This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
After 2 years years of trying to get the guy who built an extension to come and fix an eyesore of a window that he put in the wrong place, I finally lost patience and took him to the small claims court. The hearing is early next year.
The two things I have to think about are 1) will I win or lose? And 2) if I win, will I get any money out of him?
Does anyone here have any experience of either of these things? If it turns out to be a bad idea, I have a couple of months during which I could pull out and recoup the money I paid for a hearing fee, which is a few hundred quid.
Thanks.
The two things I have to think about are 1) will I win or lose? And 2) if I win, will I get any money out of him?
Does anyone here have any experience of either of these things? If it turns out to be a bad idea, I have a couple of months during which I could pull out and recoup the money I paid for a hearing fee, which is a few hundred quid.
Thanks.
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
And 2) if I win, will I get any money out of him?
not if he goes bankrupt first; do you never watch the telly, that and washed up celebrities is about all that's on it.
And 2) if I win, will I get any money out of him?
not if he goes bankrupt first; do you never watch the telly, that and washed up celebrities is about all that's on it.
In reply to Hyphin:
I don't watch a lot of TV these days. What makes good television doesn't necessarily make for good practice - how seriously to you take Bear Grylls? - No, let's not make this thread a discussion about him, but...
I'm interested in hearing from people who've actually taken builders to court themselves - are there any here?
> not if he goes bankrupt first; do you never watch the telly,
I don't watch a lot of TV these days. What makes good television doesn't necessarily make for good practice - how seriously to you take Bear Grylls? - No, let's not make this thread a discussion about him, but...
I'm interested in hearing from people who've actually taken builders to court themselves - are there any here?
8
5
In reply to Andy Morley:
If he's a limited company, it's very easy for him to go into liquidation and you won't get a penny out of him. If he's not limited, you might be able to get something. I haven't taken anyone to small claims court, so can only give you second hand information.. A friend of mine took a building company to small claims court, won and never got a penny. The court bailiff didn't manage to get anything for him either!?!
If he's a limited company, it's very easy for him to go into liquidation and you won't get a penny out of him. If he's not limited, you might be able to get something. I haven't taken anyone to small claims court, so can only give you second hand information.. A friend of mine took a building company to small claims court, won and never got a penny. The court bailiff didn't manage to get anything for him either!?!
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
The answer to this all depends what you have in writing. I run my own small business in the building trade and all details for projects have a complete rundown with drawings regarding every last detail with both parties signing before anything happens. If you don't have this then it could all get a bit he said this and he promised that.
Will you get any money out of him if you win? Depends if he has any money or if he recognises the judgement. Some just simply refuse to pay. All the best of luck getting it sorted.
My pet hate is anybody hiring tradesmen or weekend cash in hand tax cheats. I'm not suggesting for a moment you have done this but I'd hope such risks would put off anybody aiding dishonest business.
The answer to this all depends what you have in writing. I run my own small business in the building trade and all details for projects have a complete rundown with drawings regarding every last detail with both parties signing before anything happens. If you don't have this then it could all get a bit he said this and he promised that.
Will you get any money out of him if you win? Depends if he has any money or if he recognises the judgement. Some just simply refuse to pay. All the best of luck getting it sorted.
My pet hate is anybody hiring tradesmen or weekend cash in hand tax cheats. I'm not suggesting for a moment you have done this but I'd hope such risks would put off anybody aiding dishonest business.
Post edited at 18:09
3
In reply to Andy Morley:
Not from first hand experience, but anecdotally going bankrupt just before appearing in court then reappearing under a new company name would appear to be fairly standard practice among "cowboy" builders. What's he got to lose, is it a long established family firm with a good reputation, a big firm with plenty of capital behind it, or a man with a van and some rented tools?
Not from first hand experience, but anecdotally going bankrupt just before appearing in court then reappearing under a new company name would appear to be fairly standard practice among "cowboy" builders. What's he got to lose, is it a long established family firm with a good reputation, a big firm with plenty of capital behind it, or a man with a van and some rented tools?
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
Yes, and I won. That was in Norway though. I had to pull them in for working too slowly *there is a time limit for what's acceptable for a build, and they wenr well over this and wouldn't pay the regulated fine.
As stated above, depends on what's in writing. What you get back depends on the size of the company I suspect. Larger ones can't dodge so easily
Yes, and I won. That was in Norway though. I had to pull them in for working too slowly *there is a time limit for what's acceptable for a build, and they wenr well over this and wouldn't pay the regulated fine.
As stated above, depends on what's in writing. What you get back depends on the size of the company I suspect. Larger ones can't dodge so easily
1
In reply to olddirtydoggy:
I paid him 50% bank transfer and 50% cash. I don't actually think this was an income tax dodge though it might have been a way to keep his turnover under the VAT threshold - the cash was for him to pay his son's/abourer's wages and incidental expenditure.
His defence is that I (his customer) 'appointed myself project manager' and was therefore responsible for verifying all his setting out - of window openings and the like. In actual fact, when he was setting out the foundations from the architect's working drawings, he was obviously very good at it, so after that, I let him get on with the setting out without my interfering.
However, it's my belief that when it came to setting out the upstairs, he had lost the relevant drawing and was too proud to say so, and so asked me a lot of indirect questions about where I wanted the window to go. I thought this was just about 'working courses' (adjusting the opening to increments of one brick or one half brick) and I believed his assurance that it would not be less than half a brick out of true from the gable above.
> My pet hate is anybody hiring tradesmen or weekend cash in hand tax cheats. I'm not suggesting for a moment you have done this but I'd hope such risks would put off anybody aiding dishonest business.
I paid him 50% bank transfer and 50% cash. I don't actually think this was an income tax dodge though it might have been a way to keep his turnover under the VAT threshold - the cash was for him to pay his son's/abourer's wages and incidental expenditure.
His defence is that I (his customer) 'appointed myself project manager' and was therefore responsible for verifying all his setting out - of window openings and the like. In actual fact, when he was setting out the foundations from the architect's working drawings, he was obviously very good at it, so after that, I let him get on with the setting out without my interfering.
However, it's my belief that when it came to setting out the upstairs, he had lost the relevant drawing and was too proud to say so, and so asked me a lot of indirect questions about where I wanted the window to go. I thought this was just about 'working courses' (adjusting the opening to increments of one brick or one half brick) and I believed his assurance that it would not be less than half a brick out of true from the gable above.
In reply to Hyphin:
I think he's a subcontract bricklayer who's probably worked on building sites for main contractors and who fancied being a main contractor himself. Whatever he does on that score generates cash flow but he makes his real money from doing up houses which he lives in as his 'main residence' for a while and then sells on - he would avoid capital gains tax that way. His current home address has been on the market since March this year.
When I gave him the contract, he'd just completed a very similar extension around the corner. His website at the time was aimed at householders wanting someone to build extensions or complete houses, and he 'guaranteed' quality by doing the work himself with his 'team' (son). He took this website down after these problems first emerged, suggesting to me that he realised that he'd been over-ambitious. His defence starts of by saying he was only a subcontractor - he seems to be suggesting that I, as customer, was the 'main contractor'.
> Not from first hand experience, but anecdotally going bankrupt just before appearing in court then reappearing under a new company name would appear to be fairly standard practice among "cowboy" builders. What's he got to lose, is it a long established family firm with a good reputation, a big firm with plenty of capital behind it, or a man with a van and some rented tools?
I think he's a subcontract bricklayer who's probably worked on building sites for main contractors and who fancied being a main contractor himself. Whatever he does on that score generates cash flow but he makes his real money from doing up houses which he lives in as his 'main residence' for a while and then sells on - he would avoid capital gains tax that way. His current home address has been on the market since March this year.
When I gave him the contract, he'd just completed a very similar extension around the corner. His website at the time was aimed at householders wanting someone to build extensions or complete houses, and he 'guaranteed' quality by doing the work himself with his 'team' (son). He took this website down after these problems first emerged, suggesting to me that he realised that he'd been over-ambitious. His defence starts of by saying he was only a subcontractor - he seems to be suggesting that I, as customer, was the 'main contractor'.
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
Too true. He picked a fight with Greg Boswell and got his arse handed to him, the big jessie.
> Bear Grylls is a tw*t.
Too true. He picked a fight with Greg Boswell and got his arse handed to him, the big jessie.
1
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
Usually hate those "well I'm no expert in this but....." answers.
BUT
I think I'd be starting to look at the cost of taking him to court against the cost of getting someone reliable to sort out the window. Doesn't sound like he'd have a lot to lose.
Usually hate those "well I'm no expert in this but....." answers.
BUT
I think I'd be starting to look at the cost of taking him to court against the cost of getting someone reliable to sort out the window. Doesn't sound like he'd have a lot to lose.
In reply to Hyphin:
Yeah, that's what's going through my mind right now. But it is only the Small Claims Court.
> I think I'd be starting to look at the cost of taking him to court against the cost of getting someone reliable to sort out the window. Doesn't sound like he'd have a lot to lose.
Yeah, that's what's going through my mind right now. But it is only the Small Claims Court.
In reply to Andy Morley:
The hassle of closing down his company to avoid fixing your window may be such an irritant to him that he decides to perform the work but then again maybe not. I'd have been tempted to write a draft article, with pictures, for the local paper (they welcome cheap editorial) describing his incompetence and fecklessness and then sending it to him for review and rebuttal. Reputations matter and the thought of being embarrassed in the local paper might be motivational. Then again, he might call your bluff and then you'd need to be careful that the article wasn't defamatory if you went ahead with it.
