Question on tradesman labour charges outside item guarantee period
Comments
-
It would help significantly if you told us what this item was
If you supplied and fitted a washing machine for example then you probably could be liable for repairs to the customer as one would expect that product to last longer.0 -
unholyangel wrote: »How about you try reading what I actually said rather than just the part you selectively quoted. Here it is again:
You see that important word in bold? IF the op supplied the goods and they don't conform to contract (faulty doesn't necessarily mean they don't conform).
However I notice what you've said in your latest post on this thread is just paraphrasing what I said in the quoted paragraph - telling the OP to send a cheque to cover the costs of refitting.
If all you have experience of is cowboy traders, perhaps you need to re-evaluate how you select traders to do work for you.
No I gave him a solution without the 4 hours travelling. Something simple you missed with all your waffle. But made it clear I would not.
Never had a cowboy but I have heard about them as I have a TV and internet, friends and family, oh and I read the odd paper. I know human nature.
Its taken as read if you have a kitchen fitted by BnQ where you go to for redress.
Good luck with getting a one man band to return 5 years later on some faulty shower or taps. lol0 -
You really should stop posting now, both ,myself and Unholyangel are right.
If the OP supplied the part and the customer can prove fault is inherent then he is liable for all cost including the cost of the report. But as I said the customer has to go to court to uphold those rights.
You can't change the law or make it up as you go along, facts are facts and that's what the OP was asking for a legal position is what he wanted and now he has it..
No, we can stop when we have all the facts. Not when you think we do or you say we do.
The advice he has been given by others is also right. He has to do nothing at the moment. You have confirmed that. The onus is now on the customer. I hope you are reading that part OP.
Interestingly he asked was he obligated. He did not ask for legal advice. If he wants that he should go to them that are qualified.
To the OP; Customers damage or misuse items. You dont want a four hour trip to find out I assume. Maybe just send the part. And then leave the rest with him. That is more than your "obligation" which was the question right at the start.0 -
No I gave him a solution without the 4 hours travelling. Something simple you missed with all your waffle. But made it clear I would not.
Never had a cowboy but I have heard about them as I have a TV and internet, friends and family, oh and I read the odd paper. I know human nature.
Its taken as read if you have a kitchen fitted by BnQ where you go to for redress.
Good luck with getting a one man band to return 5 years later on some faulty shower or taps. lol
So you're just incapable of reading plain english then? All I have ever said is that if the OP supplied the goods and the goods dont conform, that OP would be liable for the labour & postage costs involved in a replacement.
I know that a court won't order someone to perform a contract that they don't want to perform. What they will do is award damages for any losses incurred as a result of their breach of contract. Designed to put the innocent party into the position they would have been in (or as near as money can achieve it) had the contract not been breached. That is not just limited to the cost of labour & postage for a replacement though. Its any loss that was (or should have been) foreseeable.
But any business supplying goods or services needs to be aware that everything has a failure rate and that the costs involved in those failures need to be worked into their pricing - at least they do if they want a successful business.
ETA: As for having to prove the fault - well the manufacturer seem to have accepted that the part was faulty (usually warranties will exclude faults that have been caused by misuse or damage) so on the balance of probability, theres a very good chance the goods don't conform to contract. There is no requirement in law to obtain an independent report.You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0 -
unholyangel wrote: »So you're just incapable of reading plain english then? All I have ever said is that if the OP supplied the goods and the goods dont conform, that OP would be liable for the labour & postage costs involved in a replacement.
I know that a court won't order someone to perform a contract that they don't want to perform. What they will do is award damages for any losses incurred as a result of their breach of contract. Designed to put the innocent party into the position they would have been in (or as near as money can achieve it) had the contract not been breached. That is not just limited to the cost of labour & postage for a replacement though. Its any loss that was (or should have been) foreseeable.
But any business supplying goods or services needs to be aware that everything has a failure rate and that the costs involved in those failures need to be worked into their pricing - at least they do if they want a successful business.
ETA: As for having to prove the fault - well the manufacturer seem to have accepted that the part was faulty (usually warranties will exclude faults that have been caused by misuse or damage) so on the balance of probability, theres a very good chance the goods don't conform to contract. There is no requirement in law to obtain an independent report.
There is an awful lots of ifs and buts...........bit like if me mum had wheels she would be a bike.
Not interested in what the customer may do........many of us are answering and giving advise to what the OP may, could or want to do. Which still looks like he has to do nada for now if he wants or meet the customer half way like we have suggested from the start.. Nowhere has the OP even suggested the customer has mentioned court and the like. Lets all turn the drama dial back a bit and have a nice cup of tea.
