Builder charging for travel

Doozergirl

WannaBLoaded wrote: »

Depends how much and what sort of work you had done really? If it was a full refurb then i would say that is pretty low. It isn't unusual for people to be 500 quid out or more.

It's not about being 'out' - that is an incorrect assumption on the part of the OP. It is only about the way the builder has quoted. Sundry items (not a potential contingency) are in the initial estimate (see post 5) and the costs are almost identical - it is fair and legitimate.

A builder can break down their quote or estimate whichever way they see fit. We have another case here of people thinking that tradesmen aren't allowed to charge for legitimate costs.

Whoever thinks that screws, sealant, blades, petrol etc should be in an hourly rate is out of the tree. If it were included, the final price would and should still be the same!

atprice

Hi all. I've just checked back and thought I should just clarify that in both the estimate and the invoice, each item was broken down into both materials and time. Therefore sundries, in this instance, does not include sealant, nails, etc. as this would fall under 'materials'. As far as I can tell the £200 is purely for travel expenses.

atprice

WannaBLoaded wrote: »

Where we leave leeway in a price we tell people 'work on 10,000 but allow an extra 500' if there is something that we feel may be more difficult than it looks.

We price fixed so that the customer knows what the're paying irrespective of how many tubes of silicon etc as long as our original quote is competitive the customer is getting a good deal either way and that's probably all most people care about, getting what they wanted done within a budget they feel comfortable spending.

It all depends on how your original verbal and written quote were geared up to be honest, if you were a fixed price then this addition is cheeky and probably not legal because they should tell you before they start work so that you can agree or decline.

It was an estimate, not a quote, so would expect if 'sundries' weren't required then they wouldn't be billed. Again, this just goes to the definition of what's a sundry.

atprice

Doozergirl wrote: »

We have another case here of people thinking that tradesmen aren't allowed to charge for legitimate costs.

As I have said before, I have no problem in being billed for legitimate costs, the issue is that my idea of "sundries" is not the same as his. Materials were included in the price, so we're not talking bits and bobs here, we're talking purely travel expenses but that's not how it was described. If the estimate had said "travel expenses" then I would have known that's what he meant and would have known how to deal with it. He may as well have put "miscellaneous" for all that it means. As the person paying the bill I'm entitled to know exactly how every penny is being spent if it's coming out of my pocket.

And, yes, I think £200 is steep for travel expenses, but that's another issue that I can take up with him directly.

wealdroam

atprice wrote: »

Hi all. I've just checked back and thought I should just clarify that in both the estimate and the invoice, each item was broken down into both materials and time. Therefore sundries, in this instance, does not include sealant, nails, etc. as this would fall under 'materials'. As far as I can tell the £200 is purely for travel expenses.

I have no idea what your job entailed because you haven't told us, but are you saying that he has (to use my earlier examples) listed the number and various sizes of all the screws used?

You tell us he has broken down the costs so one would expect everything itemised.

atprice wrote: »

Again, this just goes to the definition of what's a sundry.

As said earlier, sundries are all things used that are not itemised elsewhere.

atprice

wealdroam wrote: »

I have no idea what your job entailed because you haven't told us, but are you saying that he has (to use my earlier examples) listed the number and various sizes of all the screws used?

You tell us he has broken down the costs so one would expect everything itemised.



As said earlier, sundries are all things used that are not itemised elsewhere.

I'm not quite sure I follow your logic. How far should the costs of materials be broken down before they're not included in the price? Materials are anything required to do the job but I wouldn't expect every screw to be counted.

The job was to strip the walls and plaster where needed. He also painted the canopy over the front door. I would expect "materials" to include anything required to do the job.

WannaBLoaded

Unfortunately i think my original post stands, when you do not have a fixed price for the work you leave yourself open to further costs.

When we have given a fixed price if we end up having to buy more of something than we expected, lowering our profit we don't ask the customer for more money, unless they make alterations to the original agreement.

We'd never slap 200 quid on for odds and sods and petrol, depending on how much profit was in the work they may very well have had their petrol money twice

WannaBLoaded

Doozergirl wrote: »

It's not about being 'out' - that is an incorrect assumption on the part of the OP. It is only about the way the builder has quoted. Sundry items (not a potential contingency) are in the initial estimate (see post 5) and the costs are almost identical - it is fair and legitimate.

A builder can break down their quote or estimate whichever way they see fit. We have another case here of people thinking that tradesmen aren't allowed to charge for legitimate costs.

Whoever thinks that screws, sealant, blades, petrol etc should be in an hourly rate is out of the tree. If it were included, the final price would and should still be the same!

The op has only just said that they had had an estimate and not a fixed price. If the op had been given a fixed price, the sundy would be an unfair trading practice and trading standards would be giving him a bell.

But as it is an estimate, no fixed cost, the scope for adding extras is always going to be there and legal.

Doozergirl

WannaBLoaded wrote: »

The op has only just said that they had had an estimate and not a fixed price. If the op had been given a fixed price, the sundy would be an unfair trading practice and trading standards would be giving him a bell.

But as it is an estimate, no fixed cost, the scope for adding extras is always going to be there and legal.

Absolutely. But in this case it isn't an 'extra'
a) because sundries are accounted for and therefore fair
b) because it was an estimate

Doozergirl

atprice wrote: »

As I have said before, I have no problem in being billed for legitimate costs, the issue is that my idea of "sundries" is not the same as his. Materials were included in the price, so we're not talking bits and bobs here, we're talking purely travel expenses but that's not how it was described. If the estimate had said "travel expenses" then I would have known that's what he meant and would have known how to deal with it. He may as well have put "miscellaneous" for all that it means. As the person paying the bill I'm entitled to know exactly how every penny is being spent if it's coming out of my pocket.

And, yes, I think £200 is steep for travel expenses, but that's another issue that I can take up with him directly.

But you're not entitled to know how every penny is spent! In fact, if he hadn't have broken it down in quite a way, this conversation wouldn't be taking place.

The raw materials in a tin of baked beans do not add up to the sum of the cost to you of baked beans. If you add the travelling time of the lorry that takes the beans to Tesco and add it to the hourly rate of the person on the checkout, it does not make the price to you different. Tesco can break the price down any way they want (which, handily, is one price made up of 'none of our business'), but the price to make them profitable enough is what it is.

Your guy is absolutely entitled to put 'sundries' on his estimate and subsequent invoice and those sundries can include whatever he wants them to because it was his estimate and he told you they existed. It seems that he has made effort to be fair to you and he deserves that respect back. For all we know, he doesn't even know what's in it and his wife does it all to save him working for free (yes, many builders are like that)

I don't know what you do for a living but I don't know any company that I deal with that has to break down every penny of the supply chain or where I have the right to demand it.

I don't know what proportion of my insurance policy or accountant's bill is taken up by a particular customer, or how much wear and tear one job puts on a wheelbarrow or a cement mixer or how much petrol goes in a company vehicle or how many blades my guys go through on a job, but it doesn't come out of my personal wage or my materials estimate on my estimating software.