Or you could reflect on how treating people with more decency and respect has probably landed you with a lifestyle and regular sleep that might be denied to your builder by his more haphazard approach. In similar situations, after I've grumbled and grimaced for a while this is what I normally end up reflecting on, usually to the point of moving on with a degree of contentment.
The hassle of closing down his company to avoid fixing your window may be such an irritant to him that he decides to perform the work but then again maybe not. I'd have been tempted to write a draft article, with pictures, for the local paper (they welcome cheap editorial) describing his incompetence and fecklessness and then sending it to him for review and rebuttal. Reputations matter and the thought of being embarrassed in the local paper might be motivational. Then again, he might call your bluff and then you'd need to be careful that the article wasn't defamatory if you went ahead with it.
Or you could reflect on how treating people with more decency and respect has probably landed you with a lifestyle and regular sleep that might be denied to your builder by his more haphazard approach. In similar situations, after I've grumbled and grimaced for a while this is what I normally end up reflecting on, usually to the point of moving on with a degree of contentment.
Post edited at 19:05
4
2
In reply to BnB:
I was hoping this, but I've reached the conclusion that he's a very stubborn guy with a point to prove - that he can't possibly ever be wrong. It's amazing how many bricklayers come to resemble the materials they work with - uncompromising and unforgiving.
Well I gave him plenty of opportunities to work with me to arrive at a negotiated solution. But when someone won't answer their phone and then, when you do manage to agree a meeting, they don't turn up, it's hard. In the end, I just didn't see any other options than to go this route. I could have just accepted the window and lived with it, but it's a nice old Victorian house that will hopefully be here for many hundreds of years to come and the thought of an eyesore of a misplaced window for all those years to come would be a detrimental factor in my own ease of sleep!
> The hassle of closing down his company to avoid fixing your window may be such an irritant to him that he decides to perform the work but then again maybe not.
I was hoping this, but I've reached the conclusion that he's a very stubborn guy with a point to prove - that he can't possibly ever be wrong. It's amazing how many bricklayers come to resemble the materials they work with - uncompromising and unforgiving.
> Or you could reflect on how treating people with more decency and respect has probably landed you with a lifestyle and regular sleep that might be denied to your builder
Well I gave him plenty of opportunities to work with me to arrive at a negotiated solution. But when someone won't answer their phone and then, when you do manage to agree a meeting, they don't turn up, it's hard. In the end, I just didn't see any other options than to go this route. I could have just accepted the window and lived with it, but it's a nice old Victorian house that will hopefully be here for many hundreds of years to come and the thought of an eyesore of a misplaced window for all those years to come would be a detrimental factor in my own ease of sleep!
4
1
In reply to BnB:
Whoa there, feller! I think we need to hear the builder's side of the story here!
The OP wrote: "His defence is that I (his customer) 'appointed myself project manager' and was therefore responsible for verifying all his setting out - of window openings and the like. In actual fact [...snip...] I let him get on with the setting out without my interfering."
*If* that's true, then the blame perhaps accrues to the absent project manager.
Anyway: the court will decide.
> Or you could reflect on how treating people with more decency and respect has probably landed you with a lifestyle and regular sleep that might be denied to your builder by his more haphazard approach.
Whoa there, feller! I think we need to hear the builder's side of the story here!
The OP wrote: "His defence is that I (his customer) 'appointed myself project manager' and was therefore responsible for verifying all his setting out - of window openings and the like. In actual fact [...snip...] I let him get on with the setting out without my interfering."
*If* that's true, then the blame perhaps accrues to the absent project manager.
Anyway: the court will decide.
2
In reply to Rob Parsons & OP:
Fwiw, I've never worked on a project of any size where the project manager was responsible for setting out.
Fwiw, I've never worked on a project of any size where the project manager was responsible for setting out.
6
In reply to Rob Parsons:
Of course there are two sides to every story. I was simply pointing out, from the aggrieved (and one-sided) customer's stance and viewpoint, how he might move on without continuing the conflict. It appears however from a second glance at the thread that there are architects drawings in the mix. Surely these set out the window proportions and placement and are therefore germane to the dispute?
Of course there are two sides to every story. I was simply pointing out, from the aggrieved (and one-sided) customer's stance and viewpoint, how he might move on without continuing the conflict. It appears however from a second glance at the thread that there are architects drawings in the mix. Surely these set out the window proportions and placement and are therefore germane to the dispute?
1
1
In reply to BnB:
They certainly do. It's my belief that he lost his copy of the crucial working drawing at the time he set this window out. Statements he made in his defence seem to bear this out, e.g. "I was only provided with planning drawings, not working drawings" (or words to that effect) whereas the architect produced 6 sheets, one 'as was', two planning drawings and three working drawings.
> Surely these set out the window proportions and placement and are therefore germane to the dispute?
They certainly do. It's my belief that he lost his copy of the crucial working drawing at the time he set this window out. Statements he made in his defence seem to bear this out, e.g. "I was only provided with planning drawings, not working drawings" (or words to that effect) whereas the architect produced 6 sheets, one 'as was', two planning drawings and three working drawings.
1
In reply to Rob Parsons:
Obviously, the following is fictitious and bears no resemblance to any people or situations, real or otherwise, but a builder writes:
So a while ago, it occurred to me that there was money to be made in knocking a few extensions up. Nice little jobs and the first couple went like a dream. I'd stick some cheapish quotes in and I wasn't too busy what with just starting to build the business up, so this bloke asked me to come and do one on his house. There's only me and the boy and we get the chippys and sparkys in as needed, so the guy said he wanted to project manage. That way, he said, everything would be done exactly as he wanted and whatever he finished up with, it would be as he specified. And with him keeping an eye on everything, there wouldn't be any confusion or hassle at the end - that's the whole point of having a project manager, it works for both sides.
It was a bit of a PITA at first, to be honest, as I'm the builder and he, well, wasn't. But once I'd got the foundations sorted and he realised that I knew more about this stuff than he did, and I was good at it, he left me alone. Obviously, with it being on the side of his house he could see what I'd done each day and if anything was out of whack, he could get me to change it next morning, before we went any further. With it being me and the boy, it wasn't like we were rushing along anyway so anything wrong would have been an easy fix with no skin off my nose. But he never said a thing.
It was all going fine until we got to the upstairs windows. There was some confusion about one of them and it seemed like an odd place to put it, but I kept asking him and he kept saying everything was fine. I even tried dropping some hints by asking odd questions, but he was adamant he wanted me to carry on. And like I say, it was his house and he wanted to be project manager, so he was the boss. And it would have been obvious for days on end if the openings were in the wrong place. Not a dicky bird from him.
So I finished the job and he paid the full amount - half cash, half bank transfer, all above board. And I thought, that went well and looked to the next job.
But then he starts contacting me, saying one of the windows is in the wrong place. At first I thought it was a joke, so I laughed politely. But he carried on: he was absolutely serious. One of the windows, that I built on the side of his house while he watched me do it, never saying a word, is in the wrong place. This extension, that he'd apparently been happy to pay for at the time, has a window in the wrong place.
I've tried ignoring him, but he won't leave me alone and he wants to take me to court now. Why, I have no idea. But he says he's got a court date. Fortunately, a mate of mine goes on this climbing website and the guy's been posting on it using his real name, admitting that he was project managing but left me to myself and didn't give me any input, and that I asked him a few times about the window, but he didn't get what I was asking about. And that he paid me. So I reckon if I turn up in court with that and the judge asks him why he didn't ask for the window to be moved while I was still building it, it'll all get thrown out. Doesn't he realise this is how I make my living? I can't just take time off to move a window at my own expense, plus lost wages, because he's decided he doesn't like it there after all.
The stress is killing me.
> Whoa there, feller! I think we need to hear the builder's side of the story here!
Obviously, the following is fictitious and bears no resemblance to any people or situations, real or otherwise, but a builder writes:
So a while ago, it occurred to me that there was money to be made in knocking a few extensions up. Nice little jobs and the first couple went like a dream. I'd stick some cheapish quotes in and I wasn't too busy what with just starting to build the business up, so this bloke asked me to come and do one on his house. There's only me and the boy and we get the chippys and sparkys in as needed, so the guy said he wanted to project manage. That way, he said, everything would be done exactly as he wanted and whatever he finished up with, it would be as he specified. And with him keeping an eye on everything, there wouldn't be any confusion or hassle at the end - that's the whole point of having a project manager, it works for both sides.
It was a bit of a PITA at first, to be honest, as I'm the builder and he, well, wasn't. But once I'd got the foundations sorted and he realised that I knew more about this stuff than he did, and I was good at it, he left me alone. Obviously, with it being on the side of his house he could see what I'd done each day and if anything was out of whack, he could get me to change it next morning, before we went any further. With it being me and the boy, it wasn't like we were rushing along anyway so anything wrong would have been an easy fix with no skin off my nose. But he never said a thing.
It was all going fine until we got to the upstairs windows. There was some confusion about one of them and it seemed like an odd place to put it, but I kept asking him and he kept saying everything was fine. I even tried dropping some hints by asking odd questions, but he was adamant he wanted me to carry on. And like I say, it was his house and he wanted to be project manager, so he was the boss. And it would have been obvious for days on end if the openings were in the wrong place. Not a dicky bird from him.
