Electrician Overcharge Complaint

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

Are you sure about that?

Yeap, I didn't mention the Price Marking Order 2004.

The call out fee is £69 plus VAT plus 0.1 of the bill (Decimal).

To get to the correct callout fee of £91.08 the customer needs to know the applicable rate of VAT is 20% (the terms don't mention the rate of VAT and it wouldn't surprise me if many people don't know it's 20%), that 0.1 (Decimal) means 10% and have the knowledge to do the maths to get the final figure.

The main rate of VAT has been 17.5%, 15% and 20% over the last 15 years or so, certain things are rated at different percentages and there are instances where special rates are applied for certain periods. At the main rate it's 20% on the net and 16.6% off the gross. 

There is no reason to state the fee is £69 plus, plus rather than simply £91.08 other than to make it look much cheaper than it is and I think the average person would struggle with the calculation. 

It's, IMO, a misleading action which is a prohibited commercial practice under the Unfair Trading Regs. 

The admin fees makes it worse but even with basic + VAT I don't think it meets the regs unless a trader has a very good reason for wishing to display pricing in such a way. 

You said the price calculated must be gross, that is incorrect for services.

It's all well and good stating what you have posted above is 'in your opinion', but anything to back it up?

https://www.businesscompanion.info/sites/default/files/Guidance-for-Traders-on-Pricing-Practices-Apr-2018.pdf

This glossary contains explanations or words and expressions as they are used in this guidance.

Product:  Defined widely to include goods, services, digital content, immovable property, rights

and obligations or the demand of payment from a consumer in settlement of a liability

There are certain general requirements that a trader should consider when pricing products for sale. In addition to the

Regulations, overlapping obligations can be found in the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional

Charges) Regulations 201312 and the Price Marking Order 2004.

13 Visit www.businesscompanion.info for advice and

guidance on these requirements.

These general requirements apply to all of your pricing practices and should be read in conjunction with the rest of this

guidance.

DO indicate the total price of the product inclusive of taxes when you invite consumers to purchase it.14 If the nature of

the product means that the price cannot reasonably be calculated in advance, indicate how the price will be calculated

- for example, fabric on a roll is priced by the metre.

DO provide all additional freight, delivery and postal charges in or with the price.15 If those charges cannot reasonably

be calculated in advance, tell consumers that they may be payable - for example, ‘Delivery charges apply and vary

according to destination’.

DO include all compulsory fees and charges in the price.16

DO show unit prices where required by the Price Marking Order 2004.17

DON’T charge consumers a fee for using a credit card or debit card.18

DON’T use a default option (such as a pre-ticked box on a website) in order to obtain a consumer’s consent to

an additional fee or charge.19

16 Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, regulations 5 and 6

That's guidance though. Doesn't negate the fact someone offering a service can list it as £x per hour + VAT

You are correct that's guidance, the Unfair Trading Regs are broad by nature which have the benefit of offering greater protection but the downside of being less specific in nature leaving guidance and interpretation, similar to discussions on unfair terms. 

I should have posted in more depth initially  

Well yes any one can do anything, if you mean may then it would appear to be a misleading action which means they may not.

If you've been shopping in Tesco recently you will have seen an alleged breach of the Unfair Trading Regs. The regs don't specifically state that Tesco must display unit pricing for their Clubcard price and that the omission of such is a breach of the legislation but that is what is being alleged. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65854124

It's the same sense, broad legislation rather than specific. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Kortatu85 said:

Thank you so much for your valuable comments. The spirited debate has really made me reflect on the situation, and it's become evident that the conditions were indeed unclear. I must also acknowledge my own mistake in accepting everything too hastily. 

To ensure a better reading of the whole situation, I would like to provide a timeline of events:

1. I initially contacted an electrician, who quoted a price of £69 to simply assess the situation. There was no mention of any administrative fees or VAT charges at that point

2. The electrician finally arrived at my place on Saturday evening, after not showing up on both Friday and Saturday morning. It was at this time that they sent me an email containing all the terms and conditions, which were only presented at the start of the work. I want to emphasize that these terms and conditions were not shared with me beforehand.

