Bad Job on New Fence

somethingcorporate

Paying doesn't complete a contract, nor mean you are happy with it.

Vax is 110% in the wrong when they say that.

You both have to complete your sides of the contract for it to "complete" and then there are still a number of ongoing implied (Sales of Goods and Services Act) and express terms (warranty etc) that apply to the service.

Start putting things in writing, write with your complaint and your suggested resolution. Get quotes from other builders to fix the job and then you may have to sue the original builder for that amount of money back since he failed to satisfactorily perform the original contract. This can be done easily via moneyclaimonline but you will need to send a letter before action prior to doing this informing him what you are doing.

vax2002

My advice is based on
"What will actually happen"
I could write pages outlining the legal obligations and possible CCJ action against a fly by night builder.
However in the REAL world, things are slightly different to law book fiction.
The Op has paid, unless the builder wants to return and fix the fence for free, then the OP has just about seen the last of the fence and the money.
They are several legal remedies, none of which are guaranteed to fix either.
In the building trade even large companies take measures to protect themselves from incomplete work.
The best way of doing so is to draw a contract that clearly states payment will only be made on completion of the work including all snagging.
If interim payments are the only way of getting the job done, then the contract is split in 4 usually with the final quarter only paid on full completion.
Some will even keep a retainer for six months until a six month defect inspection is carried out.
These measures are for good reason, the building trade is full of flyby night vanishing act merchants.

I sincerely hope the builder is honest and returns to fix the work, however as outlined above the reality is somewhat different once they have the money.

BigMarv

Thanks something corp. I have recently sent a "letter before action" suggesting that he either refunds the money, fix the fence properly, or I'll be going down the small claims route.

Again, going back to my original point, if the fence was "unfinished" and the damage was caused whilst the fence was a "work in progress", isn't he at fault for this, especially as he suggested, supplied, and installed the fence?

somethingcorporate

It should be his responsibility to ensure that it would not receive additional damage whilst he is working on it, although act of god stuff like the weather he could probably argue he did what he could to avoid.

Vax, this is a consumer rights forum where things that are "advised" need to be appropriately caveated. You clearly stated that a contract is concluded when the payment has been made. I merely pointed out this is wrong. Whatever transpires in reality (builders declaring themselves bankrupt / folding and coming out under a different name etc etc) may be "reality" but it does not change the legal position of the OP or the contracts agreed upfront.

They may or may not be able to get their money out of the builder but your advice so far has been inaccurate and misleading.

If the OP gets nowhere then at least they would have explored all the options available to them rather than just expecting the builder to declare themselves bankrupt and forget about the money they now have to shell out to have the work done properly.

vax2002

It is not a "consumer forum"
It is a MONEY SAVING FORUM.
And the op could save a fair bit of money by taking a wider approach to the advice offered.
The question of why the OP paid in full yet later considered the work not complete will be one of the first from the circuit Judges mouth.
It will take some explaining.

somethingcorporate

Are you stupid? this is the "Consumer Rights" element of the forum - the clue is in the title at the top of your page.

Paying upfront for contracts is perfectly legitimate, it is done every day by millions of customers, companies and governments all over the world - it is particularly important when the supplier of services needs to spend a considerable amount of money at the outlay. Some industries such as the one in question it can be a bit dodgy if you get a rogue tradesman but assuming this is a blanket requirement in the industry is foolish to suggest you cannot trust a company to keep to a contract. I am pretty sure a judge could understand that (even if you cannot).

If the default position was everyone would renege on a signed contracts then the whole business world would fall apart.

Hintza

Hintza wrote: »

I don't think you have much of a leg to stand on. It doesn't sound as if the wall was struturally sound to start with if it has taken off a couple of courses of brick.

Sounds like the fence was fine.

I will refer back to my post (#3).

Still sounds like the wall wasn't fit for purpose.

BigMarv

Maybe. But it should not be part of his job to say if it will work or not?

Before he started the work he said the "wall was fine".

Also the fence was most definately not fine. I could have pushed it over with a good shove.

Hintza

You do have the quote in writing that details the extent of the works and how they are to be carried out? If not it will be a case of you said, he said.

You will have to be sure of your ground here, as unless you come to an agreement with the builder then this is going to cost you money. All I can go on is what you have said here and I am really acting as devils advocate.

BigMarv

Thats fine Hintza, its a valid point.

I'm not going to go into too much detail, but yes it was summarised in a few emails, plus I can get other evidence (emails, witnesses, etc, photographs, etc.) If I need to. I've managed to trip him up in some email correspondence, where he said he had done something (and I knew he hadn't).