So I finished the job and he paid the full amount - half cash, half bank transfer, all above board. And I thought, that went well and looked to the next job.
But then he starts contacting me, saying one of the windows is in the wrong place. At first I thought it was a joke, so I laughed politely. But he carried on: he was absolutely serious. One of the windows, that I built on the side of his house while he watched me do it, never saying a word, is in the wrong place. This extension, that he'd apparently been happy to pay for at the time, has a window in the wrong place.
I've tried ignoring him, but he won't leave me alone and he wants to take me to court now. Why, I have no idea. But he says he's got a court date. Fortunately, a mate of mine goes on this climbing website and the guy's been posting on it using his real name, admitting that he was project managing but left me to myself and didn't give me any input, and that I asked him a few times about the window, but he didn't get what I was asking about. And that he paid me. So I reckon if I turn up in court with that and the judge asks him why he didn't ask for the window to be moved while I was still building it, it'll all get thrown out. Doesn't he realise this is how I make my living? I can't just take time off to move a window at my own expense, plus lost wages, because he's decided he doesn't like it there after all.
The stress is killing me.
17
In reply to Martin not maisie:
Being a self employed builder this "story" rings so true.lots of people decide to project manage their builds because they've watched grand designs and all builders are retards so how hard can it be ? Harder than you think probably.obviously I'm not suggesting this is the case but there would have been plenty of time to mention the window during the construction phase.clients eh,who needs em ?
Being a self employed builder this "story" rings so true.lots of people decide to project manage their builds because they've watched grand designs and all builders are retards so how hard can it be ? Harder than you think probably.obviously I'm not suggesting this is the case but there would have been plenty of time to mention the window during the construction phase.clients eh,who needs em ?
5
In reply to Wsdconst:
On the other hand, how hard can it be to follow an architect's drawing? Specially when it shows the window plumb in line with the ridge at the top of the gable just a few feet above... Would you find that hard if you were in his situation? Bearing in mind that the roof timbers had already been put in place, correctly, by a chippy he himself had introduced for that very purpose?
The reason it didn't become obvious earlier was that he set it out then disappeared early without finishing the job, which he shunted on to a retired brickie to finish, building on what he had set out. It went up wrapped in hessian because it was cold at nights. The problem only showed when the hessian came off, by which time the guy who did the setting out was long gone.
> Being a self employed builder this "story" rings so true.lots of people decide to project manage their builds because they've watched grand designs and all builders are retards so how hard can it be ? Harder than you think probably.obviously I'm not suggesting this is the case but there would have been plenty of time to mention the window during the construction phase.clients eh,who needs em ?
On the other hand, how hard can it be to follow an architect's drawing? Specially when it shows the window plumb in line with the ridge at the top of the gable just a few feet above... Would you find that hard if you were in his situation? Bearing in mind that the roof timbers had already been put in place, correctly, by a chippy he himself had introduced for that very purpose?
The reason it didn't become obvious earlier was that he set it out then disappeared early without finishing the job, which he shunted on to a retired brickie to finish, building on what he had set out. It went up wrapped in hessian because it was cold at nights. The problem only showed when the hessian came off, by which time the guy who did the setting out was long gone.
In reply to Andy Morley:
As long as you have a drawing and something in writing you are on to a winner.
As long as you have a drawing and something in writing you are on to a winner.
In reply to Andy Morley:
I don't want to add to your anguish but did the builder give you an invoice for the full amount or just the element that you paid for by bank transfer? It's a side issue but, in the absence of a full invoice, you are possibly a party to the builder's VAT and income tax fraud. Artificially keeping turnover below the VAT threshold is a form of tax avoidance that, multiplied many times across thousands of tradesmen, costs the exchequer far more than the corporate version plyed by Starbucks or Google. And failing to declare income by routing cash directly to staff (or oneself) without declaring the wages is even worse as it denies the state income tax and employers' as well as employee's national insurance.
I don't actually believe the small claims court thinks in such a joined up way to make an issue of this. However, I've suffered VAT fraud against my business (charging VAT with a fake number) and you may find the threat of reporting the miscreant to HMRC highly motivational (if you get my drift) compared to a civil claim. The worry would be the extent to which you are deemed a party to the fraud (if such a fraud exists of course), which you don't appear to have fully grasped when you speculate on the reasons for the financial arrangements.
I don't want to add to your anguish but did the builder give you an invoice for the full amount or just the element that you paid for by bank transfer? It's a side issue but, in the absence of a full invoice, you are possibly a party to the builder's VAT and income tax fraud. Artificially keeping turnover below the VAT threshold is a form of tax avoidance that, multiplied many times across thousands of tradesmen, costs the exchequer far more than the corporate version plyed by Starbucks or Google. And failing to declare income by routing cash directly to staff (or oneself) without declaring the wages is even worse as it denies the state income tax and employers' as well as employee's national insurance.
I don't actually believe the small claims court thinks in such a joined up way to make an issue of this. However, I've suffered VAT fraud against my business (charging VAT with a fake number) and you may find the threat of reporting the miscreant to HMRC highly motivational (if you get my drift) compared to a civil claim. The worry would be the extent to which you are deemed a party to the fraud (if such a fraud exists of course), which you don't appear to have fully grasped when you speculate on the reasons for the financial arrangements.
Post edited at 08:21
In reply to Martin not maisie:
Thanks for that Martin not! You obviously have a bit of a talent going on there for creative writing
I guess if that's all his defence could come up with, I should, theoretically win, but it's worth remembering that the court may feel a teeny bit sorry for the guy, so it's good that you've highlighted that. Please feel free to carry on in that vein if any more thoughts like that occur to you...
> Obviously, the following is fictitious and bears no resemblance to any people or situations, real or otherwise, but a builder writes:
<...Snip...>> So I reckon if I turn up in court with that and the judge asks him why he didn't ask for the window to be moved while I was still building it, it'll all get thrown out. Doesn't he realise this is how I make my living? I can't just take time off to move a window at my own expense, plus lost wages, because he's decided he doesn't like it there after all. > The stress is killing me.
Thanks for that Martin not! You obviously have a bit of a talent going on there for creative writing
I guess if that's all his defence could come up with, I should, theoretically win, but it's worth remembering that the court may feel a teeny bit sorry for the guy, so it's good that you've highlighted that. Please feel free to carry on in that vein if any more thoughts like that occur to you...
1
In reply to olddirtydoggy:
Thanks, I'm encouraged that you think so. But if I do win, what do you reckon to my chances of seeing anything by way of actual spondulics by way of compensation from him?
Given that he's the kind of guy who just does jobs like this for cash-flow and makes his real money from doing up houses and selling them. it would probably be quite easy for him to squirrel all his assets away. As I mentioned, guys like this buy a house, live in a couple of years then sell it on at a profit. His current address has been on the market for 6 months, by the time this all comes to anything, he may well have sold it and bought another one in his wife's name, and be saying 'sorry mate, I'm skint' when the baliffs come knocking at his wife's door.
Do you know if there's any way around that one?
> As long as you have a drawing and something in writing you are on to a winner.
Thanks, I'm encouraged that you think so. But if I do win, what do you reckon to my chances of seeing anything by way of actual spondulics by way of compensation from him?
Given that he's the kind of guy who just does jobs like this for cash-flow and makes his real money from doing up houses and selling them. it would probably be quite easy for him to squirrel all his assets away. As I mentioned, guys like this buy a house, live in a couple of years then sell it on at a profit. His current address has been on the market for 6 months, by the time this all comes to anything, he may well have sold it and bought another one in his wife's name, and be saying 'sorry mate, I'm skint' when the baliffs come knocking at his wife's door.
Do you know if there's any way around that one?
In reply to BnB:
I think the problem I've had with the guy is that he's someone who's incredibly stubborn and unwilling to admit to his mistakes. If I thought that he'd been in any way bent I would not have used him. I actually had the conversation about cash payments with him and his colleague the chippy he introduced to put rafters up for him to build to (and who managed to get his bit right). They both said that they declared all they earned, including cash, because they worked all year round and if they didn't declare it, there would be a hole in their earnings that would be awkward to explain. When someone has wages to pay, I guess it speeds things up and makes it easier for a small-ish operator to have cash to pay his son/ labourer with. But these days, the VAT threshold is high enough for them to fall clear of, so even taking both of them into account, they wouldn't have gone over it.
In retrospect, I think that the VAT angle applies more to materials than anything else - I picked up the tab for those, so they would not have gone through his books - he told me what he wanted and I phoned the supplier he recommended. I don't know if he was getting any kind of kickback from the supplier but to be honest I wasn't overly fussed by that since I was paying a competitive price and everyone has to earn a living. However, as he's not in the business of supplying building materials, I can't see how the VAT inspectors could complain just because he wasn't funnelling that spend through his books, and obviously I was paying VAT on the materials I bought.
> I don't want to add to your anguish but did the builder give you an invoice for the full amount or just the element that you paid for by bank transfer? It's a side issue but, in the absence of a full invoice, you are possibly a party to the builder's VAT and income tax fraud. Artificially keeping turnover below the VAT threshold is a form of tax avoidance that, multiplied many times across thousands of tradesmen, costs the exchequer far more than the corporate version plyed by Starbucks or Google. And failing to declare income by routing cash directly to staff (or oneself) without declaring the wages is even worse as it denies the state income tax and employers' as well as employee's national insurance.