How about we wait and see if the OP adds any more info as it looks like he may be bored and run away........and I think I am starting to understand why.0 -
OP supplied the goods and they don't conform to contract, he's liable for costs involved with a repair/replacement (including postage and labour).
The parts of the Consumer Rights Act you describe only apply to 'contracts for goods'. They do not apply to 'contracts for services'.unholyangel wrote: »Who said that? The only thing people here have said is that if the OP supplied the goods and they don't conform to contract, he's liable for costs involved with a repair/replacement (including postage and labour).
Those rights are set out in the Sale of Goods Act for contracts entered into before 1st Oct 2015 and the Consumer Rights Act for contracts entered into on or after 1st Oct 2015.
The Consumer Rights Act does not allow for part-goods and part-services contracts. Every contract is either a goods contract or a services contract. There is no grey area in the middle.
The Op says that he was engaged to do the installation. While we would need more information to be completely sure, it sounds like a 'contract for services' to me.
If so, the Op's legal obligations are much limited than you describe. If the Op complied with their duty to perform the installation with reasonable care and skill, the customer would not have a claim under the Consumer Rights Act as a result of fault in the product. Even if the product was provided as part of the service.0 -
steampowered wrote: »The parts of the Consumer Rights Act you describe only apply to 'contracts for goods'. They do not apply to 'contracts for services'.
The Consumer Rights Act does not allow for part-goods and part-services contracts. Every contract is either a goods contract or a services contract. There is no grey area in the middle.
The Op says that he was engaged to do the installation. While we would need more information to be completely sure, it sounds like a 'contract for services' to me.
If so, the Op's legal obligations are much limited than you describe. If the Op complied with their duty to perform the installation with reasonable care and skill, the customer would not have a claim under the Consumer Rights Act as a result of fault in the product. Even if the product was provided as part of the service.
Page 16 - example 12
https://www.businesscompanion.info/sites/default/files/The%20sale%20and%20supply%20of%20goods_ALL_BIS_GOODS_GUIDANCE_SEP15.pdf0 -
Link doesn't work.0 -
steampowered wrote: »The parts of the Consumer Rights Act you describe only apply to 'contracts for goods'. They do not apply to 'contracts for services'.
The Consumer Rights Act does not allow for part-goods and part-services contracts. Every contract is either a goods contract or a services contract. There is no grey area in the middle.
The Op says that he was engaged to do the installation. While we would need more information to be completely sure, it sounds like a 'contract for services' to me.
If so, the Op's legal obligations are much limited than you describe. If the Op complied with their duty to perform the installation with reasonable care and skill, the customer would not have a claim under the Consumer Rights Act as a result of fault in the product. Even if the product was provided as part of the service.
Next time, you might want to read the whole section before quoting it.(7)A mixed contract (see section 1(4)) may be a contract of any of those kinds.
Section 1 tells us:(4)In each case the Chapter applies even if the contract also covers something covered by another Chapter (a mixed contract).
(5)Two or all three of those Chapters may apply to a mixed contract.
And the explanatory notes even clarify for section 1:32.Subsections (4) to (6) set out the position with regard to “mixed contracts”. There are many examples of mixed contracts, for example contracts involving the supply of both goods and services (e.g. a car service where parts are fitted) or digital content and a service (e.g. supplying and installing anti-virus software). In such contracts, under the Act, the service element of the contract attracts service rights and remedies, the goods elements attract goods rights and remedies and the digital content elements attract the digital content rights and remedies. Subsection (3) therefore makes clear that, for such mixed contracts, it will be relevant to look at the rights and remedies for each element of the mixed contract. In most cases it will be relevant to look at the appropriate chapter of the Act (Chapter 2 for goods, 3 for digital content and 4 for services). Subsection (6) sets out that for particular mixed contracts (goods and installation services, and goods and digital content) it may also be relevant to look at sections 15 and 16.
And for section 3:55.Subsection (7) provides that with regard to any of the specific types of contracts defined in the following sections, the provisions apply whether goods are supplied alone or alongside a service and/or digital content.You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0 -
There is an awful lots of ifs and buts...........bit like if me mum had wheels she would be a bike.
Not interested in what the customer may do........many of us are answering and giving advise to what the OP may, could or want to do. Which still looks like he has to do nada for now if he wants or meet the customer half way like we have suggested from the start.. Nowhere has the OP even suggested the customer has mentioned court and the like. Lets all turn the drama dial back a bit and have a nice cup of tea.
How about we wait and see if the OP adds any more info as it looks like he may be bored and run away........and I think I am starting to understand why.
Theres an awful lot of ifs and buts because thats how the law works. Its dependent on circumstance, there is no one answer fits all.
Not sure what else OP could add that would change the advice given rather than just satisfying our own curiosity. We might not know which advice fits the circumstances but he will.You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.6K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards