Important Consideration: Synthetic Teak Decking Warranties

[hobiecat]

As a professional working with synthetic teak decking, I’m currently dealing with a rare issue from a customer who recently had installed synthetic decking on their boat. It’s a reminder of the importance of understanding the full scope of your decking warranty before making any decision.

When installing synthetic teak decking, boatowners should ensure that their warranty covers not only the raw material but also the finished product when it’s fabricated into panels and installed on the boat. Do manufacturers only offer material warranties? I still dont clearly know the answers. It could leave boatowners without recourse if something goes wrong during installation or poor fabrication.

Before proceeding with any decking purchase or installation, it’s important to ask the manufacturer or installer these key questions:

1. Does the warranty cover the fabricated panels and installation?
2. Are there any exclusions to the warranty that could affect coverage if the deck fails?

It’s always better to clarify upfront rather than deal with potential issues down the line. I encourage all boatowners to investigate their decking’s warranty terms thoroughly to avoid surprises.

This rare issue is a reminder that boatowners deserve full transparency when choosing decking solutions, and it’s always wise to be well-informed before making such an important investment.

 

[Hurricane]

I have two different supplies of synthetic teak on my boat.
The first was done professionally to my bathing platform and supplied by Flexiteek.
I fitted the rest of the boat myself, making the panels using Trakmark.
Maybe your "issue" applies to Flexiteek.
In my experience, Flexiteek will turn slightly pink after a few years, especially in the strong Med sun.
The colours in Trakmark seem to be more robust.
I am unlikely to change the bathing platform because the Flexiteek works well apart from the slight colour change.
But I can sympathise with the owner's complaint if your issue is Flekiteek turning pinkish after a couple of seasons.
But I may be reading too much into your post.

 

[hobiecat]

The issue I’m highlighting is about the way some synthetic teak brands advertise their products.

Many of these brands prominently display images of fully installed decks, which could lead customers to believe that their warranties cover both the materials and the installation process. However, in reality, the warranties that I see published appear to just cover the bare pvc raw material strips and do not extend to installation, panel welding, or deck panel fabrication errors. The issues I hear generally relate to this.

This distinction seems unclear in the marketing materials, which can lead to confusion and disappointment for customers who think they are fully covered by the material manufacturer brand. It’s always a good idea to double-check warranty terms before committing to any decking system, especially when it comes to coverage of the installation process

 

[benjenbav]

As a professional working with synthetic teak decking, I’m currently dealing with a rare issue from a customer who recently had installed synthetic decking on their boat. It’s a reminder of the importance of understanding the full scope of your decking warranty before making any decision.

When installing synthetic teak decking, boatowners should ensure that their warranty covers not only the raw material but also the finished product when it’s fabricated into panels and installed on the boat. Do manufacturers only offer material warranties? I still dont clearly know the answers. It could leave boatowners without recourse if something goes wrong during installation or poor fabrication.

Before proceeding with any decking purchase or installation, it’s important to ask the manufacturer or installer these key questions:

1. Does the warranty cover the fabricated panels and installation?
2. Are there any exclusions to the warranty that could affect coverage if the deck fails?

It’s always better to clarify upfront rather than deal with potential issues down the line. I encourage all boatowners to investigate their decking’s warranty terms thoroughly to avoid surprises.

This rare issue is a reminder that boatowners deserve full transparency when choosing decking solutions, and it’s always wise to be well-informed before making such an important investment.

It’s also worth thinking about the interaction between the obligations of the manufacturer and the installer, each of which may seek to blame the other for any problems encountered and, potentially, to argue that what they did was ok; it was the other party that caused the problem.

Well worth (UK) folks also reminding themselves of rights under Consumer Rights Act 2015 - broadly along the lines that both goods and workmanship can be expected to be of a reasonable quality.

