Hello everyone,
We ordered a clinker brick from a well-known supplier, which arrived after about 12 weeks.
Upon delivery, I noticed damage on one pallet. I contacted the seller immediately, who told me this was normal since it is a natural product and such damage can occur (without having seen it).
The next day, I went to the construction site with my wife. She immediately noticed the damage; I had been so busy I had forgotten about it, and she had no prior knowledge of it.
We removed the plastic wrap from one pallet to take a closer look, and the damage was clearly visible. We took photos and sent them to the seller, who did not respond. The next day, I received a call from a company acting as an intermediary, which I hadn’t known about before. The seller had always told me that he sourced the goods directly from the manufacturer. The caller said the issue would now be handled by them.
We arranged a meeting at the site to inspect the clinker. On the scheduled day, no one showed up. I contacted the field representative from that company, who said he had already been to the site, inspected the clinker, and determined the damage was not normal. I strongly criticized this approach since a joint meeting had been planned. He said he wasn’t aware the homeowner was supposed to be there; he had just been instructed by his manager to inspect the clinker onsite. The representative was nearby and spontaneously offered to meet at the site. We met there, and he again confirmed that the damaged pallet needed to be replaced. He planned to discuss with my contractor to sort out the damaged bricks and later talk about whether a price reduction would be granted.
A few days later, my contractor was ready to start the brickwork. He called me and asked me to come to the site because he had found extensive damage to the bricks. We checked several pallets, and many bricks were damaged to the point they could no longer be used. I then contacted the wholesaler/intermediary again. This time, I was told that two field representatives would visit, one of whom was more experienced with such cases.
Three days later, they arrived, and my contractor was also present. At first, they tried to minimize the problem but eventually had to acknowledge that the pallets needed to be replaced quickly. We inspected five pallets together; about 3.5 of them were completely unusable out of a total of 17 pallets (some pallets were still at the manufacturer, with delivery of the remaining clinker planned once the first batch was processed). My contractor mentioned that damage sometimes occurs but never to this extent. He also said he did not consider it his responsibility to check every single brick, which I understand since it is time-consuming. Of course, he could still install the bricks, but I shouldn’t complain about the damage afterward.
I brought up the additional costs incurred (scaffolding, etc.) and made it clear that I would not cover these myself since the bricks were damaged. The remaining pallets were not thoroughly inspected; the issue was to be escalated to the manufacturer.
The next day, I contacted one of the field representatives. He stated that the manufacturer could not explain the damage but was willing to replace four pallets as a goodwill gesture. I asked about the follow-up costs and who would cover them, but I received no answer. I also asked about the delivery time, which was not provided. I told the representative that only a refund made sense here since anything else would drag on.
I wanted to take the initiative and speak to the production manager myself. Through a contact at the manufacturer, I was told that the kiln producing my bricks had a defect. Whether my batch was affected remained unclear. I was unable to reach the production manager. I then drafted a letter to the wholesaler/intermediary, setting a deadline for either a replacement or refund with incurred costs. Otherwise, the next step would be legal action.
Two days later, I received a message from the intermediary/field representative stating that I should contact the seller again to follow the claims process chain. I tried reaching the seller, who told his employee that we should contact the intermediary. I called the field representative and asked what this back-and-forth was about. He was very frustrated with the seller’s behavior and didn’t understand it, even though he had been previously informed. I threatened legal action again and said I did not care who handled the case anymore; I did not understand why I was suddenly supposed to contact the seller again. He could not say anything; he had just been told by his manager again.
The clinker is currently out of stock and will not be produced again until the end of November.
I have a meeting with a lawyer tomorrow. Maybe they can give me a prognosis regarding our chances. Afterward, I will need to find another clinker quickly; waiting longer would be even worse for us. I have also documented everything thoroughly.
I noticed something afterwards: the order confirmation contained a note saying "IP = Individual Product, this brick is excluded from returns." This was not mentioned in the quote. Is this even allowed? Can this still be considered transparent?
