Replacement sink - who pays for plumber to install?

iandv

Hi

Our rhoper rhodes sink / vanity unit is faulty (its approx 6 months old) and they have agreed via the retailer to send another sink unit to replace.

However who should pick up the tab (us, the retailer or rhoper rhodes) to pay for the plumber to take out the faulty sink and replace with the new sink?

warmhands.coldheart

iandv wrote: »

Hi

Our rhoper rhodes sink / vanity unit is faulty (its approx 6 months old) and they have agreed via the retailer to send another sink unit to replace.

However who should pick up the tab (us, the retailer or rhoper rhodes) to pay for the plumber to take out the faulty sink and replace with the new sink?

Hassle free option - You..
Pain in the Rectum option that'll probably take ages to agree - Rhoper Rhodes

vaio

depends who bought it originally...

If your plumber supplied & fitted then it's down to him

If you bought and then paid plumber to fit then it's down to whoever you bought it from (assuming you bought as a consumer rather than a business)

manufacturer are out of the frame unless they also sold it direct to you

iandv

Thanks all - we bought it as a consumer from a builders merchants and paid for a plumber to install

So what would you say to the builders merchants, can you install it?

Toxteth_OGrady

Under SOGA, you can claim the cost of re-installation from the seller (builders merchant) as it's a reasonable, foreseeable and quantifiable consequential loss.

southcoastrgi

Toxteth_OGrady wrote: »

Under SOGA, you can claim the cost of re-installation from the seller (builders merchant) as it's a reasonable, foreseeable and quantifiable consequential loss.

I think you will find you are wrong, the seller will be responsible for suppling a new unit however not for paying for the installation, had the plumber supplied it & they are a decent tradesman then they would have put a markup on the cost (profit) & they should have done the replacement labour foc

however there are some on here that think making a profit is against the law, but they would still want the trade to replace the unit foc. cake & eat it springs to mind

keystone

Toxteth_OGrady wrote: »

as it's a reasonable, foreseeable and quantifiable consequential loss.

Eh? What is? And agree with the post above too.

Cheers

evoke

I would say OP needs to pay a plumber to remove the old sink and install the new one. The sink is warranted and the warranty has been honoured and OP has received a brand new one.

What happens after that is down to the OP. I really can't see it being a big job to be honest.

vaio

southcoastrgi wrote: »

I think you will find you are wrong, the seller will be responsible for suppling a new unit however not for paying for the installation, had the plumber supplied it & they are a decent tradesman then they would have put a markup on the cost (profit) & they should have done the replacement labour foc

however there are some on here that think making a profit is against the law, but they would still want the trade to replace the unit foc. cake & eat it springs to mind

If you sell sinks to consumers for a living then there is nothing wrong with making a profit as long as you don't expect your customers to end up out of pocket by having to pay to remove and then replace a faulty sink you have supplied.

Sale of Goods legislation (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/54/section/48B) as well as general contract law is is perfectly clear, consequential costs including labour are recoverable.

If the buyer requires the seller to repair or replace the goods, the seller must—

(a)repair or, as the case may be, replace the goods within a reasonable time but without causing significant inconvenience to the buyer;

(b)bear any necessary costs incurred in doing so (including in particular the cost of any labour, materials or postage)....

keystone

But it still isn't a consequentiial loss. Consequential losses are indirect losses. A consequential loss would be inability to use the house because the bathroom was out of action. Labour for replacement is a direct loss.

Additionally I wonder if six months is a "reasonable" timescale for repair or replacement as unfit for purpose under SOGA. Isn't that normally taken to be iro 3 weeks. I think 6 months makes it a warranty issue rather than a SOGA issue.

Cheers

virtuallyfree

iandv wrote: »

Hi

Our rhoper rhodes sink / vanity unit is faulty (its approx 6 months old) and they have agreed via the retailer to send another sink unit to replace.

However who should pick up the tab (us, the retailer or rhoper rhodes) to pay for the plumber to take out the faulty sink and replace with the new sink?

You would pay as no one else was involved in the installation.

But I would then send copy of installation bill to the retailer and hope they will compensate you as goodwill and good customer service. If not, then say that you are going to seek advice from trading standards, do that, you will find out if there has been any mistakes made.