 

[hobiecat]

Excellent point, but as you've pointed out, things can get murky when deck fabrication is handled either by the manufacturer or the installer, which can make brand warranties less clear. Some manufacturers may offer limited warranties on materials, but if the installation is involved, the warranty might not cover issues related to the fitting or even fabrication process. This can leave consumers unsure of where they stand if something goes wrong, so it’s really important to clarify the scope of any warranty and the responsibilities of both parties in advance

 

[Tranona]

Excellent point, but as you've pointed out, things can get murky when deck fabrication is handled either by the manufacturer or the installer, which can make brand warranties less clear. Some manufacturers may offer limited warranties on materials, but if the installation is involved, the warranty might not cover issues related to the fitting or even fabrication process. This can leave consumers unsure of where they stand if something goes wrong, so it’s really important to clarify the scope of any warranty and the responsibilities of both parties in advance

That is true of any consume transaction. The CRA relies on the contract relationship. If you sell on a "supply and fit" basis you are responsible to the customer for any defects both materials and installation. If the fault is with the materials, the buyer claims for any remedial work from you and if it is faulty material you claim from your supplier.

That is the legal position but as you say disputes can be difficult. A warranty is almost always limited and consumer rights overrule them as CRA provides much greater protection in theory. It is OK if the warranty is very specific about what the manufacture will cover, as most warranties for new cars are but I would imagine the "warranty" of synthetic teak is very limited.. You say you have a rare case (they usually are when there is a dispute) which suggests that the material "warranty" was very limited. The customer then (as in post#4) relies on the CRA which has to consider 2 possible reasons for rejecting/repair/replacement "merchantable quality" "fitness for purpose" and the defect was there from the time of the original supply. There is a process to go through that is time based from date of supply which starts with the supplier being given the opportunity to repair/replace but eventually requires the buyer to prove that the product was defective for one or both of the reasons.

You are right that consumers ought to be aware of what is specifically covered by a manufacturers warranty, but in a sense it is not relevant in law as he has no legal relationship with the manufacturer.

 

[Hurricane]

That is true of any consume transaction. The CRA relies on the contract relationship. If you sell on a "supply and fit" basis you are responsible to the customer for any defects both materials and installation. If the fault is with the materials, the buyer claims for any remedial work from you and if it is faulty material you claim from your supplier.

That is the legal position but as you say disputes can be difficult. A warranty is almost always limited and consumer rights overrule them as CRA provides much greater protection in theory. It is OK if the warranty is very specific about what the manufacture will cover, as most warranties for new cars are but I would imagine the "warranty" of synthetic teak is very limited.. You say you have a rare case (they usually are when there is a dispute) which suggests that the material "warranty" was very limited. The customer then (as in post#4) relies on the CRA which has to consider 2 possible reasons for rejecting/repair/replacement "merchantable quality" "fitness for purpose" and the defect was there from the time of the original supply. There is a process to go through that is time based from date of supply which starts with the supplier being given the opportunity to repair/replace but eventually requires the buyer to prove that the product was defective for one or both of the reasons.

You are right that consumers ought to be aware of what is specifically covered by a manufacturers warranty, but in a sense it is not relevant in law as he has no legal relationship with the manufacturer.

I guess that in my case (regarding my professional Flexiteek installation), my claim (if I were to make one) would be with the installer even though it is clearly a manufacturing issue.

I guess that your analogy to a car would be more appropriate to a house where a builder sources and uses materials.

 

[jfm]

That is true of any consume transaction. The CRA relies on the contract relationship. If you sell on a "supply and fit" basis you are responsible to the customer for any defects both materials and installation. If the fault is with the materials, the buyer claims for any remedial work from you and if it is faulty material you claim from your supplier.

That is the legal position but as you say disputes can be difficult. A warranty is almost always limited and consumer rights overrule them as CRA provides much greater protection in theory. It is OK if the warranty is very specific about what the manufacture will cover, as most warranties for new cars are but I would imagine the "warranty" of synthetic teak is very limited.. You say you have a rare case (they usually are when there is a dispute) which suggests that the material "warranty" was very limited. The customer then (as in post#4) relies on the CRA which has to consider 2 possible reasons for rejecting/repair/replacement "merchantable quality" "fitness for purpose" and the defect was there from the time of the original supply. There is a process to go through that is time based from date of supply which starts with the supplier being given the opportunity to repair/replace but eventually requires the buyer to prove that the product was defective for one or both of the reasons.

You are right that consumers ought to be aware of what is specifically covered by a manufacturers warranty, but in a sense it is not relevant in law as he has no legal relationship with the manufacturer.