Given these circumstances, I can't help but feel a bit concerned that I may have inadvertently fallen into a scam

OP how did you find them? Are their prices given anywhere online? 

powerful_Rogue

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

Are you sure about that?

Yeap, I didn't mention the Price Marking Order 2004.

The call out fee is £69 plus VAT plus 0.1 of the bill (Decimal).

To get to the correct callout fee of £91.08 the customer needs to know the applicable rate of VAT is 20% (the terms don't mention the rate of VAT and it wouldn't surprise me if many people don't know it's 20%), that 0.1 (Decimal) means 10% and have the knowledge to do the maths to get the final figure.

The main rate of VAT has been 17.5%, 15% and 20% over the last 15 years or so, certain things are rated at different percentages and there are instances where special rates are applied for certain periods. At the main rate it's 20% on the net and 16.6% off the gross. 

There is no reason to state the fee is £69 plus, plus rather than simply £91.08 other than to make it look much cheaper than it is and I think the average person would struggle with the calculation. 

It's, IMO, a misleading action which is a prohibited commercial practice under the Unfair Trading Regs. 

The admin fees makes it worse but even with basic + VAT I don't think it meets the regs unless a trader has a very good reason for wishing to display pricing in such a way. 

You said the price calculated must be gross, that is incorrect for services.

It's all well and good stating what you have posted above is 'in your opinion', but anything to back it up?

https://www.businesscompanion.info/sites/default/files/Guidance-for-Traders-on-Pricing-Practices-Apr-2018.pdf

This glossary contains explanations or words and expressions as they are used in this guidance.

Product:  Defined widely to include goods, services, digital content, immovable property, rights

and obligations or the demand of payment from a consumer in settlement of a liability

There are certain general requirements that a trader should consider when pricing products for sale. In addition to the

Regulations, overlapping obligations can be found in the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional

Charges) Regulations 201312 and the Price Marking Order 2004.

13 Visit www.businesscompanion.info for advice and

guidance on these requirements.

These general requirements apply to all of your pricing practices and should be read in conjunction with the rest of this

guidance.

DO indicate the total price of the product inclusive of taxes when you invite consumers to purchase it.14 If the nature of

the product means that the price cannot reasonably be calculated in advance, indicate how the price will be calculated

- for example, fabric on a roll is priced by the metre.

DO provide all additional freight, delivery and postal charges in or with the price.15 If those charges cannot reasonably

be calculated in advance, tell consumers that they may be payable - for example, ‘Delivery charges apply and vary

according to destination’.

DO include all compulsory fees and charges in the price.16

DO show unit prices where required by the Price Marking Order 2004.17

DON’T charge consumers a fee for using a credit card or debit card.18

DON’T use a default option (such as a pre-ticked box on a website) in order to obtain a consumer’s consent to

an additional fee or charge.19

16 Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, regulations 5 and 6

That's guidance though. Doesn't negate the fact someone offering a service can list it as £x per hour + VAT

You are correct that's guidance, the Unfair Trading Regs are broad by nature which have the benefit of offering greater protection but the downside of being less specific in nature leaving guidance and interpretation, similar to discussions on unfair terms. 

I should have posted in more depth initially  

Well yes any one can do anything, if you mean may then it would appear to be a misleading action which means they may not.

If you've been shopping in Tesco recently you will have seen an alleged breach of the Unfair Trading Regs. The regs don't specifically state that Tesco must display unit pricing for their Clubcard price and that the omission of such is a breach of the legislation but that is what is being alleged. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65854124

It's the same sense, broad legislation rather than specific. 

In your opinion it's a misleading action to state £x per hour + VAT, I disagree and will stick with what the Price Marking Order 2004 legislation states, that providers of a service do not have to include VAT in the price.

In regards to the Tesco part you mention, that's a supply of goods, so unit price must be displayed as per the PMO 2004.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

powerful_Rogue said:

In regards to the Tesco part you mention, that's a supply of goods, so unit price must be displayed as per the PMO 2004.

They are displaying a unit price, given your in-depth knowledge of The Price Marking Order 2004 I would assume you are aware that a unit is defined by

(ii) in respect of products sold by number, where unit price means the final price including VAT and all other taxes for an individual item of the product.

Tesco are complying with this by stating a bottle of ketchup or bag of chips is £3.

