Builder and subcontractor

shaun_from_Africa

For something like this it may well be best to get the advice of a solicitor or if you have any legal protection on your household insurance, give them a call.

Failing that, it might be worth sending a recorded letter to the subcontractor, and in it state that you deny any debt to them or their company and that at no point have you entered into any contract with them.

I don't know if it would have any effect, but you could also state that you are denying their implied right of access to your property and that if they do attempt to enter to remove any of the conservatory then you will sue them for civil tresspass and report them to the police for theft.

mo786uk

If the subcontractor wants to carry on finishign the work, let him - on the provisio that you are not paying him directly.

jetplane

What about trading standards, many local authorities have a registered traders scheme. Are either of these on this scheme? If so they help settle disputes.

Personally I would pay the builder and he is responsible for paying other people who he subcontracts and this should have been arranged between the two of them.

shaun_from_Africa

If the subcontractor wants to carry on finishign the work, let him

I may be wrong (I often am), but the way I've read the posts makes it sound as if all the work has been completed and the £1494 that the OP still owes is the final completion payment.

Even if the work hasn't been finished, I would be very wary of letting the subcontractor onto the property to complete it until the payment matter has been totally sorted out.
Once he is there it would be a very simple matter for him to "repossess" the glass and windows and simply take them away.

eurows

Yes. The work is now complete and the balance is owed to the builder.

mo786uk

Just pay the buidler and dont let the subcontractor onto your property - end of

You have no contract with the subcontractor

If you want to play the goodguy then get the builder and subcontractor into your house at the same time so the builder is pressured to pay the subcontractor.

DVardysShadow

mo786uk wrote: »

On what basis can he be sued? He is for all intents and purposes working for the original builder. If he does anything dodgy contractually - including taking parts away then you must sue the original builder because it is being done in his name/on his behalf.

There may be some tort against the subcontractor but its long winded.

Doubt any criminal action would be taken - technically the subscontractor is not stealing soemthing that is his. Ciminal damage? Not if he takes it all back in a proper fashion without causing any damage to existing property.

No. you have this ar5E about face.

There is no contractual relationship between OP and subcontractor. So subcontractor is really on the back foot to defend taking stuff from OP's property, The sub-contractor has no claim against OP, so taking stuff from OP's premises is indefensible.

The long winded claim is against the contractor.
If the OP sues the contractor rather than the sub-contractor, contractor can legitimately say 'nothing to do with me, I have done my job'

mo786uk

You've lost me

Either way there are a coupel of ways this could play out .Worst case scenario is Op pays the biulder and sub contractor turns up and starts taking stuff away

Optimist

I am confused by the relationship between the supplier or builders friend, as was originally stated and the builder. Is he a valid trader or a friend who has mysteriously acquired these goods ?

If the supplier is a proper over the counter supplier I think he is relying on a more than probable clause in his terms giving him retention of title until the goods are paid for. Sometimes called a Romalpa Clause. Mainly used if the buyer goes out of business without paying and liquidators are involved. If that is so I fear he is mistaken as goods are now fitted and the OP would need to have agreed to such a term which I presume he has not.

If this supplier does come around then I would suggest calling the police. They will do their job and keep the peace but don't expect them to get involved otherwise, as they tend to take the path of least resistance and will consider it a civil matter.


Otherwise as others have said the contract is between the OP and the builder.

mo786uk

Sounds to me like

Op has hired a builder
He has subcrontracted all the work out to the subcontractor
The sub contracter has got the goods but not paid for them


Original supplier has not been paid for their goods
Subcontractor has not been paid for his work and is threatening to take the goods back (which he probably owes the supplier for - or the main builder does).