Well, he has a legal relationship in the form of the warranty, but not otherwise.

Imho, in the marine world "warranty" is the go to term to deal with glitches, but really your first point of call should be CRA, if you're within its time limits. I was running a new boat last summer at 3-4 months old, and all the glitches were referred to by the supplier side as "warranty items" with the occasional "the warranty doesn't cover that". All irrelevant, and I had to keep reminding them that my requests for glitch fixing were made under CRA.

The real point is that CRA covers materials and fitting, everything, as mentioned above. Warranty only covers the limited things that is says it covers, in this case just the bare material. So don't fret too much about warranty; fret more about using the product enough to make sure you discover any glitches within the CRA time limits.

To be clear on legal relationships: warranty is a contract between you and whoever wrote the warranty, usually the original manufacturer from who you did not buy the product. Can only be enforced according to its terms and under the law under which it is written. CRA rights are against the UK person you contracted with namely the local supplier. dealer, installer etc, and there will be CRA equivalents in countries other than UK

 

[hobiecat]

You’ve made great points about the CRA and seller responsibility, but another related issue is how some brands market their products. By showcasing images of completed decks, these brands can give the impression that they are responsible for both the material quality and the fabrication or fitting.

In reality, many of these brands seem to distance themselves from both fabrication and installation, leaving consumers exposed if issues arise. This can be misleading, as consumers may assume they’re fully protected when, in fact, the warranty often only covers the raw material.

Surely brands should clearly communicate what is—and isn’t—covered in their marketing to avoid misleading claims and ensure consumers understand where responsibility lies.

 

[Tranona]

Just looked at the Flexiteek website flexiteek.com/flexiteek/material-guarantee-registration/ seems pretty clear to me what is covered by their warranty.

Of course they are going to show what the product looks like when applied - that is what buyers are interested in. They link to installers and boat builders who offer their products indicating where they canget it installed. They are not selling materials to end users. No different from for example manufacturers of sailcloth who sell to sailmakers. Customers buy sails, not materials.

 

[hobiecat]

Valid point about showing the finished product, but the issue arises when marketing blurs the line between material and installation/fabrication quality. If the warranty only covers the material but images show finished decks, it could mislead consumers into thinking installation is covered too. Unlike sailcloth, where roles are clear and the sailmaker is responsible for the finished product, decking manufacturers often don’t clarify the distinction, leading to confusion. Brands need to clearly state what’s covered and who’s responsible for installation and fabrication."

This highlights the difference between sails and decking materials.

 

[jfm]

I've just read your website and I'm afraid I'm going to accuse you of being a kettle/pot merchant. Frankly I'm finding you a bit astounding:

1. In your first post you write "boatowners should ensure that their warranty covers not only the raw material but also the finished product when it’s fabricated into panels and installed on the boat" yet in your very own warranty you disclaim (as deck manufacturer) responsibility for the installation. You also have a bunch of other subjective get out clauses, and best of all is where you explain that if there is a manufacturing fault with your deck material then you'll replace the deck material but the poor boat owner will need to pay for the removal of the bad panel and installation of the new. Nice! Oh, and for good measure you even exclude warrnaty cover for discolouring due to sun. You're guiltier than all the others you're complaining about, aren't you?

2. On this page you go on about the warranty point yet you misleadingly fail to mention the consumer's CRA rights. Your statement "Discovering later that the warranty doesn’t cover fabrication or installation can lead to ... financial loss" is simply incorrect, and quite misleading. Indeed the general tone of the page is misleading on multiple counts.

3. On the same page your bold heading "No Recourse for Poor Workmanship" is very misleading. The "Misleading Advertising" accusation is also very questionable - I would want to see pictures of the stuff installed, not just rolls of raw material, and the use of such pictures does not imply the plastic manufacturer is responsible for the local installer's mistakes unless the customer is very dense. Here's an example: If I see an ad for Dulux paint and I get my local decorating firm to buy some and paint my house, and the workmanship is bad, does that "imply" I can ask Dulux to come to my house and fix it? Of course it doesn't - get real.