I think the problem I've had with the guy is that he's someone who's incredibly stubborn and unwilling to admit to his mistakes. If I thought that he'd been in any way bent I would not have used him. I actually had the conversation about cash payments with him and his colleague the chippy he introduced to put rafters up for him to build to (and who managed to get his bit right). They both said that they declared all they earned, including cash, because they worked all year round and if they didn't declare it, there would be a hole in their earnings that would be awkward to explain. When someone has wages to pay, I guess it speeds things up and makes it easier for a small-ish operator to have cash to pay his son/ labourer with. But these days, the VAT threshold is high enough for them to fall clear of, so even taking both of them into account, they wouldn't have gone over it.
In retrospect, I think that the VAT angle applies more to materials than anything else - I picked up the tab for those, so they would not have gone through his books - he told me what he wanted and I phoned the supplier he recommended. I don't know if he was getting any kind of kickback from the supplier but to be honest I wasn't overly fussed by that since I was paying a competitive price and everyone has to earn a living. However, as he's not in the business of supplying building materials, I can't see how the VAT inspectors could complain just because he wasn't funnelling that spend through his books, and obviously I was paying VAT on the materials I bought.
In reply to Andy Morley:
I don't know if you've tried it already, but if he's registered with an industry body (e.g. Federation of Master Builders) then you might find it helps registering a complaint through them as well. This worked wonders for us with a company that was refusing to put right bad work in a similar way.
Losing registration would have meant they couldn't get work from bigger companies, or on some council / public funded schemes as easily and folk undertaking big projects wouldn't use them or would see they had outstanding judgements against them. The threat of that seemed a lot more motivational than that of court.
Plus the fact that the disputes are arbitrated by others within the trade helps if they don't consider themselves cowboys as they could end up with a bad reputation / loosing face within the industry. In our case they ended up being told to pay up for another company to make good the work and did so without too much fuss after the judgement.
I was pleasantly surprised by how seriously the body took the complaint - I'd always seen them as a shield for the builders rather than for customers but I couldn't fault the way they handled the complaint. Worth a thought anyway!
Hope it gets sorted out!
Cheers,
Stuart
I don't know if you've tried it already, but if he's registered with an industry body (e.g. Federation of Master Builders) then you might find it helps registering a complaint through them as well. This worked wonders for us with a company that was refusing to put right bad work in a similar way.
Losing registration would have meant they couldn't get work from bigger companies, or on some council / public funded schemes as easily and folk undertaking big projects wouldn't use them or would see they had outstanding judgements against them. The threat of that seemed a lot more motivational than that of court.
Plus the fact that the disputes are arbitrated by others within the trade helps if they don't consider themselves cowboys as they could end up with a bad reputation / loosing face within the industry. In our case they ended up being told to pay up for another company to make good the work and did so without too much fuss after the judgement.
I was pleasantly surprised by how seriously the body took the complaint - I'd always seen them as a shield for the builders rather than for customers but I couldn't fault the way they handled the complaint. Worth a thought anyway!
Hope it gets sorted out!
Cheers,
Stuart
2
In reply to Andy Morley:
They would be the first tradesmen to have to make monthly declarations of turnover then!! Most businesses submit accounts annually
> I think the problem I've had with the guy is that he's someone who's incredibly stubborn and unwilling to admit to his mistakes. If I thought that he'd been in any way bent I would not have used him. I actually had the conversation about cash payments with him and his colleague the chippy he introduced to put rafters up for him to build to (and who managed to get his bit right). They both said that they declared all they earned, including cash, because they worked all year round and if they didn't declare it, there would be a hole in their earnings that would be awkward to explain.
They would be the first tradesmen to have to make monthly declarations of turnover then!! Most businesses submit accounts annually
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
He won't contest it and you'll win but the Court will gobble some of the money.
A roofer dropped slates on my motorbike and damaged the seat and the tank. I took it up with him and he agreed to pay but when he saw the actual bill he went all quiet. So I went to the Small Claims Court and got my money back, or around half of it plus the satisfaction.
He won't contest it and you'll win but the Court will gobble some of the money.
A roofer dropped slates on my motorbike and damaged the seat and the tank. I took it up with him and he agreed to pay but when he saw the actual bill he went all quiet. So I went to the Small Claims Court and got my money back, or around half of it plus the satisfaction.
In reply to Rigid Raider:
I guess not all builders are the same. This guy is contesting it fiercely, even though it would seem he doesn't have much of a leg to stand on. I really do think, as I've said before, that some bricklayers do come to resemble the materials that they work with when it comes to being unyielding...
> He won't contest it and you'll win but the Court will gobble some of the money.
I guess not all builders are the same. This guy is contesting it fiercely, even though it would seem he doesn't have much of a leg to stand on. I really do think, as I've said before, that some bricklayers do come to resemble the materials that they work with when it comes to being unyielding...
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
An elevation drawing might show the window centred on the gable, but how about the plan dimensions? An architect's drawings is rarely perfect, and it wouldn't be unusual to have dimensions off one wall to position a window on a plan drawing that were at odds with an elevation drawing. This could also arise from a different thickness wall construction being used or the window size being changed if dimensions are provided from face to face of each element. Other things might also constrain the positioning of a window. So, to someone with no knowledge of construction it might seem very straightforward, whereas in reality it's not. You might see a pretty picture of a gable with a window looking like it's in the centre that to you is crystal clear, a bricklayer might see a working plan drawing he's been given with 5.175m dimension from one wall to the edge of window, and to him that's crystal clear.
Also, it seems really strange that you'd let them complete all the finishings whilst knowing this problem was present. Moving the window might not be a big problem prior to plastering, painting etc., and whilst scaffolding is still up but leaving it until someone has moved in is adding massively to the cost and disruption.
And the windows to my house aren't centred on the gable, neither are several across the road as I look out the window.
> On the other hand, how hard can it be to follow an architect's drawing? Specially when it shows the window plumb in line with the ridge at the top of the gable just a few feet above... Would you find that hard if you were in his situation? Bearing in mind that the roof timbers had already been put in place, correctly, by a chippy he himself had introduced for that very purpose?
An elevation drawing might show the window centred on the gable, but how about the plan dimensions? An architect's drawings is rarely perfect, and it wouldn't be unusual to have dimensions off one wall to position a window on a plan drawing that were at odds with an elevation drawing. This could also arise from a different thickness wall construction being used or the window size being changed if dimensions are provided from face to face of each element. Other things might also constrain the positioning of a window. So, to someone with no knowledge of construction it might seem very straightforward, whereas in reality it's not. You might see a pretty picture of a gable with a window looking like it's in the centre that to you is crystal clear, a bricklayer might see a working plan drawing he's been given with 5.175m dimension from one wall to the edge of window, and to him that's crystal clear.
Also, it seems really strange that you'd let them complete all the finishings whilst knowing this problem was present. Moving the window might not be a big problem prior to plastering, painting etc., and whilst scaffolding is still up but leaving it until someone has moved in is adding massively to the cost and disruption.
And the windows to my house aren't centred on the gable, neither are several across the road as I look out the window.
Post edited at 11:08
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
I'd be surprised if you 'win'. SCC will award a part settlement which both parties will find equally annoyed about but will accept. In my reasonable experience of SCCs they are less interested in a just ruling and more in preventing the case coming back. I (my company) has had judgements that have left us in disbelief!
And whether you actually recover the money is another question.
I'd be surprised if you 'win'. SCC will award a part settlement which both parties will find equally annoyed about but will accept. In my reasonable experience of SCCs they are less interested in a just ruling and more in preventing the case coming back. I (my company) has had judgements that have left us in disbelief!
And whether you actually recover the money is another question.
In reply to Andy Morley:
Oh, then you should definitely take him to court. Please do come back and tell us all about it.
Oh, then you should definitely take him to court. Please do come back and tell us all about it.
4
In reply to Andy Morley:
Now this is interesting, it sounds to me from what you have said that he has submitted a defence. Have you chatted with someone totally independent and non involved and got their opinion of who is right and who is wrong. Worth a shot. Maybe you are both a bit in the wrong, is there no possibility of arbitration.
I would hazard a guess the courts are full of very stubborn guys with a point to prove
> I was hoping this, but I've reached the conclusion that he's a very stubborn guy with a point to prove - that he can't possibly ever be wrong.
Now this is interesting, it sounds to me from what you have said that he has submitted a defence. Have you chatted with someone totally independent and non involved and got their opinion of who is right and who is wrong. Worth a shot. Maybe you are both a bit in the wrong, is there no possibility of arbitration.
I would hazard a guess the courts are full of very stubborn guys with a point to prove
1
In reply to wurzelinzummerset:
Thanks for this - all useful stuff which I'm checking off here...
The drawing show it aligned with the gable, and it also shows the main existing gable and a smaller gable the other side, both have similar windows aligned with their gables in the drawing and in real life. A table gives approximate window dimensions and a note says to match the one in the main gable as to size and build. That one, like the others is aligned.
The window is central to the interior of the room behind, but it is offset from the centre of the brickwork externally because of a 13" cavity wall on one side of the upstairs extension. The other side abuts an existing wall. The ridge of the gable is likewise central to the room below but not to the outside brickwork. This is shown consistently in all the drawings, elevation, section and plan, both 1:50 scale and 1:20. In his defence the contractor admits he didn't realise this at the time.
