Tradesman with no liability insurance

bengasman

garethgas wrote: »

My view is for you to tell the plumber to go ahead with the job and to send the bill to the 'tradesman'.
I fail to see why its any more complicated than that.

It is more complicated than that because the tradesman is not legally obliged to pay for if he hasn't agreed to do the work for that price. If he or his lawyer is half switched on with the defence, the court will throw it out.

real1314

bengasman wrote: »

That doesn't make it correct. There are specific legal requirements for where wiring can be hidden in walls without adequate protection.

There are indeed current requirements, there have in the past been other requirements, and going back further there were no requirements. For wiring that is.

If memory serves me well, a run of wire in a straight horizontal or vertical line between 2 outlets does not need to be shielded, but one that runs other than this does.

However that is all about wiring, not pipework.

A competent tradesman would always check for fittings / devices on the other side of a wall and would also check using an appropriate device to check for hidden wiring/pipework.
A really sharp one would ask the householder to assure that there was nothing of concern. :cool:

Leif

bengasman wrote: »

That doesn't make it correct. There are specific legal requirements for where wiring can be hidden in walls without adequate protection.

It was a heating pipe he drilled through and he could and should have located it and avoided drilling through it. And the fact that he was drilling into the airing cupboard which held the hot water tank might perhaps have provided a tiny clue to even the most dim witted of people that water pipes might be present. I think he was negligent. I don't think he can argue that it was an unusual place to find a water pipe.

bengasman

Leif wrote: »

I don't think he can argue that it was an unusual place to find a water pipe.

Yes, he can, and any lawyer worth his keep will argue that in court. The fact that the cylinder was nearby does not alter the fact that pipes are NOT supposed to be hidden in the middle of a wall. It simply is not good workmanship ( and dangerous ) to put unprotected pipe hither and yon, which is why it is ILLEGAL to do so with gaspipe and electrical cable.

Civil cases like this are judged on likelihood and reasonable assumption, which means a good lawyer will make getting a compensation order from the court both difficult and expensive.
That in turn means that not only can the court throw the claim out, they can also find the plaintiff responsible to pay the costs of the defendant.

On top of that, the customer has to give the tradesman reasonable opportunity to make good, which means you have very little chance of getting paid if you just go ahead and let someone else do the repairs.

iamcornholio

bengasman wrote: »

That doesn't make it correct. There are specific legal requirements for where wiring can be hidden in walls without adequate protection.

Yes if you are installing some today. But if you are working on an older property, then the installation would have been done to the regulations of the day - hidden and unprotected services may well be in place

In which case then there is an inherent duty for any tradesperson to use skill and competence in properly checking walls where holes are to be made

There is no wriggling out of it

iamcornholio

bengasman wrote: »

Civil cases like this are judged on likelihood and reasonable assumption, which means a good lawyer will make getting a compensation order from the court both difficult and expensive.
That in turn means that not only can the court throw the claim out, they can also find the plaintiff responsible to pay the costs of the defendant.

Rubbish.

This would be a small claims track without lawyers and inexpensive to pursue by the claimant - we have not had plaintiffs since 1999

And no cost orders can be made against any party unless in the most extraordinary circumstances. Each party pays their own costs win or lose

laurz121

Can i just say that bengasmans attitude towards customers stinks and i for one would never let a man like that do any work for me.

bengasman

Of course you can dear even though it is a bit odd to blame me for British legislation you don't like; I didn't make the law or set precedents, I just live by it.

mikey72

bengasman wrote: »

Yes, he can, and any lawyer worth his keep will argue that in court. The fact that the cylinder was nearby does not alter the fact that pipes are NOT supposed to be hidden in the middle of a wall. It simply is not good workmanship ( and dangerous ) to put unprotected pipe hither and yon, which is why it is ILLEGAL to do so with gaspipe and electrical cable.

Civil cases like this are judged on likelihood and reasonable assumption, which means a good lawyer will make getting a compensation order from the court both difficult and expensive.
That in turn means that not only can the court throw the claim out, they can also find the plaintiff responsible to pay the costs of the defendant.

On top of that, the customer has to give the tradesman reasonable opportunity to make good, which means you have very little chance of getting paid if you just go ahead and let someone else do the repairs.

Of course you put pipes in walls, or do you really think everyone is happy with central heating pipes on the wall on their bedrooms and living rooms.
You never bang a hole through a wall without checking first.

bengasman

mikey72 wrote: »

Of course you put pipes in walls, or do you really think everyone is happy with central heating pipes on the wall on their bedrooms and living rooms.

I never said you couldn't put pipes in walls. If you read my post with a bit more attention, you would have understood that I stated you can't put them in at random without adequate protection.
The building regs indicate clearly how and where pipes can be put in walls and floors through the relevant guidance notes.
You could see it as boiler flues; you can stick them through a wall, but not just any way you like.

mikey72 wrote: »

You never bang a hole through a wall without checking first.

I never said you should.
If you read my post more carefully, you would have understood that I pointed out NEITHER party is without blame wherein lies half the risk of unilateral action in the hopes that the tradesman will cough up whatever you demand.