Help! Worktop Join

Apart from the gap around the pillar (next to the wall, probably to allow for expansion), I can't see anything wrong with the joint itself. I'm assuming it has worktop bolts securing it underneath and is flat across the joint ?

 

Possibly been done like that to retain a bit more strength in the joint (shortened because of the pillar/pier)

 

I'm on one now!..................

We are all doing the best we can in our chosen professions, I see so many clients chosing to 'go off on one' right at the end of the works undertaken at agreed prices etc, usually for simple reasons, trying to claw back a bit of 'petty' money, usually because they've over spent and thus try to claw it back via the innocent tradesmen.

 

I would say the top is fitted about as well as can be expected with the nib being in that position. To do the mitre straight would have left a narrow piece of top which would be susceptible to breaking.
On solid wood I prefer a 45deg mitre so the grain flows round. But others don't.
Nice bit of wood though btw. Looks well prepared and the fitter seems to have thought ahead re the cutting.
What company did you buy the kitchen from?

 

Deep breaths Rulland mate,its not worth it. But I know exactly what you mean.

 

And breath!, glad its not just me Plumberboy, so fecking frustrating when you've done your best price wise and work wise, and then they try to sh!t on you for the want of peanuts.

 

Nope. The only thing I can think is that it was done like that so to keep the overlap at the breakfast bar equal. But then we can't see what's under the breakfast bar and if there is any need to equal an overlap! We also can't see the other side/edge, and maybe where to keep full width, it needed to be brought in a tad at the joint.

Mr. HandyAndy - Really

 

Thinking about it, if there's units under the breakfast bar, it may well have had to be done this way to keep the overhang right. Just a shame that the pillar happens to be in the wrong place.

 

Your right Rulland,they will always try it on at the end of the job when your in to deep to argue.
Thinking about it I think it's an illness with some folk.(short arms and deep pockets)

 

Go back to the company in question with your issues,you won't get a good professional opinion from a picture let's be honest.

 

See, being cynically minded, you might think that the edge of the first worktop could have been chipped, so the thought of very slightly mitring got rid of the problem!!!!!
oooooo!

Mr. HandyAndy - Really

 

Can you get a photo of the units underneath? Specifically a view looking towards where the join between the units on the back wall and the units coming out at right angles meet.

 

Hmm, it's a weird one.

(Rulland et al, let's cut Coakers a bit of slack - there is no suggestion that he's picky, or trying it on or even aiming for a discount. He's just asked a perfectly valid question 'cos he clearly wasn't given a proper answer by the fitters.)

And, it is a strange one, isn't it? Having such an unusual - slight - angle is always going to catch the eye as being something 'not right', just like a unit or shelf that's a wee bit off-level.

I mean, what possible good reason could there be for not keeping the left hand worktop edge dead square? And then 'Masoning' it slightly into the b'bar?

I can't think of one. (Not to say there isn't a good reason, of course).

So that leaves the suspicion of an error of some sort, such as what Mr Ha says - the end of the LH worktop might have been damaged, so they decided on this as a way of trimming it.

In which case - sorry - I know it'll cost a packet to replace, but it ain't good enough. Kitchens are not only very expensive fitments, but tend to be an emotive one too - it's the 'big thing' in the house, the one very visual statement that a lot of people dream about. So only one standard is acceptable.

Unless there is a valid reason.

Which no one has come up with yet.

 

Personally I think it would have looked better like this.

 

Yep. And I cannot think of any structural reason why they wouldn't have done this; it's the 'obvious' way, and it's easier to do.

So that leaves the suspicion of an 'error' or a 'misjudgement' by a fitter in choosing a silly solution. Or, that they were covering up for something else.

In either of these cases, it also means they are being less than truthful with their customer - and that alone deserves a full metaphorical kicking.

 

I agree with Phil the Pavers drawing. It is how I would have done it in those circumstances.

However, if there had been enough material available, I would have done a complete 45 degree mitre to allow the "Flow" of the grain.

Snezza.