Good point, but I answered this one (see a few messages above) and I've got it covered, cast iron
All the ones in these four matching Victorian houses (same builder) are aligned with the gable to within half a brick (4") which is what the contractor promised this one would be.
Thanks for this - all useful stuff which I'm checking off here...
> An elevation drawing might show the window centred on the gable, but how about the plan dimensions? An architect's drawings is rarely perfect, and it wouldn't be unusual to have dimensions off one wall to position a window on a plan drawing that were at odds with an elevation drawing.
The drawing show it aligned with the gable, and it also shows the main existing gable and a smaller gable the other side, both have similar windows aligned with their gables in the drawing and in real life. A table gives approximate window dimensions and a note says to match the one in the main gable as to size and build. That one, like the others is aligned.
> This could also arise from a different thickness wall construction being used or the window size being changed if dimensions are provided from face to face of each element. Other things might also constrain the positioning of a window. So, to someone with no knowledge of construction it might seem very straightforward, whereas in reality it's not. You might see a pretty picture of a gable with a window looking like it's in the centre that to you is crystal clear, a bricklayer might see a working plan drawing he's been given with 5.175m dimension from one wall to the edge of window, and to him that's crystal clear.
The window is central to the interior of the room behind, but it is offset from the centre of the brickwork externally because of a 13" cavity wall on one side of the upstairs extension. The other side abuts an existing wall. The ridge of the gable is likewise central to the room below but not to the outside brickwork. This is shown consistently in all the drawings, elevation, section and plan, both 1:50 scale and 1:20. In his defence the contractor admits he didn't realise this at the time.
> Also, it seems really strange that you'd let them complete all the finishings whilst knowing this problem was present. Moving the window might not be a big problem prior to plastering, painting etc., and whilst scaffolding is still up but leaving it until someone has moved in is adding massively to the cost and disruption.
Good point, but I answered this one (see a few messages above) and I've got it covered, cast iron
> And the windows to my house aren't centred on the gable, neither are several across the road as I look out the window.
All the ones in these four matching Victorian houses (same builder) are aligned with the gable to within half a brick (4") which is what the contractor promised this one would be.
In reply to Reggie Perrin:
I was a year phoning him every week, but he wouldn't pick up (my phone records prove this) and writing to him, several times via recorded delivery, which he returned unopened. I've tried to explore every avenue, even managed to get him to agree to a meeting which he failed to show up for. Arbitration isn't going to work I'm afraid.
> Now this is interesting, it sounds to me from what you have said that he has submitted a defence. Have you chatted with someone totally independent and non involved and got their opinion of who is right and who is wrong. Worth a shot. Maybe you are both a bit in the wrong, is there no possibility of arbitration.
I was a year phoning him every week, but he wouldn't pick up (my phone records prove this) and writing to him, several times via recorded delivery, which he returned unopened. I've tried to explore every avenue, even managed to get him to agree to a meeting which he failed to show up for. Arbitration isn't going to work I'm afraid.
In reply to Toccata:
Are you able to give me (and anyone else who might possibly be in a similar position at some time) any insights into what it's like trying to enforce a Small Claims Court judgement? How do you go about it?
> I (my company) has had judgements that have left us in disbelief! > And whether you actually recover the money is another question.
Are you able to give me (and anyone else who might possibly be in a similar position at some time) any insights into what it's like trying to enforce a Small Claims Court judgement? How do you go about it?
In reply to Andy Morley:
How much is it going to cost for you to get somebody else in to rectify the issue?
How much is it going to cost for you to get somebody else in to rectify the issue?
In reply to Andy Morley:
I would still seek an independent opinion.
Enforciing a judgement can be very tricky and costs money. I would advise you first of all read up on enforcement and consider which method you would use to enforce the ruling if you won.
I would still seek an independent opinion.
Enforciing a judgement can be very tricky and costs money. I would advise you first of all read up on enforcement and consider which method you would use to enforce the ruling if you won.
In reply to Andy Morley:
Assuming the measures were on the drawings and the building was actually the size it was supposed to be it sounds like a silly mistake which he should have sorted.its quite easy to set the measures wrong especially when using dry bricks to set out the window position but then building to the wrong side of them or putting it to the wrong side of the reveal,is it 100mm out of place by any chance ?
Assuming the measures were on the drawings and the building was actually the size it was supposed to be it sounds like a silly mistake which he should have sorted.its quite easy to set the measures wrong especially when using dry bricks to set out the window position but then building to the wrong side of them or putting it to the wrong side of the reveal,is it 100mm out of place by any chance ?
In reply to Andy Morley:
Well, that sounds completely unreasonable - I expect the court will take a very dim view of that. What was it about the fifty-second attempt which made you think that approach wasn't working?
> I was a year phoning him every week, but he wouldn't pick up
Well, that sounds completely unreasonable - I expect the court will take a very dim view of that. What was it about the fifty-second attempt which made you think that approach wasn't working?
2
In reply to Martin not maisie:
As someone upthread said "he's a very stubborn guy with a point to prove - that he can't possibly ever be wrong".
As someone upthread said "he's a very stubborn guy with a point to prove - that he can't possibly ever be wrong".
2
In reply to neilh:
£1500 to £2000. However I'm claiming compensation for the delay too. That's why it's only a small claims action.
> How much is it going to cost for you to get somebody else in to rectify the issue?
£1500 to £2000. However I'm claiming compensation for the delay too. That's why it's only a small claims action.
In reply to Martin not maisie:
It's not unreasonable if you're pursuing someone who is deliberately avoiding their oblications and responsibilities. I'd like to take the opportunity to thank you (for a second time) for your previous contribution. However, I am aware that you and 'Sir Chasm' do enjoy derailing threads, and I'd be grateful if you would refrain from derailing this one as I am actually finding the contribution of some of the other people here quite useful. Cheers and all that....
> Well, that sounds completely unreasonable - I expect the court will take a very dim view of that. What was it about the fifty-second attempt which made you think that approach wasn't working?
It's not unreasonable if you're pursuing someone who is deliberately avoiding their oblications and responsibilities. I'd like to take the opportunity to thank you (for a second time) for your previous contribution. However, I am aware that you and 'Sir Chasm' do enjoy derailing threads, and I'd be grateful if you would refrain from derailing this one as I am actually finding the contribution of some of the other people here quite useful. Cheers and all that....
In reply to Wsdconst:
That's exactly what the architect said. The amount it's out by is 180mm, nearly a whole brick which is more than enough to make it look a real eyesore. It's an arched window with a slight point, and that point is (or should be) directly below the ridge of the gable, which it's quite close to. I think that what happened is he didn't understand the design, he didn't get that both the window and the ridge were actually supposed to be somewhat off-centre, so he thought that the architect must have it wrong and ended up in a sort of compromise position that was neither properly in line with the ridge nor properly central to the brickwork. All the drawings show the window and ridge closer to the main house than to the outside, which actually works from an aesthetic point of view. he's gone the other way with his window, which throws the whole thing off. He's clearly the kind of brickie who doesn't do 'aesthetic'. He's claiming in his defence that the architect's drawings are 'inconsistent' whereas they're not, they all say the same thing, both planning drawings and working drawings.
> Assuming the measures were on the drawings and the building was actually the size it was supposed to be it sounds like a silly mistake which he should have sorted.its quite easy to set the measures wrong especially when using dry bricks to set out the window position but then building to the wrong side of them or putting it to the wrong side of the reveal,is it 100mm out of place by any chance ?
That's exactly what the architect said. The amount it's out by is 180mm, nearly a whole brick which is more than enough to make it look a real eyesore. It's an arched window with a slight point, and that point is (or should be) directly below the ridge of the gable, which it's quite close to. I think that what happened is he didn't understand the design, he didn't get that both the window and the ridge were actually supposed to be somewhat off-centre, so he thought that the architect must have it wrong and ended up in a sort of compromise position that was neither properly in line with the ridge nor properly central to the brickwork. All the drawings show the window and ridge closer to the main house than to the outside, which actually works from an aesthetic point of view. he's gone the other way with his window, which throws the whole thing off. He's clearly the kind of brickie who doesn't do 'aesthetic'. He's claiming in his defence that the architect's drawings are 'inconsistent' whereas they're not, they all say the same thing, both planning drawings and working drawings.
In reply to Reggie Perrin:
I am doing just that, however additionally I have come to this most wise and estimable forum seeking others who may have had experience of precisely these matters, in order to supplement my reading of reference documents, which can be somewhat dry and occasionally less than informative
> I would still seek an independent opinion. > Enforciing a judgement can be very tricky and costs money. I would advise you first of all read up on enforcement and consider which method you would use to enforce the ruling if you won.
I am doing just that, however additionally I have come to this most wise and estimable forum seeking others who may have had experience of precisely these matters, in order to supplement my reading of reference documents, which can be somewhat dry and occasionally less than informative
In reply to Andy Morley:
Basically, you have to find a way to access their money.
Garnishee, you need to know his bank account, and when EXACTLY there will be money in.
Attachment of earnings, could be very tricky with someone who is self employed.
Bailiffs, this can get expensive and if you know the ropes you can run them ragged. IF he has a dedicated business premises it may be easier, but if you only have a home address, consider very carefully.
There could be other ways but those are the ones I have used.
Look very very carefully at if you could enforce, that is the hard part, do not be fooled by him living in a nice house with a nice car, this could all belong to his partner.
Basically, you have to find a way to access their money.
