Richard Neale and I have spent much time this year discussing care labelling issues (see July/ August issue, ‘LCNi’s Definitive Guide to Care Labelling’) and finally I am now going to round off the subject by providing a little well-meant advice that both wet- and drycleaners might wish to consider. By now we should all be aware of just how unreliable and misleading some manufacturers’ aftercare information can be, and as Dr Neale has indicated, some care labelling can only be described as disgraceful.
Many drycleaners may be considering that in the future, the trend may favour dual capability wetcleaning machines because of pressure on workspace, which would then leave traditional drycleaning only for the high end cleaners who have the skill and the ability to deal with the kind of high value items that are very much at risk if exposed to water.
However, wetcleaners may also be taking on the high value items that they consider can be safely cleaned in their systems. Bear in mind that the more exclusive the brand and the higher the value, the less reliable the care label information is likely to be. This is not to say that some manufacturers do not provide precise and detailed care label information with the correct use of correctly configured symbols, but don’t be misled, for herein can lie the risk of disaster. Cleaners also need to bear in mind that care labels may have been removed or garments without any labels may have been home made.
Trims and adornments
In my view, these present perhaps the greatest risk of things going pear shaped. So let’s get things straight, if the trim forms an integral part of the item, in other words cannot be readily removed; if the trim is delicate and the care label has say a 
symbol, provided the cleaner uses a delicate programme with reduced mechanical action, and may at his discretion place the item in a net bag, if the trim is damaged the responsibility will lie firmly with the retailer/manufacturer.
But who will the customer blame?
Garment construction
Some garments even though correctly labelled, either due to their fabric type or construction may be at risk of failure during cleaning because they have not been tested against BS / ISO standards and may be incapable of reliably withstanding even a gentle cleaning cycle. In such cases, once again, responsibility falls firmly in the court of the retailer/manufacturer.
But, again, who will the customer blame?
Adopting the moral high ground may well avoid a major claim but can easily impact on the reputation of the cleaner when the customer actually feels it is the cleaner who is really at fault. The best solution is to strive to resolve the issue amicably with the customer. If necessary, support them by writing a technical letter fto the retailer (whose products must be of merchantable quality) which explains why the manufacturer is responsible for the failure. Some cleaners deal with the retailer/ manufacturer on behalf of their customer. Members can obtain a pro forma letter from The Guild of Cleaners & Launderers.
Finally, bear in mind that good customer service is vital and that within today’s all-encompassing social media, one disappointed, disgruntled, articulate customer can easily do your business a disproportionate amount of damage.
