Cancelled fitter. Not returning full amount as per contract

Lomast

Ultimately it would be for a judge to decide but On the face of it their costs don't seem unreasonable.

Their legal team is likely to be a legal advice capacity from either their insurer or more likely someone like the federation of master builders.

denk15

Lomast wrote: »

Ultimately it would be for a judge to decide but On the face of it their costs don't seem unreasonable.

Their legal team is likely to be a legal advice capacity from either their insurer or more likely someone like the federation of master builders.

I'm hoping it doesn't go that far. I'm going to suggest to them that we proceed with an ADR.

I would hope their costs are seen as unreasonable lol They are currently withholding £900+ when their contract says they will return all funds.

Looks like a trip to CAB is needed

zoob

I’m assuming that when the fitter contacted the boss you’d told them that you wanting the work done as had being already agreed and there was no changes to what was agreed when the he was there.

denk15

zoob wrote: »

I’m assuming that when the fitter contacted the boss you’d told them that you wanting the work done as had being already agreed and there was no changes to what was agreed when the he was there.

Yea, when we saw the plan we told the fitters that this wasn't what we had originally agreed. They then called the boss to find out what was going on, which is when he came back with a quote of an additional £1,000.

If the original quote was for the works we had actually asked for (and so would have been £1,000 more expensive) we never would have agreed in the first place.

Dean000000

Op. You are right and wrong, and appears you have slightly conflicting terms.

You are correct that your contract is with FC. Though, our are also bound by their terms of having to pay all reasonable costs.

If their supplier (regardless of relation to FC) is charging them 30% restocking, then that’s a reasonable cost.... and you are bound by that.

I noted the following;

The contract does say that if they start work during the 14 day cancellation period, this does not affect my right to cancel within that period, but I must pay a fair amount for any work completed before they receive my cancellation

Work completed / materials procured? It’s interpretation but kinda the same thing isn’t it? You can’t start work without some materials...

What I would argue, is that under very few scenarios I can imagine, the additional cost would be £1000 to relocate services to a bath. (Unless it’s a very big bathroom) Both supply and drainage can be run in a day, and there is a theoretical saving against any first fix they may have allowed in their theoretical original locations (less so if they perceived the agreed location was as existing bath)

I’ve not really added much here....but I’ve got this far so may as well hit post....

denk15

Dean000000 wrote: »

Op. You are right and wrong, and appears you have slightly conflicting terms.

You are correct that your contract is with FC. Though, our are also bound by their terms of having to pay all reasonable costs.

If their supplier (regardless of relation to FC) is charging them 30% restocking, then that’s a reasonable cost.... and you are bound by that.

I noted the following;

The contract does say that if they start work during the 14 day cancellation period, this does not affect my right to cancel within that period, but I must pay a fair amount for any work completed before they receive my cancellation

Work completed / materials procured? It’s interpretation but kinda the same thing isn’t it? You can’t start work without some materials...

What I would argue, is that under very few scenarios I can imagine, the additional cost would be £1000 to relocate services to a bath. (Unless it’s a very big bathroom) Both supply and drainage can be run in a day, and there is a theoretical saving against any first fix they may have allowed in their theoretical original locations (less so if they perceived the agreed location was as existing bath)

I’ve not really added much here....but I’ve got this far so may as well hit post....

I hear what you are saying, but then what classes as "work started" - For example, if I had canceled the day before and the fitters had never shown up, they would still have bought materials, so would that class as work starting? - not relevant to my case of course.

Also, 30% re-stocking fee? seems unfair to me, the goods either stayed in the van or their premises so presumably, they are still in the packaging. They sent me the policy (after cancelation, not before) and it says "we can charge up to and including 30%"

Again, looks like they are just trying to get what they can, rather than reasonably cover their costs

Dean000000

I agree. Restocking charges are an absolute racquet. I mean how much can it cost to put a £200 toilet back on the shelf.

However, as you quickly identified, they are different companies, therefore the company that you contracted with are liable to pay these charges (again - despite their relationship to each other)

Take your point on ‘when’s the cut off’ (I.e liability before works commenced) but I suppose that’s kinda the fitting company’s risk isn’t it.....

It could well be that fc have a contractual agreement that unless work starts, restocking charges won’t apply.

I doubt this is the case, but you don’t know that...

In any case - given the relation between the sanitary ware company and your installers, they could theoretically make up Any cost or agreement, so it’s not a solid starting point

mattyprice4004

Business to business contracts (ie between their supplier and themselves, as a business) can have restocking fees - and it's unfair for them to pay them because you decide to cancel.

They've put time into drawing up plans, ordering stock and now they've got stock they won't use - so I think you'll be hard pushed to get much of £500 back.

denk15

Thanks for the replies

I understand Matty - put, pulling this back to the contract. The contract says that if I canceled in the 14 days then I get back all money already paid - it's a term they put into the contract, not me.

There's no mention of taking off costs for re-stocking/losses/suppliers fees. I wouldn't class buying supplies as "starting work"

I've also read that the courts don't look kindly on those who don't mitigate their losses - since both companies are owned and run by the same guy, I would hope a judge would use common sense and say that this guy charging himself is not mitigating losses.

The whole thing is giving me a headache

unholyangel

denk15 wrote: »

Thanks for the reply. Just to make it more clear, we didn't change the plan.

When he came round to quote up the works, we told him then where we want the bath. For some reason in his plan, he put it in a different place. From start to end, we have only wanted the bath in one location.

Thanks

And this is the main point you rely on. That they were in breach of contract. If anyone should be liable for losses, it should be them. They agreed a price of x based on your instructions to them. They then refused to honour that agreement and tried to vary the terms.

Of course they may then say theres been a mistake. But that type of mistake doesn't automatically void a contract and if it does void it, then again they have no right to keep any of your money.

Remind them that under the CCRs they need to give you certain information - including the total price and that a change to that information is not effective unless expressly agreed (ie in writing).