Window fitter put his foot through my ceiling!

leveller2911

evoke wrote: »

Dear Lord! Three pages for a hole in the ceiling on a
house that is a building site. OP: just get it repaired and stop expending
energy and stress on what is almost a non-issue in the grand scheme of
things.





These things happen and you just deal with them as and when they
happen.

Imagine working for him............. Would def need to do a detailed quote...:D Whinging about a few £ for a ceiling repair makes me wonder if the sub-contactots will get paid in full...

I_have_spoken

Chances are you'll be the one paying compo.

Toxteth_OGrady

googler wrote: »

Does anyone have anything which contradicts this?

The Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 was mentioned in an earlier post but Section 2(4)(b) of that Act is germane.

Melaniep101

OP, I think you have to take responsibility for this, you can't really expect tradesmen to tiptoe round where floorboards are up carrying sheets of glass, regardless of whether they were made aware of it or not. It just seems common sense to me.


If I were in your shoes, I wouldn't waste my energy kicking up a stink about it, surely you have enough on your plate with the rest of the renovation. In the grand scheme of things, your ceiling repair won't be hugely expensive, is it really worth the additional hassle of arguing with the window fitters?

Just MHO...

googler

Toxteth_OGrady wrote: »

The Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 was mentioned in an earlier post but Section 2(4)(b) of that Act is germane.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/5-6/31/crossheading/liability-in-tort

I think 2(3) is relevant;

(b)an occupier may expect that a person, in the exercise of his calling, will appreciate and guard against any special risks ordinarily incident to it, so far as the occupier leaves him free to do so.

Retro_Bunny

evoke wrote: »

Dear Lord! Three pages for a hole in the ceiling on a house that is a building site.

This is classic MSE though.

1. OP asks a question, as he/she feels put out etc.
2. OP gets responses which suggest that actually they are at fault / don't have a leg to stand on etc.
3. OP re-asks / re-poses question / adds more facts - mainly because they don't like the response they got
4. OP gets more responses which suggest that actually they are at fault / don't have a leg to stand on etc.
5. OP posts something hissy in the middle of it all, using bold or CAPITALS as they furiously insist that we should be supporting them.
6. MSE community posts something like this in response.

The result - 3 pages (maybe 4 after this )

So stuff the sensible advice and help we're trying to give...
Dear OP - sue 'em.
End thread.

googler

... Or, as in this case, some MSEers actually try to clarify what legislation actually applies, for the benefit of future homeowners in the same situation.

Mr_Ted

Retro_Bunny wrote: »

This is classic MSE though.

1. OP asks a question, as he/she feels put out etc.
2. OP gets responses which suggest that actually they are at fault / don't have a leg to stand on etc.
3. OP re-asks / re-poses question / adds more facts - mainly because they don't like the response they got
4. OP gets more responses which suggest that actually they are at fault / don't have a leg to stand on etc.
5. OP posts something hissy in the middle of it all, using bold or CAPITALS as they furiously insist that we should be supporting them.
6. MSE community posts something like this in response.

The result - 3 pages (maybe 4 after this )

So stuff the sensible advice and help we're trying to give...
Dear OP - sue 'em.
End thread.

:rotfl:Me thinks an element of sarcasm is starting to emanate :rotfl:

Cant see the need for anything further to be said other than BEWARE a HORNETS NEST dependent on your action OP