Dispute over roof repair which should be under guarantee

Shoxt3r

Hi there,

We're currently going through a dispute regarding a roof repair.

The roof was installed in 2015 under the instruction of the previous owner, just prior to us exchanging and came with a Product Guarantee of 10 years. In early February (i.e. before Storm Dudley and Storm Eunice hit) we noticed that one of the roof slates had slipped and exposed the roof lining underneath - we have dated photographs of this.

Keen to have the roof repaired I started looking for quotes from other companies (I hadn't found the guarantee in our paperwork at that point and had no idea it even existed) and found a couple of local companies who came to quote. They stated that it was unlikely to have been anything other than negligence during installation as the slate should not have slipped, coupled with the fact that the ridge tile was sat at an awkward angle over our neighbour's (we are in a terrace) ridge tiles.

After finding the Product Guarantee I contacted the original installers as soon as possible on Wednesday 16th February (again, prior to the storms) via email. By Monday 21st February I hadn't heard anything and so decided to call them instead. During the phone call I was told that "storm damage would not be covered under the Product Guarantee". After I stated that the damage was not caused by any storm, they didn't back down and said they could come to look at the damage but that all work would be chargeable at the standard rates.

As we were conscious of the further damage that could have been caused, we decided to decline their offer of visiting the property and instead opted for another local business to take the work on which was booked for and completed on Friday 25th February. After the work was completed, it was found that on one side of the slate there was a missing fixing hole and therefore a missing disc rivet which should have been done during installation (apparently a 2-minute job). The work was completed and we were charged £200.00. We were given the faultily-installed slate as evidence to hopefully claim back at least some of the repair cost from the original installers.

I have since contacted the original installers again to source compensation, providing both photographs of the slate as well as the paid invoice from the repair company but they are again denying responsibility and stating that this was due to "storm damage". Until this point no terms and conditions for the Product Guarantee had been provided but these were sent to me in a reply and it was stated this was given to the previous owners alongside the Product Guarantee. Once again the original installers highlighted that one particular clause within the terms states that "storm damage" is not covered under the guarantee.

It's obviously unfortunate timing that this was noticed just prior to the storms but we have dated photo evidence to the contrary, as well as the opinions of two roofing companies who said that this was due to negligence during installation, not storm damage.

What are my rights and do I have any reasonable grounds to take this further and who would this be with?

Many thanks in advance.

cx6

If they won't play ball you would have to go to small claims court.

Not sure if you would succeed. You weren't the original purchaser. You would need expert opinion to say it was faulty installation and not storm damage (there have been a few storms this year). 

Aylesbury_Duck

The first thing to check is if this "guarantee" is an actual insurance-backed guarantee, or just a selling point of the original roofer.  The second thing to check is whether it applies to you or the property, because if it was a job completed under previous ownership, you may not have any rights at all anyway.

Jenni_D

Did you have forum problems when posting @Aylesbury_Duck? (Triple posting goodness)  

bris

Was the warranty transfered with the roofing companies agreement to you? If not you actually have no rights here.
As you can see aylesbury_Duck really means it as he has posted it 3 times.

Aylesbury_Duck

Oops!  No sure what happened there, the red post button did "stick" so I clicked it more than once!

lincroft1710

As the roof was installed 7 years ago you are outwith the time limit for breach of contract and in fact have no contract with the roofer. You decided to go with a 3rd party roofer, rather than the original roofer and so have incurred costs which may be excessive compared to what the original roofer may have charged.


Your only redress with the original roofer was with the guarantee. Had the original roofer carried out the repair and charged you, you may, and I stress may, have been able to persuade a small claims court that you this work should have been covered by the guarantee and you should be refunded the cost of repair.

Shoxt3r

cx6 said:

If they won't play ball you would have to go to small claims court.

Not sure if you would succeed. You weren't the original purchaser. You would need expert opinion to say it was faulty installation and not storm damage (there have been a few storms this year). 

Yes it seems that would be the only way to go about claiming back the costs. I would assume that dated photographs simply wouldn't be enough evidence and they would probably have a big legal team behind them to essentially have the case thrown out and cost us even more money as a result.

I think basically they're not even going to entertain the fact I'm disputing the storm damage, nevermind anything to do with how the roof was installed.

Aylesbury_Duck said:

The first thing to check is if this "guarantee" is an actual insurance-backed guarantee, or just a selling point of the original roofer.  The second thing to check is whether it applies to you or the property, because if it was a job completed under previous ownership, you may not have any rights at all anyway.

There are no details other than a signature from both sides when the roof was installed, dated and with the heading "Product Guarantee". It doesn't actually state what is even covered on the paperwork but the terms and conditions do say that any additional works would be charged at £400.00 per man, per day. This leads me to think that the guarantee is absolutely nothing of the sort and wouldn't actually cover us for anything!

bris said:

Was the warranty transfered with the roofing companies agreement to you? If not you actually have no rights here.
As you can see aylesbury_Duck really means it as he has posted it 3 times.

We were handed the Product Guarantee with all of the other paperwork but none of it is in our name so I would assume it doesn't actually cover us for anything - they haven't even entered into any discussion about the guarantee other than it doesn't cover "storm damage" and they were only going to "take a look" and any changes would be chargeable.

lincroft1710 said:

As the roof was installed 7 years ago you are outwith the time limit for breach of contract and in fact have no contract with the roofer. You decided to go with a 3rd party roofer, rather than the original roofer and so have incurred costs which may be excessive compared to what the original roofer may have charged.


