Disappointing quality and worse after-sales support

I got a response unfortunately, your reply reinforces the very concern raised in my original review: a lack of meaningful customer service and an apparent reliance on policy technicalities to avoid engaging with legitimate product quality issues. The issue raised is not cosmetic and not hygiene-related. It is a structural failure — namely noticeable sagging and side bulging — which directly affects comfort, support, and usability. These are defects that can (and often do) develop well before a mattress shows visible surface wear. Conflating structural integrity with surface cleanliness is both misleading and unreasonable. Your response also references the recommendation that customers purchase a mattress protector. Had there been any effort to properly interrogate the original invoice, it would have been evident that a mattress protector was in fact purchased. Despite this, the claim was still dismissed, further underscoring the impression that policy is being used as a barrier rather than a framework for fair assessment. The suggestion that the presence of stains — regardless of cause or relevance — automatically invalidates any consideration of a structural claim demonstrates a serious disconnect from consumer expectations and basic principles of after-sales support. A mattress does not need to be “pristine” to fail structurally, and requiring this as a precondition to even assess a claim comes across as a convenient loophole rather than a fair warranty practice. Your response repeatedly references internal policies and warranty wording, yet shows no attempt to engage with the substance of the complaint or to apply any discretion, inspection, or customer-centric judgement. Citing policy without applying common sense or technical evaluation is not customer support — it is deflection. For a premium brand positioned on quality, durability, and long-term comfort, this approach is deeply disappointing. A product designed to support a person’s body for many years should reasonably be expected to maintain its structural integrity, and customers should not be dismissed when raising genuine concerns simply because the product no longer appears “as new.” I stand by my original assessment: both the product durability and the after-sales response fall well short of expectations. I would urge your team to reconsider how warranty claims are handled if customer trust and brand reputation are to be taken seriously.