Trim problems increase
Long distances and extended delivery times from overseas factories to UK high streets often mean that design defects are only seen when it is too late to remedy the problem.
The best retailers have established controls over batch quality to ensure that an item can survive being cleaned in accordance with the care label attached to it.
However, a great many importers still do not understand their legal responsibilities and expect cleaners to deal with claims for damage that they have not caused either by error or incompetence.
A garment retailed in the UK does not (as we understand it) have to have a care label, but if one is included it must be correct and it must be valid for the trim, as well as for the adhesives, dyes and fabrics used.
Even minor errors in specifying the trim can ruin an expensive garment. The situation is little better if damage is confined to the trim, as most importers do not supply spares. So if buttons are broken or beading softened, they often cannot be replaced with matching items and the designer’s intended effect is spoilt.
British and International Standards have published updated codes for care labels and modern methods for drycleanability testing, valid with all of the UK’s main trading partners and the retail sector needs to use them.
Trim bleed spoils coat
Fault: This beige coat was drycleaned in accordance with the care label, but still became marked with loose dyes.
Cause: The leather trim had poor colourfastness when tested. This, together with the pattern of mark-off, confirmed that the trim had been poorly specified.
Responsibility: The garment maker is to blame. It is possible to buy leather trims with much better colourfastness and doing so would have avoided the fault.
Rectification: The fugitive dyes cannot be removed from the coat as doing so will also take out the beige background.
Clasp loses its jewels
Fault: During drycleaning (in accordance with the label) this clasp, stitched to the dress, shed several of its jewels, spoiling the intended effect.
Cause: The adhesive used to secure the jewels was slightly affected by the strongest of the drycleaning solvents allowed by the label.
However, the main cause was the mechanical damage suffered by the clasp with every rotation of the machine cage.
Responsibility: The manufacturer should carry most of the blame here. The labelling should have specified a milder solvent and there should have been a precautionary bar beneath the drycleaning circle symbol to denote the need to reduce mechanical action.
In this case, the correct label would have indicated that the clasp needed covering with metal foil which might have reduced the mechanical impact and also retained any loosened jewels.
Although many cleaners would have spotted the labelling errors and protected the clasp, they should not be expected to guess.
Rectification: There were no jewels in the button trap and the retailer could not get any replacements.
Braid shrinks and wrinkles
Fault: The red fabric below the braid wrinkled during drycleaning and even after pressing with steam, tension and vacuum, the fault returned quickly in wear.
Cause: Most fabrics and braid trims have a slight stretch set into them during manufacture and this is released during the first few drycleans.
This causes “relaxation shrinkage” and the cleaner can neither avoid it nor foresee the amount. The wrinkling here has occurred because the braid trim has relaxed by much more than the red base fabric.
The cleaner used the correct rectification technique, but this was not sufficient to cope with the significant difference in relaxation potential found here, so the effect is only temporary.
Responsibility: The blame here lies with the garment maker. If the relaxation potential of the braid trim had been specified to match that of the red cloth, the problem could have been avoided.