What Tesco are not doing is saying the £3 Club price bottle of ketchup is £x per 100ml (etc) where they otherwise do for standard prices and that would be classed as material information which is being omitted, may affect the purchasing decision of the average consumer and thus a breach of the Unfair Trading Regs (according to Which).

If it were a case of not complying with The Price Marking Order 2004 there wouldn't be a question of compliance for the CMA to investigate. 

powerful_Rogue

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

In regards to the Tesco part you mention, that's a supply of goods, so unit price must be displayed as per the PMO 2004.

They are displaying a unit price, given your in-depth knowledge of The Price Marking Order 2004 I would assume you are aware that a unit is defined by

(ii) in respect of products sold by number, where unit price means the final price including VAT and all other taxes for an individual item of the product.

Tesco are complying with this by stating a bottle of ketchup or bag of chips is £3.

What Tesco are not doing is saying the £3 Club price bottle of ketchup is £x per 100ml (etc) where they otherwise do for standard prices and that would be classed as material information which is being omitted, may affect the purchasing decision of the average consumer and thus a breach of the Unfair Trading Regs (according to Which).

If it were a case of not complying with The Price Marking Order 2004 there wouldn't be a question of compliance for the CMA to investigate. 

Fair enough, I saw you mention unit price and jumped to conclusions without checking. I'm always happy to hold my hands up when i'm wrong.

user1977

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

Are you sure about that?

Yeap, I didn't mention the Price Marking Order 2004.

The call out fee is £69 plus VAT plus 0.1 of the bill (Decimal).

To get to the correct callout fee of £91.08 the customer needs to know the applicable rate of VAT is 20% (the terms don't mention the rate of VAT and it wouldn't surprise me if many people don't know it's 20%), that 0.1 (Decimal) means 10% and have the knowledge to do the maths to get the final figure.

The main rate of VAT has been 17.5%, 15% and 20% over the last 15 years or so, certain things are rated at different percentages and there are instances where special rates are applied for certain periods. At the main rate it's 20% on the net and 16.6% off the gross. 

There is no reason to state the fee is £69 plus, plus rather than simply £91.08 other than to make it look much cheaper than it is and I think the average person would struggle with the calculation. 

It's, IMO, a misleading action which is a prohibited commercial practice under the Unfair Trading Regs. 

The admin fees makes it worse but even with basic + VAT I don't think it meets the regs unless a trader has a very good reason for wishing to display pricing in such a way. 

You said the price calculated must be gross, that is incorrect for services.

It's all well and good stating what you have posted above is 'in your opinion', but anything to back it up?

https://www.businesscompanion.info/sites/default/files/Guidance-for-Traders-on-Pricing-Practices-Apr-2018.pdf

This glossary contains explanations or words and expressions as they are used in this guidance.

Product:  Defined widely to include goods, services, digital content, immovable property, rights

and obligations or the demand of payment from a consumer in settlement of a liability

There are certain general requirements that a trader should consider when pricing products for sale. In addition to the

Regulations, overlapping obligations can be found in the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional

Charges) Regulations 201312 and the Price Marking Order 2004.

13 Visit www.businesscompanion.info for advice and

guidance on these requirements.

These general requirements apply to all of your pricing practices and should be read in conjunction with the rest of this

guidance.

DO indicate the total price of the product inclusive of taxes when you invite consumers to purchase it.14 If the nature of

the product means that the price cannot reasonably be calculated in advance, indicate how the price will be calculated

- for example, fabric on a roll is priced by the metre.

DO provide all additional freight, delivery and postal charges in or with the price.15 If those charges cannot reasonably

be calculated in advance, tell consumers that they may be payable - for example, ‘Delivery charges apply and vary

according to destination’.

DO include all compulsory fees and charges in the price.16

DO show unit prices where required by the Price Marking Order 2004.17

DON’T charge consumers a fee for using a credit card or debit card.18

DON’T use a default option (such as a pre-ticked box on a website) in order to obtain a consumer’s consent to

an additional fee or charge.19

16 Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, regulations 5 and 6

That's guidance though.

And it's guidance which relates only to the sale of products, not services.

tightauldgit

user1977 said:

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

Are you sure about that?