Question for you:
Has anyone had similar experiences, and how do you assess my chances in a court case?
We ordered a clinker brick from a well-known supplier, which arrived after about 12 weeks.
Upon delivery, I noticed damage on one pallet. I contacted the seller immediately, who told me this was normal since it is a natural product and such damage can occur (without having seen it).
The next day, I went to the construction site with my wife. She immediately noticed the damage; I had been so busy I had forgotten about it, and she had no prior knowledge of it.
We removed the plastic wrap from one pallet to take a closer look, and the damage was clearly visible. We took photos and sent them to the seller, who did not respond. The next day, I received a call from a company acting as an intermediary, which I hadn’t known about before. The seller had always told me that he sourced the goods directly from the manufacturer. The caller said the issue would now be handled by them.
We arranged a meeting at the site to inspect the clinker. On the scheduled day, no one showed up. I contacted the field representative from that company, who said he had already been to the site, inspected the clinker, and determined the damage was not normal. I strongly criticized this approach since a joint meeting had been planned. He said he wasn’t aware the homeowner was supposed to be there; he had just been instructed by his manager to inspect the clinker onsite. The representative was nearby and spontaneously offered to meet at the site. We met there, and he again confirmed that the damaged pallet needed to be replaced. He planned to discuss with my contractor to sort out the damaged bricks and later talk about whether a price reduction would be granted.
A few days later, my contractor was ready to start the brickwork. He called me and asked me to come to the site because he had found extensive damage to the bricks. We checked several pallets, and many bricks were damaged to the point they could no longer be used. I then contacted the wholesaler/intermediary again. This time, I was told that two field representatives would visit, one of whom was more experienced with such cases.
Three days later, they arrived, and my contractor was also present. At first, they tried to minimize the problem but eventually had to acknowledge that the pallets needed to be replaced quickly. We inspected five pallets together; about 3.5 of them were completely unusable out of a total of 17 pallets (some pallets were still at the manufacturer, with delivery of the remaining clinker planned once the first batch was processed). My contractor mentioned that damage sometimes occurs but never to this extent. He also said he did not consider it his responsibility to check every single brick, which I understand since it is time-consuming. Of course, he could still install the bricks, but I shouldn’t complain about the damage afterward.
I brought up the additional costs incurred (scaffolding, etc.) and made it clear that I would not cover these myself since the bricks were damaged. The remaining pallets were not thoroughly inspected; the issue was to be escalated to the manufacturer.
The next day, I contacted one of the field representatives. He stated that the manufacturer could not explain the damage but was willing to replace four pallets as a goodwill gesture. I asked about the follow-up costs and who would cover them, but I received no answer. I also asked about the delivery time, which was not provided. I told the representative that only a refund made sense here since anything else would drag on.
I wanted to take the initiative and speak to the production manager myself. Through a contact at the manufacturer, I was told that the kiln producing my bricks had a defect. Whether my batch was affected remained unclear. I was unable to reach the production manager. I then drafted a letter to the wholesaler/intermediary, setting a deadline for either a replacement or refund with incurred costs. Otherwise, the next step would be legal action.
Two days later, I received a message from the intermediary/field representative stating that I should contact the seller again to follow the claims process chain. I tried reaching the seller, who told his employee that we should contact the intermediary. I called the field representative and asked what this back-and-forth was about. He was very frustrated with the seller’s behavior and didn’t understand it, even though he had been previously informed. I threatened legal action again and said I did not care who handled the case anymore; I did not understand why I was suddenly supposed to contact the seller again. He could not say anything; he had just been told by his manager again.
The clinker is currently out of stock and will not be produced again until the end of November.
I have a meeting with a lawyer tomorrow. Maybe they can give me a prognosis regarding our chances. Afterward, I will need to find another clinker quickly; waiting longer would be even worse for us. I have also documented everything thoroughly.
I noticed something afterwards: the order confirmation contained a note saying "IP = Individual Product, this brick is excluded from returns." This was not mentioned in the quote. Is this even allowed? Can this still be considered transparent?
