Can I ask for installation costs to be refunded?

wealdroam

cattermole wrote: »

OP re advice which is correct re costs of installing etc.

Please note that outside lights can be covered by building regulations so it would then need to be signed off by an appropriately qualified person.

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/permission/commonprojects/lighting/

But I think you'll find that replacing a fitting like for like, which is what we are talking about here, is not notifiable work.

See here, under the heading 'Minor Works'.

unholyangel

Rotti wrote: »

Who are the "we" and "us" you refer to? I'm not asking anyone to do anything and am more than capable of dealing with these matters but a lot of people aren't and Section 75 and chargeback are terms constantly bandied around but are not as easy as people make out. I have had dealings on both recently and also won a case in the SCC last week but it took a long time and the retailer would not respond at any stage so LBA and mediation didn't work. We should not have to jump through hoops to make retailers comply with the law and take responsibility for what they sell and it seems wrong now that consumers have to do for themselves that which was previously done by Trading Standards. Companies are getting away with far too much as the resources to deal with them are too thinly spread.

TS don't (and never have to my knowledge) taken action on behalf of an individual. So even if TS took them to court, TS won and that judgement was directly applicable to your circumstances, the retailer could still refuse and you'd still have to take them to court yourself.

We obviously no longer have OFT as part of the budget measures implemented - but then you're getting into political grounds rather than consumer rights.

London50

Nodding_Donkey wrote: »

My bold.

This is very dangerous advice, it's perfectly possible to get a shock off either the neutral or live wire.

If you read my first post giving instructions of what to do with the wiring there is no way anyone can get a shock as all 3 wires {or the electric block is wrapped in electrical tape so there are no bare wires to get a shock off and sealed in a plastic bag as I advised keeps damp out.
Any work being done with the wiring that is installed already will be dead if the light fuse is removed. All the OP needs to do it connect the 2 or 3 wires into the lamp in the correct positions then replace the fuse. Job done.

McKneff

I wish people would start there own threads if they have a problem.


It just adds to the confusion as to who is talking to who.


Apart from that, its rude to hijack someone elses thread.

cattermole

wealdroam wrote: »

But I think you'll find that replacing a fitting like for like, which is what we are talking about here, is not notifiable work.

See here, under the heading 'Minor Works'.

I have no idea from her post whether or not the first lamp (i.e. the faulty one) is a replacement for an existing light fitting or not or whether it has just been put in from scratch. I just thought I would flag it up.

Regardless of this, I really don't think expecting people with no knowledge of electricity not to employ an electrician is reasonable whether it is a simple swap over or not. If they needed someone to do the job in the first place, then they need them to change/replace it as well.

FOREVER21

wealdroam wrote: »

Having agreed that the lamp is inherently faulty and should be replaced, the seller needs to cover all costs of supplying the remedy.

Section 48B of The Sale of Goods Act says (amongst other things):

Para (2)(b) is the bit you need.

However, removing and replacing an identical fitting is unlikely to be as expensive as the original installation. For example, no holes will need drilling or cables run.
I would go as far as to suggest it is a simple diy or handyman job.

Just a thought,I am no expert but reading the paragraphs of SOGA especially para 2 b, this seems to indicate that by supplying the replacement lamp labour cost of packaging and despatch and postage, the supplier is meeting the terms of SOGA.

To include the cost of the electrician might be classed as consequential loss and in most companies T&C s this is not covered.

cattermole

My understanding is re consequential losses is and recent developments it would still have to pass the "reasonable contract test".

You can't just exclude people's rights under the Sale of Goods Act in your T&C's

Looking just at an online supplier of bathrooms, what they say is if the fault should have been reasonably noticed i.e. it was obvious on inspecting the goods on delivery, there was a fault then no they will not pay for re-installation. If a fault is evident afterwards (which in this case it was) then they do not exclude costs arising out of re-installation.

I'm not 100% certain but to exclude any liability for re-installation costs (consequential loss) completely due to faulty goods would fail under the "reasonable contract test".

wealdroam

cattermole wrote: »

I have no idea from her post whether or not the first lamp (i.e. the faulty one) is a replacement for an existing light fitting or not or whether it has just been put in from scratch. I just thought I would flag it up.

It really doesn't matter what the scenario is concerning the installation of the first lamp, because the OP told us in the original post that the work was done by an electrician.

cattermole wrote: »

Regardless of this, I really don't think expecting people with no knowledge of electricity not to employ an electrician is reasonable whether it is a simple swap over or not. If they needed someone to do the job in the first place, then they need them to change/replace it as well.

As I suggested earlier, swapping an existing fitting with an identical replacement is a very simple job requiring many fewer skills that the original installation:

wealdroam wrote: »

However, removing and replacing an identical fitting is unlikely to be as expensive as the original installation. For example, no holes will need drilling or cables run.
I would go as far as to suggest it is a simple diy or handyman job.

Of course, no-one should attempt any job, especially where electricity is involved, when they feel uncomfortable or unsure about it.

Rotti

McKneff wrote: »

I wish people would start there own threads if they have a problem.

It just adds to the confusion as to who is talking to who.

Apart from that, its rude to hijack someone elses thread.

Not sure who you are referring to when you say they should start THEIR own threads but if the quote facility is used properly it is obvious isn't it? I don't see that the thread has been hijacked apart from a bunch of armchair electricians dishing out bad advice.

London50

Rotti wrote: »

Not sure who you are referring to when you say they should start THEIR own threads but if the quote facility is used properly it is obvious isn't it? I don't see that the thread has been hijacked apart from a bunch of armchair electricians dishing out bad advice.

Just because you are either not able or do not understand how a simple wiring job is done or have the money to get some {hopefully} "qualified" person in to do it does not mean that any advise given here is from an "armchair"electrician. My oldest son is qualified and has stated that any basic D.I.Yer can do a simple job like that without any qualifacations or piece of paper stating a "pass" in "xyz"