Why does the delivered FR10 adapter cover the access our drawing requires?

Their latest photograph is adapter only, Bruno. Our tool flange covers the side they appear to reach from. I've sent an overlay using the agreed tool drawing.

Has their technical person acknowledged that overlay, rather than sales repeating the equivalence line?

Also ask how the tool comes off later. Assembly order can hide a maintenance trap.

Technical contact has it now. Their first suggestion is a stand-off plate. No dimensions supplied yet, so I have not asked the installer to try it.

A stand-off changes the installed arrangement; its geometry and load implications belong in the comparison, not just its bolt pattern.

And why not supply the agreed interface instead? They should at least explain whether that's available before turning your paid configuration into another design job.

Who pays for that new plate and another installer visit?

Jasper, retain the original fitting plan. Don't overwrite it with the proposed workaround.

Bruno, they say the agreed interface is unavailable in their current stock. Oscar, they've offered to cover the proposed plate and installation revisit. Our installer still needs the actual assembly assessment before choosing that route.

A paid workaround can still be a poor workaround. What access does it leave for tool removal?

The dimensioned proposal arrived. It restores fastener access but moves the tool forward enough to conflict with our receiving fixture in the existing layout. Installer has rejected it as proposed.

Then the money offer hasn't solved the fitting problem.

Correct. I've declined the plate proposal and asked for an agreed-interface supply answer or another complete option. We haven't modified our fixture to rescue it.

Keep the rejected proposal and the identified receiving-fixture conflict with that response; it gives the next technical reviewer a specific constraint rather than another unexplained refusal.