Help Please - Problem with Plumber - What are our rights if any?

Bendy_House

DE_612183 said:

He sent you an invoice for work carried out which he believed that you would pay as you understood his T&Cs.

You then sent an email saying you wouldn't pay until the whole job was complete.

He then got sarky saying you can't dictate the T&Cs I work under.

I do think if you'd have actually had a conversation on the telephone rather than an email that the whole situation could have been resolved more easily.

Sometimes, emails can interpreted differently from the way the sender intended - phone conversations are always better as you can exchange views and the tone can also be interpreted as well as the message.

My advice - pay the man the £70, apologise for the confusion ( you never meant to say you would not pay, just that you would pay the whole amount at the end ) - I'd even do this on the phone - you could ask him back to complete the job, or just use a different plumber.

Yup - a bit of humble pie, even tho' it'll rightly stick in the craw. The guy doesn't seem to deserve it, but sometimes it's best to rise above it all.

Bottom line - you do owe him. So, best just get it done.

Section62

Whiskas12 said:

So my partner emailed him to say that we would pay him once the work had been complete, as we had ordered the part and were ready for him to fix what he thought the problem was.

It would be useful - for context - to see the exact wording of the email sent to the plumber.

DE_612183

Section62 said:

Whiskas12 said:

So my partner emailed him to say that we would pay him once the work had been complete, as we had ordered the part and were ready for him to fix what he thought the problem was.

It would be useful - for context - to see the exact wording of the email sent to the plumber.

agreed - as I said something could have been taken out of context 

Apodemus

I would pay him and walk away.  Regardless of the rights and wrongs, trust has broken down on both sides, so best to agree to differ and go your separate ways.

benson1980

I agree with the OPs concerns.

Sounds unclear at best if the initial visit is to essentially quote to fix the problem or to spend time diagnosing, or at least what your understanding was. He's the expert- perhaps he should have advised.

Secondly, I've not come across a scenario where a plumber has asked the customer to buy the part for something like this. I like the OP would expect the job to be completed and assurances that he's (or you in this case) have sourced the correct part.

Regarding his T+Cs- he's accepted these have changed. Therefore why is the onus not on him to advise you of these terms, rather than stipulating that because you've used him before, that you should be fully aware of them? Somewhat self-contradicting.

He stipulated in his own T+Cs, or at least the old ones, that you will be invoiced on completion for smaller jobs. This is definitely a smaller job so why has this changed. The work hasn't been completed yet. 

Section62

benson1980 said:

He stipulated in his own T+Cs, or at least the old ones, that you will be invoiced on completion for smaller jobs. This is definitely a smaller job so why has this changed. The work hasn't been completed yet. 

The plumber is treating the initial visit to diagnose the problem and ensure the OP has a workaround as a 'job', and has completed that.

If the OP obtained the spare part and - as some have suggested here - fitted it themselves, then would you expect the plumber to wait an infinite amount of time to get paid for the initial work, on the basis that they had never returned to complete the job?

There is no absolute right or wrong on this.  The "job" is whatever is agreed between the trader and the client, which includes whatever the trader's T&C's say.

As for buying the part, sometimes traders suggest the client buys parts/materials - particularly specialist ones - because that way the client isn't paying for the trader's time to source the part and handle collection/delivery (plus potentially returns).  Or would you suggest traders should always spend time buying parts/materials without charging for their time?

searchlight123

I work in people's houses and have jobs that require more than one visit. These do need to be paid for but...... what a terribly worded email he has sent to you. Absolutely no customer relations within it. Horrible. If it were me, I would pay it and tell him exactly what you think of his bedside manner and explain that you will get another tradesman to complete the job (probably easy enough for you or a friend to DIY it).

Put it down to a bad experience and move on. Life's too short.

macman

grumbler said:

macman said:

 £70 for the callout is reasonable.

It is IMO, but only if it covers at least 30 minutes of work.

He may well have driven 20 minutes or more each way to attend, we don't know. He has no way of knowing if it's a five minute job or a two hour one until he's looked at the job. 
He stayed at least 15 mins, so i still think a minimum callout charge is reasonable.
What is not reasonable is the tone of his response, and for that reason he has clearly lost a customer here.

benson1980

Section62 said:

As for buying the part, sometimes traders suggest the client buys parts/materials - particularly specialist ones - because that way the client isn't paying for the trader's time to source the part and handle collection/delivery (plus potentially returns).  Or would you suggest traders should always spend time buying parts/materials without charging for their time?

For £70 p/h that plumbers charge currently, part of which is to cover ancillary costs. Yes.

twopenny

Good thing he isn't charges for the length of time he took to go on and on in that email!
Sounds very much like a well known plumber in my town.

If you can bring yourself to reply civilly and say it was a misunderstanding and pay that would serve you best.
Won't stop him whingeing but would give you the moral upper hand.

Then find another plumber or research if you can fix it. 
Get the part so you can directly tell the next one exactly what the job entails.