Garnishee, you need to know his bank account, and when EXACTLY there will be money in.
Attachment of earnings, could be very tricky with someone who is self employed.
Bailiffs, this can get expensive and if you know the ropes you can run them ragged. IF he has a dedicated business premises it may be easier, but if you only have a home address, consider very carefully.
There could be other ways but those are the ones I have used.
Look very very carefully at if you could enforce, that is the hard part, do not be fooled by him living in a nice house with a nice car, this could all belong to his partner.
This is why you should always get a main contractor who's a carpenter. Brick layers - scum of the earth who don't know how to use a level or a square or a tape. Or a scale ruler apparently.
And I swear on my knife that I'm not a chippie
Post edited at 18:59
1
In reply to Reggie Perrin:
Part of me thinks that maybe the game isn't worth the candle. But on another level, I'm thinking that if I back down here, then in some subtle way, I'm weakening my position with other people who might be inclined to try it on. It's all part of cultivating that 'don't mess with me' ethos. Every now and then, someone will call you out on it, and you have to face this stuff. It's like picking up the tab for all those other times when you stand up to someone who's trying it on and they do back down.
> Basically, you have to find a way to access their money. > Garnishee, you need to know his bank account, and when EXACTLY there will be money in. > Attachment of earnings, could be very tricky with someone who is self employed. > Bailiffs, this can get expensive and if you know the ropes you can run them ragged. IF he has a dedicated business premises it may be easier, but if you only have a home address, consider very carefully.
Part of me thinks that maybe the game isn't worth the candle. But on another level, I'm thinking that if I back down here, then in some subtle way, I'm weakening my position with other people who might be inclined to try it on. It's all part of cultivating that 'don't mess with me' ethos. Every now and then, someone will call you out on it, and you have to face this stuff. It's like picking up the tab for all those other times when you stand up to someone who's trying it on and they do back down.
1
In reply to elliott92:
I think you may have something there.
> This is why you should always get a main contractor who's a carpenter. Brick layers - scum of the earth who don't know how to use a level or a square or a tape. Or a scale ruler apparently.
I think you may have something there.
In reply to Andy Morley:
Don't you worry, Andy, I'll stick to the topic like glue. As will Sir, I'm sure.
Couple of things which you're really going to have to consider for your day as Perry Mason:
Wouldn't it have been easier to get the window put in the place that you're now wishing it to be, when you were project managing (ie overseeing the build to your satisfaction)? It'll come up as a question in court, quite early on.
Second, as to claiming for the delay, how exactly is it that the time taken to this point has caused you financial loss? Or is it for the angst of having your view moved seven inches to the left? If so, do you understand the remit and scope of the process you're going through, and what you can actually claim for?
> However, I am aware that you and 'Sir Chasm' do enjoy derailing threads, and I'd be grateful if you would refrain from derailing this one as I am actually finding the contribution of some of the other people here quite useful. Cheers and all that....
Don't you worry, Andy, I'll stick to the topic like glue. As will Sir, I'm sure.
Couple of things which you're really going to have to consider for your day as Perry Mason:
Wouldn't it have been easier to get the window put in the place that you're now wishing it to be, when you were project managing (ie overseeing the build to your satisfaction)? It'll come up as a question in court, quite early on.
Second, as to claiming for the delay, how exactly is it that the time taken to this point has caused you financial loss? Or is it for the angst of having your view moved seven inches to the left? If so, do you understand the remit and scope of the process you're going through, and what you can actually claim for?
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
Hmmm. I think you've decided the issue in that case: you *have* to go through with it; anything else would be a cop-out which you'd regret for ever.
So let us know how it goes.
My theory, for what it's worth, is that he did it deliberately just to wind you up. Do you get that a lot?
> ... But on another level, I'm thinking that if I back down here, then in some subtle way, I'm weakening my position with other people who might be inclined to try it on ...
Hmmm. I think you've decided the issue in that case: you *have* to go through with it; anything else would be a cop-out which you'd regret for ever.
So let us know how it goes.
My theory, for what it's worth, is that he did it deliberately just to wind you up. Do you get that a lot?
2
In reply to Andy Morley:
Think it through. But try not to let emotion get in the way.
Try and be objective, does the window look okay, could it be that in 70 years someone will look up and go, "thats interesting, I wonder why that window is just a bit different to the others" its called a bit of character
Think it through. But try not to let emotion get in the way.
Try and be objective, does the window look okay, could it be that in 70 years someone will look up and go, "thats interesting, I wonder why that window is just a bit different to the others" its called a bit of character
1
In reply to Martin not maisie:
1) My argument would be that the brickwork contract was pretty much self contained, so did not need a project manager. Project management per se is a skill that any professional dealing with logistics needs to an extent but here there was no need for a dedicated professional PM.
2)The problem only became apparent when the protective hessian used to protect the brickwork from the frost came off, by which time the brickwork was complete - I have convincing photographic evidence of that.
3) As to sorting it at the time - very good point. It was only after a considerable amount of prevarication on his part that I actually wrote him a polite-but-firm letter. He saw me going into writing as a declaration of war of some kind and pretty much straight away after that, he sent his scaffolders to remove the scaffolding which he'd previously said would be there as long as it was needed. So that was him burning his boats.
These are bolt-on issues that I'm not looking for advice over, so thanks for your concern but I don't want to get distracted by them. The other points are helpful though.
> Wouldn't it have been easier to get the window put in the place that you're now wishing it to be, when you were project managing (ie overseeing the build to your satisfaction)? It'll come up as a question in court, quite early on.
1) My argument would be that the brickwork contract was pretty much self contained, so did not need a project manager. Project management per se is a skill that any professional dealing with logistics needs to an extent but here there was no need for a dedicated professional PM.
2)The problem only became apparent when the protective hessian used to protect the brickwork from the frost came off, by which time the brickwork was complete - I have convincing photographic evidence of that.
3) As to sorting it at the time - very good point. It was only after a considerable amount of prevarication on his part that I actually wrote him a polite-but-firm letter. He saw me going into writing as a declaration of war of some kind and pretty much straight away after that, he sent his scaffolders to remove the scaffolding which he'd previously said would be there as long as it was needed. So that was him burning his boats.
> Second, as to claiming for the delay, how exactly is it that the time taken to this point has caused you financial loss? Or is it for the angst of having your view moved seven inches to the left? If so, do you understand the remit and scope of the process you're going through, and what you can actually claim for?
These are bolt-on issues that I'm not looking for advice over, so thanks for your concern but I don't want to get distracted by them. The other points are helpful though.
Post edited at 20:09
1
In reply to Reggie Perrin:
Almost everyone whose advice I've asked agrees it's an eyesore. I spent £400 on ornamental stonework to go over this window, plus special bricks for the arch. I didn't do all that only to have to hide it all in climbing plants, which is the only other way of dealing with it.
Plus, it's so significantly out that it would only take a snotty neighbour to complain and planning might well turn round an make me sort it. Though it's not quite a conservation area, these are 'arts-and-crafts' style late Victorian houses and we only got planning permission at all after substantial negotiations and an appeal, so it's a real possibility that I might get made to sort it at some point.
> Try and be objective, does the window look okay, could it be that in 70 years someone will look up and go, "thats interesting, I wonder why that window is just a bit different to the others" its called a bit of character
Almost everyone whose advice I've asked agrees it's an eyesore. I spent £400 on ornamental stonework to go over this window, plus special bricks for the arch. I didn't do all that only to have to hide it all in climbing plants, which is the only other way of dealing with it.
Plus, it's so significantly out that it would only take a snotty neighbour to complain and planning might well turn round an make me sort it. Though it's not quite a conservation area, these are 'arts-and-crafts' style late Victorian houses and we only got planning permission at all after substantial negotiations and an appeal, so it's a real possibility that I might get made to sort it at some point.
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
1) won't stand up in court. You cherrypicking which bits of your role as project manager you thought were needed just demonstrates your lack of judgement and wasn't the builder's fault. Unless you're going to fall back on your previous statement that he'd done such a good job on the foundations that you left him alone. In which case, your argument is essentially that he was incompetent because he did something you didn't want him to, largely because you stopped supervising his work because he was, er, competent.
2) won't stand up in court. You didn't think to look under the hessian? How, then, were you supervising the work? Are you saying that in all the time the guy was laying, what, three courses a day - on the days he was there - you never once saw the wall uncovered?
3) doesn't pertain to anything.
You might not want advice on what you can sue for, but you don't half need it. Presumably, you've already submitted your claim, but if you're thinking to ask for remedies for emotional distress, you need to watch fewer law dramas.
Equally, whilst you think it reasonable to phone somebody who clearly doesn't want to be phoned, every week for a year over an untested (and, I'd say, without-merit) civil claim, the law probably won't. You might want to look up the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, as the court officials will be more than acquainted with it and I doubt your conduct will help your case.
1) won't stand up in court. You cherrypicking which bits of your role as project manager you thought were needed just demonstrates your lack of judgement and wasn't the builder's fault. Unless you're going to fall back on your previous statement that he'd done such a good job on the foundations that you left him alone. In which case, your argument is essentially that he was incompetent because he did something you didn't want him to, largely because you stopped supervising his work because he was, er, competent.
2) won't stand up in court. You didn't think to look under the hessian? How, then, were you supervising the work? Are you saying that in all the time the guy was laying, what, three courses a day - on the days he was there - you never once saw the wall uncovered?
