Hourly labour rate changed

glasgowdan

It's not 5 hours though - it's 10! 10 hours to fix some taps does sound unusual.

konark

Apprentice ain't doing bad though, he's on £2.50 a hour more than a quarter of the country already even if he's doing jack.

Tontogary

The job was to fix a mixer tap unit in the kitchen, that would not turn off, check a tap unit in the bathroom which was leaking, and fix 2 flexible joints from the toilet waste to the soil pipe.

The mixer tap was fixed, but not the other one, and the toilet waste elbows were replaced. The job included time to get parts which was about an hour, so of course the apprentice was not actually doing work to speed up the job sitting in the car with the plumber was he?

I just think it's a bit of a liberty to be told one thing, and charged another....if it is usual to do so, I will be more wary in the future, and the wife certainly will be. I would have questioned it straight away if I was home, but am away for a few months working.

glasgowdan

konark wrote: »

Apprentice ain't doing bad though, he's on £2.50 a hour more than a quarter of the country already even if he's doing jack.

£10 is the charge out rate, not his wage.

George_Michael

Risteard wrote: »

The quote was for one person per hour. Assuming this job lasted an hour or more then it would be logical to assume that the bill has probably been reduced by having the second (cheap) person there.)

Because of having an apprentice there, the job may well have taken longer than if the plumber was on his own.
He may well have taken time to explain to the apprentice what he was doing and did the job slowly to ensure that the apprentice was getting a good view and idea of what was going on.

Cisco001

Some time they quote without VAT...

zaax

The quote should have been for he job.

shaun_from_Africa

Cisco001 wrote: »

Some time they quote without VAT...

When dealing with consumers, the quote given should be VAT inclusive.
The plumber has already told the OP that the extra £10 per hour was for the apprentice but even if it was VAT, the figure charged should have been £48 per hour and not the £50 charged.