Unusual delamination
Problem: An attractive lightweight summer coat suffered from an unsightly overall crumpled appearance and an excess of material in many areas. Despite pressing and careful hand ironing the problem could not be solved.
Cause: The problem arose due to the very flimsy fabric of the coat which is supported entirely by a lightweight interlining applied not just to the fronts but also to the back and sleeve fabric. It was originally laminated on the roll. The peel bond strength between the interlining and the outer cloth, however, is virtually non-existent and the two layers just fall apart.
Responsibility: The responsibility lies with the garment maker and ultimately with the original cloth supplier who laminated these layers. A well-made interlining bond will withstand multiple drycleaning, even on a very severe process. The bond here was weak from original manufacture and not as a consequence of anything the owner or the cleaner may have done.
Rectification: There is no sensible means by which this problem can be rectified. In future the garment maker should specify peel bond strength and check this regularly by simple peel test assessment and also by test drycleaning.
Wear abrasion on flock
Problem: After drycleaning, a jacket, which had been manufactured with a flock finish created by coating the original cloth with a layer of adhesive into which short fibres were sprayed, suffered from a loss of flock pile at the main wear points creating a threadbare appearance on its exposed edges.
Cause: Generally speaking the garment drycleaned surprisingly well—the adhesive was evidently designed to withstand drycleaning. When a garment such as this is subjected to flexing and abrasion in wear it is generally the adhesive at the high wear points which starts to display incipient cracking and other damage. Only after drycleaning, when the adhesive breaks up and releases its flock in these areas, is the problem revealed.
Responsibility: The responsibility in this instance lies equally with the wearer and the manufacturer. A flock fabric of this type is not designed for regular wear—it is a limited life fashion garment and if the owner did not understand this at point of sale then the complaint should be based on this. It is not a drycleaning fault.
Differential greying strikes again.
Problem: A three piece outfit comprising jacket, top and dress. The jacket of a three piece outfit, also comprising a top and dress, was handed in for drycleaning and turned grey. The owner returned with the dress and the cleaner offered to clean them both together to ensure a colour match. The jacket, however, remained a deep grey whilst the dress turned a pale grey. The cleaner then washed the jacket to bring it closer in colour to the dress but in so doing lost the crepiness of the jacket fabric creating a visible difference in appearance accompanied by enlargement. The greying itself was not much better.
Cause: The cause of the greying was failure by the cleaner to control solvent cleanliness. The risk of greying could also have been minimised by ensuring an adequate detergent charge and by thoroughly drying and airing the garments before drycleaning. Washing is normally a good rectification technique but, in this case, mechanical action should have been reduced to avoid stretching the crepe.
Responsibility: Responsibility for the original greying and for the consequences of rectification lies with the cleaner.
Rectification: There is no sensible means by which this three piece garment can be given back the original colour and texture of the uncleaned top.
High heat damage on polyester
Problem: Dark circular spots of molten polyester became visible on a polyester jacket and skirt following drycleaning and pressing.
Cause: The damage was identified by the presser immediately after it happened. When the water reservoir on the iron was checked it was found that the water had not been switched on and the dark spots corresponded with circular areas of molten polyester produced by hot air from the steam holes on the iron soleplate.
Responsibility: Polyester needs great care in finishing because it is a thermoplastic fibre which melts and glazes. The responsibility here lies with the presser.
Deposits on suite covers
Problem: Following normal drycleaning, some unsightly white marking became visible on the cloth surface of each panel inside and out of a set of multi-colour printed loose covers belonging to a three-piece suite.
Cause: To comply with modern safety regulations suite covers have to meet fire retardant specifications and the white marking seen here is typical of what happens if the back coating on a fabric is not designed to resist standard drycleaning. It is a white powdery plastic residue that fastens around the surface fibres and lodges into the weave from where it is difficult to remove. This particular resin could be softened with water-based treatment but this released the dyes so could not be continued.
Responsibility: Lies with the manufacturer and ultimately with whoever applied the back coating.
Rectification: After recleaning there was no further improvement.
