Double glazing fitter trying to charge for cancelled work

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

HillStreetBlues said:

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?

OP has a contract for both goods and a service, with regards to the goods (i.e the window) the trader's obligation is to deliver them to the consumer, should they turn up at 4am to deliver and are unable to or get sent home with a flea in their ear their obligation to deliver still remains (as if they don't the consumer may treat the contract at an end) and so they'd have to return at a more accommodating time. This is all covered by Delivery of Goods from the CRA.  

I'm always happy to be corrected where I'm wrong but based on what is legal position rather than what feels right, if you have a source or experience to share to support your view it may provide a stronger argument against the legislation that's been posted  

HillStreetBlues

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

I'm always happy to be corrected where I'm wrong but based on what is legal position rather than what feels right, if you have a source or experience to share to support your view it may provide a stronger argument against the legislation that's been posted  

But on this you are only using the Literal Rule, ignoring any of the three other rules.

If a judge feels that the Literal Rule doesn't serve justice they can apply a different rule.

So if a judge feels the fact the glazer refused to contact the OP, was the main reason for another date wasn't given, the judge can treat it as if  it was. So although Literal Rule would says the the OP is at fault, the judge could use the Golden Rule by not restricting the decision to the literal wording of an Act as in Adler v George (1964)

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

HillStreetBlues said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

I'm always happy to be corrected where I'm wrong but based on what is legal position rather than what feels right, if you have a source or experience to share to support your view it may provide a stronger argument against the legislation that's been posted  

But on this you are only using the Literal Rule, ignoring any of the three other rules.

If a judge feels that the Literal Rule doesn't serve justice they can apply a different rule.

So if a judge feels the fact the glazer refused to contact the OP, was the main reason for another date wasn't given, the judge can treat it as if  it was. So although Literal Rule would says the the OP is at fault, the judge could use the Golden Rule by not restricting the decision to the literal wording of an Act as in Adler v George (1964)

There's always a possibility for the interpretation to be taken more widely, the delivery of goods section is to prevent the consumer from being tied indefinitely to a contract if the trader continually delays delivery, the part requiring the consumer to give a second timeframe (excluding the essential aspect) appears, to me at least, to be an understanding that sometimes things goes wrong and afford the trader some leeway by giving a second opportunity. 

If the fitter says they didn't reply as they dropped their phone out of a 3 story window but shows they provided the required contact info and poses the question as to why further contact wasn't made via other means perhaps that would be viewed as things go wrong (of course you could flip that and argue the trader should have contacted via other means), without the specifics it's all hypotheticals. 

HillStreetBlues

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

There's always a possibility for the interpretation to be taken more widely, the delivery of goods section is to prevent the consumer from being tied indefinitely to a contract if the trader continually delays delivery, the part requiring the consumer to give a second timeframe (excluding the essential aspect) appears, to me at least, to be an understanding that sometimes things goes wrong and afford the trader some leeway by giving a second opportunity.

I agree with that, it's also how much leeway.

So it's a case of pay your money and take your choice.

Jumblebumble

Alderbank said:

I don't want the guy to be out of pocket...

There's only one way for that not to happen. Pay him.

I don't want the OP to be out of pocket 
There's only one way for that not to happen  Don't pay him.
Pray share with us why the OP should not think that someone who does not answer is ever going to complete the job.
The idiot window fitter might learn how to run their business in a more competent manner if they don't get paid

Alderbank

Jumblebumble said:

Alderbank said:

I don't want the guy to be out of pocket...

There's only one way for that not to happen. Pay him.

I don't want the OP to be out of pocket 
There's only one way for that not to happen  Don't pay him.
Pray share with us why the OP should not think that someone who does not answer is ever going to complete the job.
The idiot window fitter might learn how to run their business in a more competent manner if they don't get paid

Calm down!

Go back and read the thread - it was the OP who said 'I don't want the guy to be out of pocket'

The window guy won't be able to recoup his costs by selling that pane to anyone else. So if the OP (not me!) doesn't want him to be out of pocket there is only one way for that not to happen.
Or can you see another way?

Smithers37

Op, there’s a lot of bad advice posted on this thread, not uncommon on these boards to be honest.

At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter if the trader ordered a part, you’re under no obligation to pay for it if you’ve not accepted the work which by the sounds of it you haven’t. The trader will absolutely be able to send it back so they won’t be out of pocket.

Glad someone else was willing and able to do the work.

born_again

Smithers37 said:

Op, there’s a lot of bad advice posted on this thread, not uncommon on these boards to be honest.

At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter if the trader ordered a part, you’re under no obligation to pay for it if you’ve not accepted the work which by the sounds of it you haven’t. The trader will absolutely be able to send it back so they won’t be out of pocket.

Glad someone else was willing and able to do the work.

So asking a trader to go ahead with the work when they quoted is "Not accepting the work"?

A double glazed unit is not something the manufacture will take back... They are made to order.

km1500

They are definitely made to order - they do come in 'standard sizes' if you buy a new window complete, but to replace existing glass it will have been made to measure. Almost certainly not returnable.

Norman_Castle

Smithers37 said:

Op, there’s a lot of bad advice posted on this thread, not uncommon on these boards to be honest.

At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter if the trader ordered a part, you’re under no obligation to pay for it if you’ve not accepted the work which by the sounds of it you haven’t. The trader will absolutely be able to send it back so they won’t be out of pocket.

As you said, there’s a lot of bad advice posted on this thread. The glazing unit will be made to order to a specific size to fit the ops window so they won't be able to send it back..