners have no idea that their carpet was sold with a (worthless) warranty

That's a fact. To be fair though 1 we have has a legit pet warranty but normal wear and tear is not covered like most things and rightfully so

 

[BIG WOOD]

I just found out a couple weeks ago that a new encap machine or new patent of a remade machine got approved that doesn't void the warranties at the Dalton headquarters. Some foaming counter rotating brush machine that a guy in Atlanta has been testing for a few years.

I think the CRB also doesn't void warranties as well

 

[Jim Pemberton]

The threat of warranty denial is something that has been used for good and ill for nearly 40 years.

A couple of random, unassociated thoughts:

1. The relatively low cost of carpet in someone's home makes a battle over warranty coverage not worth anyone fighting over. In the commercial field, it is a more significant issue.

2. As a one time carpet inspector, I can tell you that the wording of warranties are such that few claims are settled in the buyer's favor.

3. The opportunity to damage carpet exists with most any method. I've seen more damage caused by improper brush choice and/or lubrication with a CRB (approved tool) than with an OP/scrubber/Cimex (though those too can cause damage if improperly used.) The burden of proof in a warranty claim isn't just the method used, but also proof that the method caused the damage. For example: If a red stain doesn't come out of nylon, the fact that an OP was used in cleaning isn't really relevant. If tip bloom is the cause of the claim, then PERHAPS that could be involved in the claim.

4. I will contain to rail against the "pH of less than 10 is ok" part of stain resistant carpet warranties. There are a number of "less than 10" products that have alkaline builders and solvents that wipe out the stain resistance anyway. That compromise was made out of practical necessity, not scientific proof.

5. I'd have loved the "18 month cleaning" to have been a strongly enforceable issue, but I never saw that as a sole reason a warranty was denied.

I could go on and on, but if Marty has read this far already, he's getting even more annoyed with me than usual.

I'll sum up (sorry Marty, might be long...)

The fear of voiding warranties by improper cleaning caused a spike in training, certification, and the paying of closer attention to the cleaning products cleaners used. The value of the education (it is hoped) exceeded the threat, and a lot of cleaners did a better job as a result of what they learned. I can tell you that a vacuum cleaner on the truck didn't become something that was paid attention to much before that training spike in the late 80s, as an example.

So I guess it is like this:

Cleaning related warranties were like Santa Claus:

Cleaners behaved better out of hope for reward (customers who would come to them to maintain warranties) and fear of loss (terror of replacing carpet wherever they cleaned).

Neither came true, but behavior improved as cleaners waited starry eyed for Santa Claus to deliver them success.

 

[Cleanworks]

One of the downfalls

The threat of warranty denial is something that has been used for good and ill for nearly 40 years.

A couple of random, unassociated thoughts:

1. The relatively low cost of carpet in someone's home makes a battle over warranty coverage not worth anyone fighting over. In the commercial field, it is a more significant issue.

2. As a one time carpet inspector, I can tell you that the wording of warranties are such that few claims are settled in the buyer's favor.

3. The opportunity to damage carpet exists with most any method. I've seen more damage caused by improper brush choice and/or lubrication with a CRB (approved tool) than with an OP/scrubber/Cimex (though those too can cause damage if improperly used.) The burden of proof in a warranty claim isn't just the method used, but also proof that the method caused the damage. For example: If a red stain doesn't come out of nylon, the fact that an OP was used in cleaning isn't really relevant. If tip bloom is the cause of the claim, then PERHAPS that could be involved in the claim.

4. I will contain to rail against the "pH of less than 10 is ok" part of stain resistant carpet warranties. There are a number of "less than 10" products that have alkaline builders and solvents that wipe out the stain resistance anyway. That compromise was made out of practical necessity, not scientific proof.

5. I'd have loved the "18 month cleaning" to have been a strongly enforceable issue, but I never saw that as a sole reason a warranty was denied.

I could go on and on, but if Marty has read this far already, he's getting even more annoyed with me than usual.

I'll sum up (sorry Marty, might be long...)

The fear of voiding warranties by improper cleaning caused a spike in training, certification, and the paying of closer attention to the cleaning products cleaners used. The value of the education (it is hoped) exceeded the threat, and a lot of cleaners did a better job as a result of what they learned. I can tell you that a vacuum cleaner on the truck didn't become something that was paid attention to much before that training spike in the late 80s, as an example.

So I guess it is like this:

Cleaning related warranties were like Santa Claus:

Cleaners behaved better out of hope for reward (customers who would come to them to maintain warranties) and fear of loss (terror of replacing carpet wherever they cleaned).

Neither came true, but behavior improved as cleaners waited starry eyed for Santa Claus to deliver them success.

Of warranties and certification of equipment is that many large commercial customers buy into the process and only buy equipment and chemistry that is approved by the CRI. This limits their ability to clean large areas efficiently and maintain good drying times. They tend to use large walk behind or ride on equipment with cylindrical brushes and avoid rotary or op equipment on advice from the carpet manufacturers.