New Kitchen problems - supplier v fitter

ryder72

Furts - Interesting point. Didnt realise that it was possible for a retailer to distance themselves from the installation by putting in appropriate clauses in the contract. Its a bit dissapointing though that a retailer would do this as the whole point why customers come to us is that we offer the whole package and in return offer guarantees on the services we offer. I realise not all companies are as honest and I am surprised consumer law allows this loophole to exist.

Furts

SuzieSue wrote: »

That's very useful to know and the consumer needs to watch out for this. I will need to check back but when I had my conservatory built around 7 years ago, I don't remember seeing anything like this in any of the paperwork I received.

So the supplier is explicitly distancing themselves from the fitting which they would need to do rather than just burying it in the small print.

Another one I am processing through at the moment concerns that imfamous, rogue company known as Door Stop international. They manufacture mind boggling quantities of composite doors but attempt to evade responsibity for their poor quality. They claim they only supply the "Trade" - a similar scenario to Howdens! However, one can purchase a door from them for trade is not investigated, nor defined.

One then fits the door, or gets somebody to fit it. When the inevitable problems arise Door Stop say they are a trade supplier offering a materials only warranty. Hence they operate outside of the Sale Of Goods Act, and subsequent consumer legislation. The labour warranty is by default supplied by the individual who purchased the door. This is the consumer, so of course the consumer has taken on the responsibility for rectifying Door Stop's cr-p quality! It is a clever scam but Door Stop have got rich on the back of it.

It goes further than this. Even if the consumer had not directly bought the door but instead had it supplied and fitted by Internet Whizzo Doors, or the London Pallatial Entrance Mechanism Company, there is still a cop out for Door Stop. There are guarantees on the door, glazing, ironmongery, locks... and these come from Door Stop. However if the supplier/fitter ceases trading these guarantees become pointless because the site inspection, site visiting, and labour element all die at the same time. The customer ends up with the wad of material guarantees that cannot be realistically enforced without the requisite labour element.

I make no bones about it. I detest Door Stop. But this is not because of their scamming, because that is a matter for their Directors and not for me. My concern is where Door Stop lead, other reputable companies may follow thinking this is the way to compete and survive. Door Stop are the thin end of a worrying wedge!

SuzieSue

ryder72 wrote: »

Furts - Interesting point. Didnt realise that it was possible for a retailer to distance themselves from the installation by putting in appropriate clauses in the contract. Its a bit dissapointing though that a retailer would do this as the whole point why customers come to us is that we offer the whole package and in return offer guarantees on the services we offer. I realise not all companies are as honest and I am surprised consumer law allows this loophole to exist.

I would have thought that it was a bonus for retailers like you if other retailers are doing this as once people get wise to it they will go with retailers that don't do this.

ryder72

SuzieSue - It is no doubt tempting. As a retailer we would want to make a margin on the installation services as we need this to cover overheads and the potential costs for putting things right should they go wrong in the future.

All things being equal we would be competing on a level playing field but far too often customers only compare the bottomline without studying the fine print and this only encourages behaviour like the one Furts has reported.

Its something I personally wont entertain doing as it is just wrong, but for every one of me taking this position, there is someone down the road taking a contrarian view.

I can report for instance that a local competitor of ours asks customers to pay fitters direct to 'save VAT'. They tread a fine line with the tax man but they appear 20% cheaper than the competition. The customer thinks they are getting an installation warranty from the retailer which in reality they dont. Worse, no one appears to pause and ask a very basis question - with the VAT registration threshold at £83000 equating to £1725 per week based on 48 weeks working, how does a decent kitchen installation team carrying out electrical, plumbing, plastering, tiling and fitting manage to stay under this threshold? A typical fit with all of the above could easily cost £4500+VAT for about 2-2.5 weeks work.

Strange world we live in.

littlerock

As a matter of interest how much would a skilled kitchen fitter expect to make per week?

Furts

ryder72 wrote: »

SuzieSue - It is no doubt tempting. As a retailer we would want to make a margin on the installation services as we need this to cover overheads and the potential costs for putting things right should they go wrong in the future.

All things being equal we would be competing on a level playing field but far too often customers only compare the bottomline without studying the fine print and this only encourages behaviour like the one Furts has reported.

Its something I personally wont entertain doing as it is just wrong, but for every one of me taking this position, there is someone down the road taking a contrarian view.

I can report for instance that a local competitor of ours asks customers to pay fitters direct to 'save VAT'. They tread a fine line with the tax man but they appear 20% cheaper than the competition. The customer thinks they are getting an installation warranty from the retailer which in reality they dont. Worse, no one appears to pause and ask a very basis question - with the VAT registration threshold at £83000 equating to £1725 per week based on 48 weeks working, how does a decent kitchen installation team carrying out electrical, plumbing, plastering, tiling and fitting manage to stay under this threshold? A typical fit with all of the above could easily cost £4500+VAT for about 2-2.5 weeks work.

Strange world we live in.

In my example with the conservatory company everything appears above board should they be subject to audit or a VAT inspection. The same with the fitting team. This is because VAT is charged and there is no suggestion it can be avoided. Indeed I know of consumers who have tried and been told no.

Just like Door Stop (my other example) this raises a worrying concern. There is a clear respect for the law with taxation, VAT, accounting...but a complete disregard for the law when it comes to consumers. Why is this? I suggest it is because many consumers have dumbed down to such an extent that they no longer possess common sense, or a streetwise mentality, or any inbuilt early warning antenna. Consequently companies latch onto this and exploit it.

SuzieSue

ryder72 wrote: »

I can report for instance that a local competitor of ours asks customers to pay fitters direct to 'save VAT'. They tread a fine line with the tax man but they appear 20% cheaper than the competition. The customer thinks they are getting an installation warranty from the retailer which in reality they dont. Worse, no one appears to pause and ask a very basis question - with the VAT registration threshold at £83000 equating to £1725 per week based on 48 weeks working, how does a decent kitchen installation team carrying out electrical, plumbing, plastering, tiling and fitting manage to stay under this threshold? A typical fit with all of the above could easily cost £4500+VAT for about 2-2.5 weeks work.

But I would assume that all the subcontractors in the team are self employed and so they would each have a £83k VAT threshold?

phill99

littlerock wrote: »

As a matter of interest how much would a skilled kitchen fitter expect to make per week?

Are you asking how much takes home a week or how much he charges a week? The two are very different figures.

littlerock

Both really. Interested to know the level of overheads as well.