Double glazing fitter trying to charge for cancelled work

tightauldgit

I can't see anywhere in your OP where you actually cancelled the work - it seems you just went off and got someone else to do it. At the very least that's pretty poor if accurate - even if he's not replying then at least let the guy know that you are cancelling the job. 

I would imagine that the guy won't take you to court over it but I do think he has the right to be annoyed.

HampshireH

He should be paid. You didn't cancel the job or say you would if not done by x date.

Norman_Castle

tightauldgit said:

I would imagine that the guy won't take you to court over it but I do think he has the right to be annoyed.

He should be annoyed with himself as his failure to communicate and explain the reason for the delay caused the problem. Isn't that part of managing a business?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

cymruchris said:

Once you've ordered something that's bespoke in terms of not being able to buy the said item off the shelf, then if the order had been placed with their supplier the next day and it took longer than expected to come, you'd still be liable to pay for it if you went elsewhere, unless you'd given a specific deadline at the beginning of the contract. (Which from what you've said you didn't.)

This isn't quite correct, this situation is covered by delivery of goods under the CRA which doesn't differentiate between bespoke or otherwise and stipulates that the goods must be delivered either within the agreed time or within 30 days if there is no agreed time. 

Where that fails to occur the consumer should should give the trader a new date for delivery and if that also fails the consumer may treat the contract at an end (with no obligation to pay anything or to receive a full refund of anything already paid). 

If the agreed time was essential by the circumstances or the consumer advised the trader it was then the consumer can skip the part about giving a second date and just treat the contract at an end.

Unfortunately OP has failed to treat the contract at an end by cancelling, they could give the trader a new date for delivery and if that's not met then cancel but that runs the risk they'll nip round asap leaving OP with a window they don't need. 

OP how much is the window and have you paid anything?

Really they are due payment but the lack of communication from the trader might not go in their favour which begs the question of whether it's worth them chasing the money.

Regarding the fitting aspect, was you given any info on the right to cancel? If not you can without having to pay, if you was then it depends upon whether the info was correct. If it was you'd still be entitled to cancel but could be liable for either costs incurred so far (probably none) or loss of profit.

The same applies for the window really, they claim the cost of it or the profit element but not both. 

HillStreetBlues

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

This isn't quite correct, this situation is covered by delivery of goods under the CRA which doesn't differentiate between bespoke or otherwise and stipulates that the goods must be delivered either within the agreed time or within 30 days if there is no agreed time. 

Where that fails to occur the consumer should should give the trader a new date for delivery and if that also fails the consumer may treat the contract at an end (with no obligation to pay anything or to receive a full refund of anything already paid). 

If the agreed time was essential by the circumstances or the consumer advised the trader it was then the consumer can skip the part about giving a second date and just treat the contract at an end.

Unfortunately OP has failed to treat the contract at an end by cancelling, they could give the trader a new date for delivery and if that's not met then cancel but that runs the risk they'll nip round asap leaving OP with a window they don't need. 

OP how much is the window and have you paid anything?

Really they are due payment but the lack of communication from the trader might not go in their favour which begs the question of whether it's worth them chasing the money.

Regarding the fitting aspect, was you given any info on the right to cancel? If not you can without having to pay, if you was then it depends upon whether the info was correct. If it was you'd still be entitled to cancel but could be liable for either costs incurred so far (probably none) or loss of profit.

The same applies for the window really, they claim the cost of it or the profit element but not both. 

A trader won't be able to claim the customer didn't give them another date, if that trader had refused to communicate.

 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

HillStreetBlues said:

A trader won't be able to claim the customer didn't give them another date, if that trader had refused to communicate.

 

The regs state:

In any other circumstances, the consumer may specify a period that is appropriate in the circumstances and require the trader to deliver the goods before the end of that period.

OP had the means to do so (text message) but sadly didn't  

I don't think the trader's actions are decent but I don't see that doesn't entitle them to seek some money (costs or loss of profits), I just wonder if it could be argued the lack of comms lead to the situation meaning the trader failed to mitigate their losses which might see them not awarded costs, by that point is it worth them claiming? 

