WHAT WENT WRONG Party wear


The party season is now upon us and with it will come the risks and problems associated with party wear items. So, in this issue, we have put together some problem garments that we have previously investigated on behalf of cleaners, write Roger Cawood and Richard Neale


Ruching looks difficult Fault: the cleaner agreed to clean this heavily ruched dress but was unable to press it successfully. The result was a very creased ruched area, with hard, pressed-in folds, not in the right position. It looked dreadful.


Technical cause: when this garment was made, the ruching was probably laid up onto a dummy, with soft folds, held in shape by the three-dimensional form of the wearer. Responsibility: this garment looks just as difficult to clean and finish as in fact it is. It is too great a challenge for an untrained presser and if it is accepted for processing and proves too difficult, then the responsibility should lie with the cleaner for accepting it.  In this case the distortion and multiple creasing caused by a crude attempt to finish a difficult dress was so severe that it may not be possible to restore the bodice area to a standard of finish the customer would find acceptable. The correct finishing technique, using the ironing table air blower to support the bodice area (while using the steam iron to relax the superficial creases introduced during wear and cleaning) is unlikely to work with the severe damage seen here. Adopting a similar technique, using the


air blower on the garment former, would also have little chance of correcting the problem. The only viable way to attempt restoration would be to release the tacking threads that hold the ruching in place, iron out the whole ruched area and then reintroduce the natural folds of the ruching and tack them to maintain their position. This is a highly skilled, time-consuming procedure which would probably require the assistance of a tailoress.


Plastic trim loses its silver coating Fault: during cleaning the silver coating to the attractive and unusual trim on this garment was partially lost. Technical cause: the coating used here had quite good resistance to the drycleaning process specified on the care label, but some areas lost the coating in a distinct pattern. This happens when the new trim is just about drycleanable without damage, but no allowance is made for normal wear, which may include handling (and consequent transfer of skin sebum) and flexing. It is probably the parts which have been flexed or handled in use which have been lost here, because drycleaning is a total immersion process, so if some areas have survived then these are the ones least handled or flexed.


Responsibility: the responsibility for loss of metallic finish applied to plastic trim depends on the article and the intended use, as well as on the ease of removal. Random loss of coating when the new article is drycleaned is usually the responsibility of the manufacturer. The responsibility for localised loss following handling or flexing in use depends on the degree of use and on whether the garment was purchased as a fashion item for occasional wear or whether it was considered to be suitable for everyday use.  unfortunately, this is not possible.


Trim adhesives must also be solvent resistant Fault: during the drycleaning process several of the blue beads secured with adhesive came adrift and most of the blue coating was lost. The garment was labelled Technical cause: The manufacturer has failed to specify the correct bead or adhesive. They have also failed to check that the correct adhesive had actually been used (by test drycleaning in accordance with BS EN ISO 3175). Responsibility: the blame here lies with the garment maker. All the cleaner did was to follow the care label instructions and the result was inevitable.


HIGH SKILLS: The ruching needs the attention of a highly skilled finisher and a tailoress


28


LOST SILVER: The silver coating has been lost in the typical areas handled in use


TIED ON: The blue beads were secured by adhesive and by a retaining thread, so when the drycleaning solvent dissolved the adhesive, the retaining thread prevented loss of the bead


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37