3) doesn't pertain to anything.
You might not want advice on what you can sue for, but you don't half need it. Presumably, you've already submitted your claim, but if you're thinking to ask for remedies for emotional distress, you need to watch fewer law dramas.
Equally, whilst you think it reasonable to phone somebody who clearly doesn't want to be phoned, every week for a year over an untested (and, I'd say, without-merit) civil claim, the law probably won't. You might want to look up the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, as the court officials will be more than acquainted with it and I doubt your conduct will help your case.
Post edited at 20:32
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
I think you've really got a case,if I was in his position firstly, I would have been really embarrassed, but silly mistakes sometimes happen.and secondly l would have fixed the problem as quickly and quietly as I could.things like this can really damage your reputation,after all it's not really a big job.good luck hope you get it sorted.
I think you've really got a case,if I was in his position firstly, I would have been really embarrassed, but silly mistakes sometimes happen.and secondly l would have fixed the problem as quickly and quietly as I could.things like this can really damage your reputation,after all it's not really a big job.good luck hope you get it sorted.
In reply to Martin not maisie:
I've already said that I was his customer. There was no project manager.
For a customer to go to those sorts of lengths with a contractor would suggest that there was already a problem. At that point in time, I had no reason to doubt his competence.
Your piece of creative writing earlier was amusing and useful to a point. But given that you are someone who regularly likes to derail other people's threads, I'd like to make it clear that I think you are in danger of straying into that territory now so I'm politely asking you to stop. Thanks.
> 1) won't stand up in court. You cherrypicking which bits of your role as project manager
I've already said that I was his customer. There was no project manager.
> 2) won't stand up in court. You didn't think to look under the hessian? How, then, were you supervising the work?
For a customer to go to those sorts of lengths with a contractor would suggest that there was already a problem. At that point in time, I had no reason to doubt his competence.
Your piece of creative writing earlier was amusing and useful to a point. But given that you are someone who regularly likes to derail other people's threads, I'd like to make it clear that I think you are in danger of straying into that territory now so I'm politely asking you to stop. Thanks.
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
Frankly if the importance of window positioning did not occur to the builder when he was measuring out, he must be a pretty poor operator. Unfortunately you have been unlucky to have hired a poor tradesman . Good, professional tradesmen make sure they get the simple, but important things right.
If hes been dodging your calls he's clearly one of the shit ones, and there are a lot in the UK!
If it was a matter of miscommunication usually the tradesmen would offer to come to some kind of agreement with you to rectify the situation and move on to the next job. Good tradesmen value their reputation a great deal, and would not risk it over a poorly positioned window, that they should of noticed themselves earlier!
Take him to court, fingers crossed he will have to rectify the window, or pay for it to be sorted. Wether you win, who knows?
Do all your friends, neighbours, and society a favour, and make sure they all know he's one of the shit ones!
Good luck!
Frankly if the importance of window positioning did not occur to the builder when he was measuring out, he must be a pretty poor operator. Unfortunately you have been unlucky to have hired a poor tradesman . Good, professional tradesmen make sure they get the simple, but important things right.
If hes been dodging your calls he's clearly one of the shit ones, and there are a lot in the UK!
If it was a matter of miscommunication usually the tradesmen would offer to come to some kind of agreement with you to rectify the situation and move on to the next job. Good tradesmen value their reputation a great deal, and would not risk it over a poorly positioned window, that they should of noticed themselves earlier!
Take him to court, fingers crossed he will have to rectify the window, or pay for it to be sorted. Wether you win, who knows?
Do all your friends, neighbours, and society a favour, and make sure they all know he's one of the shit ones!
Good luck!
Post edited at 20:48
In reply to Wsdconst:
I think he was embarrassed, but I also think that he just doesn't know how to deal with that - it's the major part of the problem I reckon. He sold himself as a top-notch bricklayer, which is why I used him. This part of the work should have been the jewel in the crown of what he originally gave me to understand would be a showpiece for him. If you add to that the fact that I agreed to pay him time and materials rather than fixed price so the job wouldn't be rushed, there really should have been no excuse for a botched job, which this clearly is. But he's just incapable of backing down and so he is saying that it's my fault, that it's the architect's fault and the fault of the chippy who he brought on site to give him what he needed to work to - anyone's fault but his.
> I think you've really got a case,if I was in his position firstly, I would have been really embarrassed, but silly mistakes sometimes happen.and secondly l would have fixed the problem as quickly and quietly as I could.things like this can really damage your reputation,after all it's not really a big job.good luck hope you get it sorted.
I think he was embarrassed, but I also think that he just doesn't know how to deal with that - it's the major part of the problem I reckon. He sold himself as a top-notch bricklayer, which is why I used him. This part of the work should have been the jewel in the crown of what he originally gave me to understand would be a showpiece for him. If you add to that the fact that I agreed to pay him time and materials rather than fixed price so the job wouldn't be rushed, there really should have been no excuse for a botched job, which this clearly is. But he's just incapable of backing down and so he is saying that it's my fault, that it's the architect's fault and the fault of the chippy who he brought on site to give him what he needed to work to - anyone's fault but his.
Post edited at 20:55
In reply to Andy Morley:
Ask away, that's hilarious given your posting history.
I'm not derailing your thread, just disagreeing with you (and, incidentally, answering your original question: no, you don't have a case). Out of interest, if I were to harangue you every week for a year despite knowing that you didn't want me to, would that be reasonable? Do you even understand why I ask the question?
You're now denying that you were project managing, once you've realised that it's a large b*'ll*ck that you've dropped, right there. This is a new tack. There are a heap of other inconsistencies in your stance and, given that this is you presenting it to your advantage, it's feeble. You made a commitment to supervise and you didn't; you're now saying that you didn't check on the work - on the side of your house - because there was no reason to think there was a problem; this runs counter to a previous statement that he was asking odd questions about the window whilst setting out. To be charitable, you overestimated your ability to supervise, but this seems to be consistent for you.
If I can pick holes in your arguments, a court will hand you your @rse. Best case? That they find that he did put the window in the wrong place and that he's liable for the cost of putting it right from the point at which you would reasonably have been expected to do your designated role and flag it up. Which will be virtually nothing, given that there would have been weeks or possibly months between that point and the finish. And you won't get costs.
But you should definitely go to court. Is there *any* chance of it being televised? I bet that Judge Rinder would sell his granny to get you on his show.
Ask away, that's hilarious given your posting history.
I'm not derailing your thread, just disagreeing with you (and, incidentally, answering your original question: no, you don't have a case). Out of interest, if I were to harangue you every week for a year despite knowing that you didn't want me to, would that be reasonable? Do you even understand why I ask the question?
You're now denying that you were project managing, once you've realised that it's a large b*'ll*ck that you've dropped, right there. This is a new tack. There are a heap of other inconsistencies in your stance and, given that this is you presenting it to your advantage, it's feeble. You made a commitment to supervise and you didn't; you're now saying that you didn't check on the work - on the side of your house - because there was no reason to think there was a problem; this runs counter to a previous statement that he was asking odd questions about the window whilst setting out. To be charitable, you overestimated your ability to supervise, but this seems to be consistent for you.
If I can pick holes in your arguments, a court will hand you your @rse. Best case? That they find that he did put the window in the wrong place and that he's liable for the cost of putting it right from the point at which you would reasonably have been expected to do your designated role and flag it up. Which will be virtually nothing, given that there would have been weeks or possibly months between that point and the finish. And you won't get costs.
But you should definitely go to court. Is there *any* chance of it being televised? I bet that Judge Rinder would sell his granny to get you on his show.
1
In reply to Chambers:
Actually yes. I've never yet had the pleasure of dealing with a female builder (it would be interesting) but I've dealt with their wives. Never directly, but I've often been aware of them as a powerful background presence, influencing, steering this way and that, pulling strings. Get the right side of your builder's missus and s/he'll do you a grand job
> No, but I've courted a builder. Does that count?
Actually yes. I've never yet had the pleasure of dealing with a female builder (it would be interesting) but I've dealt with their wives. Never directly, but I've often been aware of them as a powerful background presence, influencing, steering this way and that, pulling strings. Get the right side of your builder's missus and s/he'll do you a grand job
In reply to Martin not maisie:
I think you can be quite a bully. I have seen you do this before, its not nice.
I think you can be quite a bully. I have seen you do this before, its not nice.
1
In reply to Reggie Perrin:
If that's what you feel, Reggie, I have no defence. Apologies and I'm out.
If that's what you feel, Reggie, I have no defence. Apologies and I'm out.
In reply to Andy Morley:
The problem I think you may have, is that given the contractual relationship with the builder that you have described in this thread, a judge may not agree that there was no project manager.
There are a whole load of options for clients (note the use of client not customer) when entering in to construction contracts. Being clear about where responsibilities lie, is central to the nature of the contractual agreement.
As a client who is buying in materials and paying day rates to what are in effect sub-contractors, I would argue that you have assumed the role of project manager.
> I've already said that I was his customer. There was no project manager.
The problem I think you may have, is that given the contractual relationship with the builder that you have described in this thread, a judge may not agree that there was no project manager.
There are a whole load of options for clients (note the use of client not customer) when entering in to construction contracts. Being clear about where responsibilities lie, is central to the nature of the contractual agreement.
As a client who is buying in materials and paying day rates to what are in effect sub-contractors, I would argue that you have assumed the role of project manager.
