Services partially undertaken again

Dal_Whinnie

Where a service is provided and the provider decides, based on their experience that certain steps are not required but, they are subsequently required, which leads to having to re-do work previously undertaken. Am I liable for all the work or should the reparation be at the providers expense? I have been charged for the initial work and the subsequent work (about 50% of the original invoice) which necessitated re-doing some of the initial work and the steps not initially undertaken to ensure it fully worked. These additional works were minimal in relation to the whole and the provider has agreed that, with the benefit of hindsight, they should have been done but that the risks involved in doing so, in their view, meant it was better not to do them.

davidmcn

It's probably going to depend on the nature of the service, the steps, the work, and the risks.

IvanOpinion

Maybe.    

Jenni_D

davidmcn said:

It's probably going to depend on the nature of the service, the steps, the work, and the risks.

And whether this is a business-consumer contract. In a consumer contract the business is assumed to be the "expert", but the devil is in the detail (as per the post I've quoted).

Dal_Whinnie

Without going into full details I accept that I am only going to get general responses but although I am aware of consumer rights re goods I do not have any knowledge re services so any advice is going to increase that, so thank you.
This is a business to consumer contract and I fully accept that the business is the expert. In this instance the business carried out 95% of the full "belt and braces" service required but didn't carry out the final 5% because of possible side effects. Unfortunately this did not work and they had to carry out this final 5% along with repeating 50% of the work previously done. 

dinglebert

It would depend on whose decision the first crossroads of the service were.

If I understand you there was a decision to be made at some point of the journey.  If we do A which is more work then there is chance that there will be a negative side-effect.  However if we do B then its cheaper but it might not work and mean we then have to do A anyway.

Who made the choice?

Jenni_D

I guess the key question is ... did they reduce their price initially on the basis of not doing some of the initial steps? If yes then the most you could be liable for is the original cost of performing those steps - any additional costs for remedial works would be at their liability. (IMHO IANAL etc.)

Dal_Whinnie

dinglebert said:

It would depend on whose decision the first crossroads of the service were.

If I understand you there was a decision to be made at some point of the journey.  If we do A which is more work then there is chance that there will be a negative side-effect.  However if we do B then its cheaper but it might not work and mean we then have to do A anyway.

Who made the choice?

The business made the choice with no consultation with me. I did question the decision afterwards and was advised of the reasoning. 

Dal_Whinnie

Jenni_D said:

I guess the key question is ... did they reduce their price initially on the basis of not doing some of the initial steps? If yes then the most you could be liable for is the original cost of performing those steps - any additional costs for remedial works would be at their liability. (IMHO IANAL etc.)

I don't think it made any difference to cost, if so it was minimal but that is my feeling that they should be liable for remedial work but I need to fully understand what the potential side effects were, which did not emerge when the full work was undertaken

dinglebert

Dal_Whinnie said:

dinglebert said:

It would depend on whose decision the first crossroads of the service were.

If I understand you there was a decision to be made at some point of the journey.  If we do A which is more work then there is chance that there will be a negative side-effect.  However if we do B then its cheaper but it might not work and mean we then have to do A anyway.

Who made the choice?

The business made the choice with no consultation with me. I did question the decision afterwards and was advised of the reasoning. 

In which case I would say they are responsible for their choices.   Surprised they didn't make you make the decision if it was so critical.

Dal_Whinnie

Updating on this, the service provider has referred the matter to their professional indemnity insurer who are investigating the matter but I do not believe the provider has been negligent but made a wrong call which I do not consider I should pay for. Clearly, if the insurer concludes that I have a valid claim then that will be the end of the issue but if they decide not then could I still have a claim under the Consumer Rights Act?