HillStreetBlues

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

The regs state:

In any other circumstances, the consumer may specify a period that is appropriate in the circumstances and require the trader to deliver the goods before the end of that period.

OP had the means to do so (text message) but sadly didn't  

I don't think the trader's actions are decent but I don't see that doesn't entitle them to seek some money (costs or loss of profits), I just wonder if it could be argued the lack of comms lead to the situation meaning the trader failed to mitigate their losses which might see them not awarded costs, by that point is it worth them claiming? 

But a consumer isn't required to have a mobile phone just to try and give another date, that would be unreasonable.
It's the glazer that has failed in communication. 


A judge would look as to the reason why another period wasn't given, the OP would then claim that they tried but glazer failed  to reply to receive new dates.  So it would be a case that the glazer frustrated the  customer attempt to rearrange.

Take another example.
A person is given a landline number to call if they was to cancel their on-line contract within the 14 day cooling-off period.
No one answers the phone. So  no-one would ever get to cancel.
But of course they could,  as the retailer would be classed as having frustrated the customers wish to cancel.

km1500

No reply to any texts sent not even an acknowledgement, and a month overdue with no communication at all from the trader - don't pay them a penny.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

HillStreetBlues said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

The regs state:

In any other circumstances, the consumer may specify a period that is appropriate in the circumstances and require the trader to deliver the goods before the end of that period.

OP had the means to do so (text message) but sadly didn't  

I don't think the trader's actions are decent but I don't see that doesn't entitle them to seek some money (costs or loss of profits), I just wonder if it could be argued the lack of comms lead to the situation meaning the trader failed to mitigate their losses which might see them not awarded costs, by that point is it worth them claiming? 

But a consumer isn't required to have a mobile phone just to try and give another date, that would be unreasonable.
It's the glazer that has failed in communication. 


A judge would look as to the reason why another period wasn't given, the OP would then claim that they tried but glazer failed  to reply to receive new dates.  So it would be a case that the glazer frustrated the  customer attempt to rearrange.

Take another example.
A person is given a landline number to call if they was to cancel their on-line contract within the 14 day cooling-off period.
No one answers the phone. So  no-one would ever get to cancel.
But of course they could,  as the retailer would be classed as having frustrated the customers wish to cancel.

On reflection the trader should have provided the OP with

the geographical address at which the trader is established and, where available, the trader's telephone number, fax number and e-mail address, to enable the consumer to contact the trader quickly and communicate efficiently;

If they did the lack of reply doesn't affect it in my view, if they didn't OP could could say they didn't have sufficient means to notify the trader that they wished to treat the contract at an end but again whether that would mean a win for the OP or a negative for the trader (such as no costs) I don't know given they did have means to contact. 

Consumer's have rights and whilst I'm typically on the consumer's side in a lot of topics on this board, they do have to exercise those rights. There is the right to treat the contract at an end but in order to have it the consumer has to specific a new date for delivery (without the date being essential). 

Unless OP has spent a fortune on their window I don't see this going far if they refuse to pay anything but the trader's lack of will to recover any sums due doesn't affect the consumer right's aspect  

HillStreetBlues

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

On reflection the trader should have provided the OP with

the geographical address at which the trader is established and, where available, the trader's telephone number, fax number and e-mail address, to enable the consumer to contact the trader quickly and communicate efficiently;

If they did the lack of reply doesn't affect it in my view, if they didn't OP could could say they didn't have sufficient means to notify the trader that they wished to treat the contract at an end but again whether that would mean a win for the OP or a negative for the trader (such as no costs) I don't know given they did have means to contact. 

Consumer's have rights and whilst I'm typically on the consumer's side in a lot of topics on this board, they do have to exercise those rights. There is the right to treat the contract at an end but in order to have it the consumer has to specific a new date for delivery (without the date being essential). 

Unless OP has spent a fortune on their window I don't see this going far if they refuse to pay anything but the trader's lack of will to recover any sums due doesn't affect the consumer right's aspect  

I feel we will have to agree to disagree.


On a septate note if the glazer did turn up during the period in question at 4am to fit the unit would this be ok?