Your only redress with the original roofer was with the guarantee. Had the original roofer carried out the repair and charged you, you may, and I stress may, have been able to persuade a small claims court that you this work should have been covered by the guarantee and you should be refunded the cost of repair.

Yes it's frustrating that we've had to go with a third-party roofer but we were concerned that in the time it would have taken to get the original roofing company to come and take a look (nevermind actually do the work), further damage was to come, especially with the storms we had so needed to act quickly.

I'm starting to think that we had a lucky escape with the original roofer given that they've now handed us terms and conditions stating that it would have cost at least £400.00 to have it put right and that supposedly nothing would be covered under the guarantee. There's also the fact that if their workmanship was so poor in the first place as to cause the slipped slate (again this is not just my opinion but coming from two other companies, including the repairer) that I don't think we would have trusted them to work on it anyway.

----

I guess the bottom line is that it's very frustrating that the original roofer is able to "get away" with this when the issue blatantly happened during the original install but neither the Product Guarantee (such as it is!) nor the photographs we took would cover us. I suspect that going through Small Claims Court would just cause us additional stress and vast cost for absolutely no gain. All we can take comfort in is that we haven't given the original roofer more money (the roof was done for us prior to purchase) and that instead of getting the roof done for free, we've paid £200.00 (the repair cost from the repairer) but also to a more trustworthy, local and reputable business.

I just hope that nobody else has been duped by their "guarantee", only to be landed with a starting price of £400.00 to get a repair done for something the company didn't do right in the first place!

It's tempting to leave scathing reviews on their social media and other profiles but it wouldn't get me anywhere and would likely land me in hot water like defamation or something.... Urgh - another lost battle!!

visidigi

Two recent storms are not the only storms we've ever had either. It could be storm damage that's only just become apparent.

£200 doesn't see too unreasonable given the age of the roof.

Like I think you got to, tempted to be angry and post all about it, but that just extends the issue. I'd move on from this one.

Davidgary1

Shoxt3r said:

Hi there,

We're currently going through a dispute regarding a roof repair.

The roof was installed in 2015 under the instruction of the previous owner, just prior to us exchanging and came with a Product Guarantee of 10 years. In early February (i.e. before Storm Dudley and Storm Eunice hit) we noticed that one of the roof slates had slipped and exposed the roof lining underneath - we have dated photographs of this.

Keen to have the roof repaired I started looking for quotes from other companies (I hadn't found the guarantee in our paperwork at that point and had no idea it even existed) and found a couple of local companies who came to quote. They stated that it was unlikely to have been anything other than negligence during installation as the slate should not have slipped, coupled with the fact that the ridge tile was sat at an awkward angle over our neighbour's (we are in a terrace) ridge tiles.

After finding the Product Guarantee I contacted the original installers as soon as possible on Wednesday 16th February (again, prior to the storms) via email. By Monday 21st February I hadn't heard anything and so decided to call them instead. During the phone call I was told that "storm damage would not be covered under the Product Guarantee". After I stated that the damage was not caused by any storm, they didn't back down and said they could come to look at the damage but that all work would be chargeable at the standard rates.

As we were conscious of the further damage that could have been caused, we decided to decline their offer of visiting the property and instead opted for another local business to take the work on which was booked for and completed on Friday 25th February. After the work was completed, it was found that on one side of the slate there was a missing fixing hole and therefore a missing disc rivet which should have been done during installation (apparently a 2-minute job). The work was completed and we were charged £200.00. We were given the faultily-installed slate as evidence to hopefully claim back at least some of the repair cost from the original installers.

I have since contacted the original installers again to source compensation, providing both photographs of the slate as well as the paid invoice from the repair company but they are again denying responsibility and stating that this was due to "storm damage". Until this point no terms and conditions for the Product Guarantee had been provided but these were sent to me in a reply and it was stated this was given to the previous owners alongside the Product Guarantee. Once again the original installers highlighted that one particular clause within the terms states that "storm damage" is not covered under the guarantee.

It's obviously unfortunate timing that this was noticed just prior to the storms but we have dated photo evidence to the contrary, as well as the opinions of two roofing companies who said that this was due to negligence during installation, not storm damage.

What are my rights and do I have any reasonable grounds to take this further and who would this be with?

Many thanks in advance.

I'm aware this post is 2 years old but as a roofer myself I'd like to reply for anyone reading. A single slate slipping on a roof that was slated 7 years prior is definitely NOT a sign of bad workmanship. Stormy weather, high winds etc can blow slates clean of a brand new roof never mind a roof that is 7 years old and has obviously went through numerous storms. If a slate slipped shortly after the roof was built this would be a sign of bad workmanship because it would mean the slate was not nailed in. But after 7 years? No. After that length of time, even if it was only a few months after the roof was built in fact slates can and do slip due to high winds. It's an unfortunate reality. It's nature and out of roofers control. Hence why ALL roofing companies do not cover storm damage with their guarantee. 
   It's no surprise other roofers have stated it was due to bad workmanship because in general other roofers like to make themselves out to be better than other roofers and they will tell a customer what they think they want to hear.   The reality is that unless the roofer got up on the roof and found evidence that the slate was not nailed in he's talking absolute nonsense. In fact even if he did get up on the roof and look he still would not have been able to tell whether or not the slate came out due to bad workmanship or due to a storm. But that's besides the point because as 7 years had passed before the slate slipped is evidence enough on it's own that it was not bad workmanship but obvious storm damage from a previous storm and or multiple previous storms.