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
You will not like my answer.Is it worth all the aggrevaition stress and uncertainty?
I have quickly learnt in business and perosnal life that sorting these things out in couts is for the most part just not worth it. Unless you are so desperate for the money, then take the hit, get somebody else to sort it out and move on.Look at it as a life lesson.
I have seen too many people go through all this, not get the answer or the money they were looking for and it just eat away at them. Life is too short.I have seen businesses win in court for huge amounts and for them never to get their money.
Take the hit and move on.
You will not like my answer.Is it worth all the aggrevaition stress and uncertainty?
I have quickly learnt in business and perosnal life that sorting these things out in couts is for the most part just not worth it. Unless you are so desperate for the money, then take the hit, get somebody else to sort it out and move on.Look at it as a life lesson.
I have seen too many people go through all this, not get the answer or the money they were looking for and it just eat away at them. Life is too short.I have seen businesses win in court for huge amounts and for them never to get their money.
Take the hit and move on.
1
In reply to Andy Morley:
We don't. Too much hassle and unrewarding so we just sell the debt.
> Are you able to give me (and anyone else who might possibly be in a similar position at some time) any insights into what it's like trying to enforce a Small Claims Court judgement? How do you go about it?
We don't. Too much hassle and unrewarding so we just sell the debt.
In reply to The New NickB:
OK, we're getting to the heart of the matter, definitely as far as his defence is concerned, and also as you seem to suggest, as far as the law _might_ be concerned. I hope you've got time for this - I've got time because I've got the lurg and I've finally written off the rest of this week as far as anything else is concerned.
What we're looking at here I think is called 'custom and practice'. It's not law but the law takes account of it because it's the way people tend to do business, in the building trade in this instance. So what I _think_ that you're saying here by differentiating between 'client' and 'customer' is that the implied contractual relationships between customers of any kind and specialists in the building trade are set by the way in which large-scale building companies do business with those tradesmen.
The implications of that would be that when members of the public do business with tradesmen/ artisans/ craftsmen in the building trade, even though Joe Public might not have a clue what he's letting himself in for by way of 'unusual' legal rules when he engages with a bricklayer, that brickie will consider himself to be governed by special rules that are similar to those he might fall under when working for say Persimmon or Costains. This means that he will not have to abide by the same kind of contractual standards in dealing with Joe Public as say, a carpet fitter or a washing machine engineer would. All he has to do is to convince the householder to pay for materials, maybe suggesting that it keeps him below the VAT threshold and is therefore a legitimate way for a smaller operator to be competitive, and suddenly he's got a 'get out of jail free' card which allows him to blame his client/ customer for all sorts of things that he might conceivably get wrong, whereas a tradesman in any other line of business (not construction) would sort it out out if he screwed up.
This is all very interesting and I wonder if this might be one of the root causes driving the 'cowboy builder' phenomenon..? Just to remind you of what I said earlier, personally I've written off the rest of the week to getting rid of a cold so I've got time right now. If you can find time to play Devil's advocate, great, if not, that's cool but before we even get into any of that, have I understood what you're saying, as recapitulated in my own words above?
> The problem I think you may have, is that given the contractual relationship with the builder that you have described in this thread, a judge may not agree that there was no project manager. > There are a whole load of options for clients (note the use of client not customer) when entering in to construction contracts. Being clear about where responsibilities lie, is central to the nature of the contractual agreement. > As a client who is buying in materials and paying day rates to what are in effect sub-contractors, I would argue that you have assumed the role of project manager.
OK, we're getting to the heart of the matter, definitely as far as his defence is concerned, and also as you seem to suggest, as far as the law _might_ be concerned. I hope you've got time for this - I've got time because I've got the lurg and I've finally written off the rest of this week as far as anything else is concerned.
What we're looking at here I think is called 'custom and practice'. It's not law but the law takes account of it because it's the way people tend to do business, in the building trade in this instance. So what I _think_ that you're saying here by differentiating between 'client' and 'customer' is that the implied contractual relationships between customers of any kind and specialists in the building trade are set by the way in which large-scale building companies do business with those tradesmen.
The implications of that would be that when members of the public do business with tradesmen/ artisans/ craftsmen in the building trade, even though Joe Public might not have a clue what he's letting himself in for by way of 'unusual' legal rules when he engages with a bricklayer, that brickie will consider himself to be governed by special rules that are similar to those he might fall under when working for say Persimmon or Costains. This means that he will not have to abide by the same kind of contractual standards in dealing with Joe Public as say, a carpet fitter or a washing machine engineer would. All he has to do is to convince the householder to pay for materials, maybe suggesting that it keeps him below the VAT threshold and is therefore a legitimate way for a smaller operator to be competitive, and suddenly he's got a 'get out of jail free' card which allows him to blame his client/ customer for all sorts of things that he might conceivably get wrong, whereas a tradesman in any other line of business (not construction) would sort it out out if he screwed up.
This is all very interesting and I wonder if this might be one of the root causes driving the 'cowboy builder' phenomenon..? Just to remind you of what I said earlier, personally I've written off the rest of the week to getting rid of a cold so I've got time right now. If you can find time to play Devil's advocate, great, if not, that's cool but before we even get into any of that, have I understood what you're saying, as recapitulated in my own words above?
In reply to Toccata:
Thanks for this. Who do you sell the debt to and what sort of percentage do they pay you? Names of companies would be good, but all I actually need is the keyword for a Google search. Are we talking 'factors' here by any chance?
> We don't. Too much hassle and unrewarding so we just sell the debt.
Thanks for this. Who do you sell the debt to and what sort of percentage do they pay you? Names of companies would be good, but all I actually need is the keyword for a Google search. Are we talking 'factors' here by any chance?
In reply to neilh:
OK, fair comment. I'm going to repeat the 'health warning' I just made in another reply. I haven't quite taken to my bed with a cold today but I've pretty much written the rest of the week off for getting anything more productive done. If you or anyone else has time and wants to explore this one, I'd see this as being as much a topic that's for the common good as for my own personal benefit because as you rightly point out, lots of people have to deal with this one at some stage.
My own approach to conflict varies around 'avoid it', 'manage it', 'learn from it' and 'embrace it'. Sometimes there's elements of all those things but above all else I need to know what my approach is to any given conflict, otherwise I just find myself going on gut feel. That may be all I can do in some circumstances but in anything like this, there needs to be a good element of 'head' involved too.
Taking a step back, I've recently signed up for a course of Jujitsu which just happens to co-incide with my Wednesday evening trips to one particular climbing wall. An hour's climbing, an hour's jujitsu then another hour's climbing - if I stay the course of that over the winter, I'll be looking to up my outdoor grade substantially next year. Leaping about and falling a lot will be good for my bouldering in particular but I've partly done it because of this court case. I don't intend to go and sort the guy out with a few wrist-locks but any martial art forces you to confront the deeper issues behind conflict, and I think I need to give my own approach a bit of a once over.
That means there are more issues at stake than simply 'is the game worth the candle?' in this particular court case. But I still need to have a good handle on what the costs and options are and any further feedback on enforcement of judgments etc. and associated costs is more than welcome
> You will not like my answer.Is it worth all the aggrevaition stress and uncertainty? > I have quickly learnt in business and perosnal life that sorting these things out in couts is for the most part just not worth it. Unless you are so desperate for the money, then take the hit, get somebody else to sort it out and move on.Look at it as a life lesson. > I have seen too many people go through all this, not get the answer or the money they were looking for and it just eat away at them. Life is too short.I have seen businesses win in court for huge amounts and for them never to get their money. > Take the hit and move on.
OK, fair comment. I'm going to repeat the 'health warning' I just made in another reply. I haven't quite taken to my bed with a cold today but I've pretty much written the rest of the week off for getting anything more productive done. If you or anyone else has time and wants to explore this one, I'd see this as being as much a topic that's for the common good as for my own personal benefit because as you rightly point out, lots of people have to deal with this one at some stage.
My own approach to conflict varies around 'avoid it', 'manage it', 'learn from it' and 'embrace it'. Sometimes there's elements of all those things but above all else I need to know what my approach is to any given conflict, otherwise I just find myself going on gut feel. That may be all I can do in some circumstances but in anything like this, there needs to be a good element of 'head' involved too.
Taking a step back, I've recently signed up for a course of Jujitsu which just happens to co-incide with my Wednesday evening trips to one particular climbing wall. An hour's climbing, an hour's jujitsu then another hour's climbing - if I stay the course of that over the winter, I'll be looking to up my outdoor grade substantially next year. Leaping about and falling a lot will be good for my bouldering in particular but I've partly done it because of this court case. I don't intend to go and sort the guy out with a few wrist-locks but any martial art forces you to confront the deeper issues behind conflict, and I think I need to give my own approach a bit of a once over.
That means there are more issues at stake than simply 'is the game worth the candle?' in this particular court case. But I still need to have a good handle on what the costs and options are and any further feedback on enforcement of judgments etc. and associated costs is more than welcome
In reply to Andy Morley:
My advice is keep these things simple.You probably have a 50/50 chance in the court. Then you may have a 50/50 chance of getting the money.
Appreciate that you have the lurg at the moment so you have time to kill.
My advice is keep these things simple.You probably have a 50/50 chance in the court. Then you may have a 50/50 chance of getting the money.
Appreciate that you have the lurg at the moment so you have time to kill.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...