I recently ordered five pallets of Raleigh St. Augustine sod after being assured of its quality over the phone. I also reviewed customer feedback beforehand, which gave me confidence that I was making a good choice.
Unfortunately, the product that was delivered fell well short of expectations. The grass was thin, weak, and of noticeably poor quality. Even more concerning, it was infested with grubs. This was not simply a matter of cosmetic imperfections—it raised serious questions about whether the sod was suitable for delivery at all.
I realize I chose a lower-cost variety, and I fully accept that different grasses come at different price points. However, in this case, what I received was not just lower-grade sod; it was sod that appeared compromised from the start. In my opinion, it should not have left the supplier in that condition, regardless of price point.
I reached out to Grass Outlet to express my disappointment and requested either a replacement or a discount toward a different grass variety. Instead, I received a lengthy, ten-point list of questions and requirements, which felt less like a genuine attempt to resolve the issue and more like a burden placed on the customer.
I understand the challenges of working with a living product, and I appreciate the complexities involved in harvesting, transporting, and installing sod. That said, there must be a quality threshold below which product should not be shipped. Raleigh St. Augustine of this condition risks damaging customer trust and, frankly, the reputation of the supplier.
My intent in sharing this feedback is constructive: Grass Outlet should carefully review its quality assurance processes, reconsider whether certain products are fit to sell, and handle dissatisfied customers with more flexibility and understanding. Customers like myself place a great deal of trust in the assurances made at the point of sale, and when that trust is broken, it is difficult to repair.