Charged due to small print rule

pendragon_arther

How did he know your son was 16 and not 18? Most 16 yos look older.

Money-Saving-King

Fosterdog wrote: »

there are plenty of 16 and 17 year olds that live on their own

Really? I've been alive since the 70's and haven't known of any 16/17 year old's that live on their own.

pendragon_arther wrote: »

How did he know your son was 16 and not 18? Most 16 yos look older.

I can imagine a form needs to be signed at the end by the owner or at least an adult so the age was probably announced by the son at the time.

Money-Saving-King

JethroUK wrote: »

That said the repair man could've waited a few minutes for an adult to return

Nearer 20 minutes wasn't it? If everyone expected that of him and he has appointments can you imagine how late he would be by only 11:00 AM if every single person expected him to hang around for near half an hour for them to turn up. No wonder he went on his way.

JReacher1

unholyangel wrote: »

Which is why I said they may be able to charge for a second visit. But they can't charge for the first visit. That isnt a loss caused by any potential breach of contract.

If I offered you a free consultation and you fail to turn up. I cant then charge you a fee. It may mean I'm unlikely to give you another freebie....but thats another matter.

They can (and have) charged for the first visit.

They have to make two trips due to the fact the OP was not present when the engineer called. That is loss and it's been caused by the first trip which is the one that should be charged for. The second visit is covered by the warranty agreement and can not therefore be charged for.

Posters like yourself who give inaccurate advice to posters with problems are a tad annoying. You agree the OP is liable to be charged for one of the two trips and are trying to muddy the water by disputing whether the first trip is chargeable (when it clearly is)

It doesn't really help the OP

Zandoni

JReacher1 wrote: »

They can (and have) charged for the first visit.

They have to make two trips due to the fact the OP was not present when the engineer called. That is loss and it's been caused by the first trip which is the one that should be charged for. The second visit is covered by the warranty agreement and can not therefore be charged for.

Posters like yourself who give inaccurate advice to posters with problems are a tad annoying. You agree the OP is liable to be charged for one of the two trips and are trying to muddy the water by disputing whether the first trip is chargeable (when it clearly is)

It doesn't really help the OP

unholyangel's post makes far more sense than yours.

pinkshoes

ami66 wrote: »

However the day before we are told our slot is now 8am to 11am.

THEY changed the times at short notice.

You made sufficient arrangements by only having a very tiny window where the engineer would have to wait for your return.

Your son told the engineer he would phone you, and you would be back immediately.

Given this would have only cost the engineer an extra 10 minutes, then, then you could have paid for this 10 minute period at his hourly rate.

HE chose not to wait. He could have waited in his van. He didn't have to come into the house.

It is fair enough not wanting to do work with a minor in the house, but the engineer had plenty of other options available.

JReacher1

pinkshoes wrote: »

THEY changed the times at short notice.

You made sufficient arrangements by only having a very tiny window where the engineer would have to wait for your return.

Your son told the engineer he would phone you, and you would be back immediately.

Given this would have only cost the engineer an extra 10 minutes, then, then you could have paid for this 10 minute period at his hourly rate.

HE chose not to wait. He could have waited in his van. He didn't have to come into the house.

It is fair enough not wanting to do work with a minor in the house, but the engineer had plenty of other options available.

He's a contractor for a company and will have several jobs that day. He can't just wait as that would throw out his whole days appointments and he would be in trouble with his employers.

The only person who has done nothing wrong in this whole scenario is the contractor.

JReacher1

Zandoni wrote: »

unholyangel's post makes far more sense than yours.

Yes well if you only have a very basic understanding of consumer rights then you would think their post makes sense

Zandoni

JReacher1 wrote: »

Yes well if you only have a very basic understanding of consumer rights then you would think their post makes sense

I know one thing for sure unholyangel is far more knowledgeable than most on this site.

Fosterdog

JethroUK wrote: »

16/17 year old s cannot sign a contract, so you won't find them living alone unless "an adult" has signed rental agreement for them and this same "adult" will need to be present for the exact same reasons

That said the repair man could've waited a few minutes for an adult to return

A 16/17 year old is old enough to get married (although do need parental consent) and there are certainly thousands of teenage pregnancies every year in the UK, that used to be a way for people to get a council house where no a parent doesn't have to sign a rental agreement for them.

I used to volunteer with the local youth service where we used to help teenagers over 16 get out of abusive situations and into their own flats/house shares/youth housing. They bought their own appliances to go in their homes (where grants were not available).