Question for you:
Has anyone had similar experiences, and how do you assess my chances in a court case?
I’m not someone who threatens legal action lightly... but this time I feel forced to do so, as nothing else would make sense at the moment.
I will present the documentation to the lawyer, hoping they can provide an outlook on the prospects. Afterwards, I would buy a different brick. Many types of bricks have very long delivery times. I have already reserved another one.
I will present the documentation to the lawyer, hoping they can provide an outlook on the prospects. Afterwards, I would buy a different brick. Many types of bricks have very long delivery times. I have already reserved another one.
guckuck2 schrieb:
That might be premature. The retailer has two attempts to remedy the issue.It has been 14 days since the defect was reported, and it is no longer possible to exchange the goods in time because the clinker needs to be produced again first.
H
hampshire17 Oct 2019 22:42You don’t need to worry about how the supply chain is organized. Your contract partner is responsible for handling everything. That is the party who issued your invoice.
Is what you call an intermediary a building materials supplier? This structure is quite common.
Were the bricks specially manufactured for you? If not, it’s possible that another building materials supplier has a few pallets in stock. Then the issue would be arranging to get those on short notice.
Otherwise, you would have to switch to a different type of facing brick.
Is what you call an intermediary a building materials supplier? This structure is quite common.
Were the bricks specially manufactured for you? If not, it’s possible that another building materials supplier has a few pallets in stock. Then the issue would be arranging to get those on short notice.
Otherwise, you would have to switch to a different type of facing brick.
hampshire schrieb:
You don’t need to worry about how the supply chain works. Your contract partner is responsible for managing these issues. That is the one who issued your invoice.
Is what you call an intermediary a building materials supplier? This type of arrangement is quite common.
Were the bricks made specifically for you? If not, it’s possible that another building materials supplier has a few pallets in stock. Then it’s a matter of obtaining those at short notice.
Otherwise, you would have to switch to a different facing brick. At first, I was told that the facing bricks would come out of the kiln in 10 weeks. The date of the next firing is uncertain, and if I can’t decide quickly, I might have to wait 16 weeks instead of 10. We had looked at many facing bricks before, but we liked this one best visually, so we committed to it—I don’t know any more than that. I think he said that some other customers ordered it as well.
The seller buys these facing bricks from a wholesaler, who in turn sources them directly from the factory. Initially, the seller did not tell me this; he said the goods come directly from the manufacturer.
It’s a well-known facing brick supplier—I can’t say more than that.
tumaa schrieb:
I spoke with several window manufacturers beforehand to ask if installation could be done earlier. The answer was a definite no. It’s about guaranteeing the external airtightness, which is only ensured when the windows are installed after the bricklaying. When bricklaying the facade, a so-called stop is created, meaning the rough opening is slightly smaller on the outside than on the inside. During installation, the window is pushed from the inside up to this jamb, and the resulting gap between the window and the back of the brickwork is sealed with compressible sealing tape. If you installed the windows before bricklaying, there would be no way to properly seal this gap.
However, I don’t see any reason why the window openings couldn’t be temporarily closed beforehand. If in doubt, failure to do so might even be considered a neglect of your duty to minimize damage, should the case ever go to court.
tumaa schrieb:
The seller buys this brick from the wholesaler, who in turn gets it directly from the manufacturer. At first, the seller didn’t tell me this; he said the goods were sourced directly from the manufacturer. This is very likely a so-called drop shipment arrangement. Your seller buys from the wholesaler, who arranges delivery directly from the factory to the construction site—so two parties earn on the transaction without ever physically handling the goods. Perhaps the seller just phrased this unclearly.
However, as has been mentioned multiple times before, your contractual partner and point of contact is the seller—no matter what any phone agent says—and you should definitely stick to dealing with them.
The suggestion to inquire about stock availability of this brick is a good one. Maybe ask the manufacturer if they can provide a list of (wholesale) dealers in your area who have supplied this brick in recent months.
Similar topics