4. You say above (your words) "Many of these brands prominently display images of fully installed decks, which could lead customers to believe that their warranties cover both the materials and the installation process. However, in reality, the warranties that I see published appear to just cover the bare pvc raw material strips and do not extend to installation, panel welding, or deck panel fabrication errors.then disclaim responsibility for the installers [sic]." Yet on your own website you show pictures of finished decks, then you exclude in your very own warranty any responsibility for the installation! Are you serious or is this some kind of joke?

5. As a general point about misleading people, you list lots of benefits of synthtic deck on your website, while conveniently not mentioning or hinting at the killer feature - they burn your feet in hot sun. They're ok for UK boats, but are awful in the Med.

I'm finding this whole thing weird and you (Victor Aspey, I think) weird, and I'm finding your warranty very poor indeed. Your brands seems to be "Beautiful Marine Floors" and "Deckfab" I doubt many have heard of either, and hopefully folks can steer clear.

 

[hobiecat]

I take the last remarks are trolling.,,,thanks. Deckfab is a deck panel fabricator and it warrants deck panels. That is the product and it warrants all the panels. On FB the certificate is provided. Just like the sails. It does not fit. It despatches panels to cert fitters who I personally check. They take responsibility for fitting. This is not an issue about that business model. I have always insisted pvc gets hot and suggest synthetic cork instead. I am satisfied we do not intentionally mislead customers.

 

[harvey38]

As I questioned this prior to us going ahead, so to avoid future issues, we had Tek-Dek make and install the panels.

 

[hobiecat]

As I questioned this prior to us going ahead, so to avoid future issues, we had Tek-Dek make and install the panels.

That’s a sensible approach, Harvey. Having one company handle both fabrication and installation can simplify accountability and reduce the risk of disputes. However, it’s also important to ensure the company provides clear agreements on what their warranty covers and maintains high-quality standards across both fabrication and installation. Additionally, proximity to the installer matters—a company located far away can mean higher costs if remedial work is needed. Choosing a company that delivers quality at every stage and is transparent about their responsibilities offers peace of mind."

 

[jfm]

I take the last remarks are trolling.,,,thanks. Deckfab is a deck panel fabricator and it warrants deck panels. That is the product and it warrants all the panels. On FB the certificate is provided. Just like the sails. It does not fit. It despatches panels to cert fitters who I personally check. They take responsibility for fitting. This is not an issue about that business model. I have always insisted pvc gets hot and suggest synthetic cork instead. I am satisfied we do not intentionally mislead customers.

Absolutely not trolling - I'm deadly serious. I find your whole position very hypocritical and frankly a bit weird, I set out the analysis for that in my post above. You're starting a thread criticising others repeatedly for doing something, yet doing exactly the same thing, if not a slightly worse version of it, yourself - that's weird.
On your last sentence, you may be satisfied but I'm not - we can agree to disagree on that.

 

[hobiecat]

I have not criticised anyone.
My intention with this discussion was to highlight the importance of transparency in marketing and ensuring customers fully understand the scope of warranties and responsibilities.

I’m confident in the clarity of my own business practices, but I respect that opinions may differ. Ultimately, what matters most is providing customers with the information they need to make informed decisions, and that’s what I aimed to achieve through these discussions.

 

[hobiecat]

I don’t think your Dulux paint analogy holds up in this context either. Dulux is clearly marketed as a raw material for a professional to use, and consumers understand the separation between the product and the service. In the synthetic decking industry, however, many brands use marketing that prominently features fully fabricated and installed decks, which could give the impression they are responsible for the entire process, not just the raw material.

This distinction isn’t always clear to customers, particularly when warranties only cover the raw material, not fabrication or installation. Unlike paint, decking is often marketed as a complete, finished product, which makes the responsibilities less transparent. That’s the core issue I’m trying to address.

 

[Hurricane]

As I questioned this prior to us going ahead, so to avoid future issues, we had Tek-Dek make and install the panels.

Thats not the same scenario - Tek-Dek not only make the deck but also make the substrate.
I believe that Tek-Deck is the "end user" division of Trakmark.
So, in your case, you have absolute recourse to any issues.
I would do exactly the same if I were having the deck supplied and fitted.

 

[Tranona]

Still waiting to here what the "rare issue" is that has prompted your starting this thread