Yeap, I didn't mention the Price Marking Order 2004.

The call out fee is £69 plus VAT plus 0.1 of the bill (Decimal).

To get to the correct callout fee of £91.08 the customer needs to know the applicable rate of VAT is 20% (the terms don't mention the rate of VAT and it wouldn't surprise me if many people don't know it's 20%), that 0.1 (Decimal) means 10% and have the knowledge to do the maths to get the final figure.

The main rate of VAT has been 17.5%, 15% and 20% over the last 15 years or so, certain things are rated at different percentages and there are instances where special rates are applied for certain periods. At the main rate it's 20% on the net and 16.6% off the gross. 

There is no reason to state the fee is £69 plus, plus rather than simply £91.08 other than to make it look much cheaper than it is and I think the average person would struggle with the calculation. 

It's, IMO, a misleading action which is a prohibited commercial practice under the Unfair Trading Regs. 

The admin fees makes it worse but even with basic + VAT I don't think it meets the regs unless a trader has a very good reason for wishing to display pricing in such a way. 

You said the price calculated must be gross, that is incorrect for services.

It's all well and good stating what you have posted above is 'in your opinion', but anything to back it up?

https://www.businesscompanion.info/sites/default/files/Guidance-for-Traders-on-Pricing-Practices-Apr-2018.pdf

This glossary contains explanations or words and expressions as they are used in this guidance.

Product:  Defined widely to include goods, services, digital content, immovable property, rights

and obligations or the demand of payment from a consumer in settlement of a liability

There are certain general requirements that a trader should consider when pricing products for sale. In addition to the

Regulations, overlapping obligations can be found in the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional

Charges) Regulations 201312 and the Price Marking Order 2004.

13 Visit www.businesscompanion.info for advice and

guidance on these requirements.

These general requirements apply to all of your pricing practices and should be read in conjunction with the rest of this

guidance.

DO indicate the total price of the product inclusive of taxes when you invite consumers to purchase it.14 If the nature of

the product means that the price cannot reasonably be calculated in advance, indicate how the price will be calculated

- for example, fabric on a roll is priced by the metre.

DO provide all additional freight, delivery and postal charges in or with the price.15 If those charges cannot reasonably

be calculated in advance, tell consumers that they may be payable - for example, ‘Delivery charges apply and vary

according to destination’.

DO include all compulsory fees and charges in the price.16

DO show unit prices where required by the Price Marking Order 2004.17

DON’T charge consumers a fee for using a credit card or debit card.18

DON’T use a default option (such as a pre-ticked box on a website) in order to obtain a consumer’s consent to

an additional fee or charge.19

16 Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, regulations 5 and 6

That's guidance though.

And it's guidance which relates only to the sale of products, not services.

The quoted page does say it's widely defining products to include services. But that still doesn't get you to the conclusion that 'our hourly rate is £X + VAT' is misleading.

Kortatu85

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Kortatu85 said:

Thank you so much for your valuable comments. The spirited debate has really made me reflect on the situation, and it's become evident that the conditions were indeed unclear. I must also acknowledge my own mistake in accepting everything too hastily. 

To ensure a better reading of the whole situation, I would like to provide a timeline of events:

1. I initially contacted an electrician, who quoted a price of £69 to simply assess the situation. There was no mention of any administrative fees or VAT charges at that point

2. The electrician finally arrived at my place on Saturday evening, after not showing up on both Friday and Saturday morning. It was at this time that they sent me an email containing all the terms and conditions, which were only presented at the start of the work. I want to emphasize that these terms and conditions were not shared with me beforehand.

Given these circumstances, I can't help but feel a bit concerned that I may have inadvertently fallen into a scam

OP how did you find them? Are their prices given anywhere online? 

I found their services through a Google search, which directed me to a page on their website (see here), where it clearly states that they can assist with interior lighting. It's important to note that interior lighting is typically not categorised as an emergency service, which is why I decided to contact them. There is no mention of fees on their website.

Thank you all for your support throughout this process!

WhiskersTheWonderCat

Kortatu85 said:

TELLIT01 said:

I don't understand why the OP would think the total price would be £269 when that was clearly quoted as the hourly rate.

I want to clarify that I never explicitly stated that the total price would be £269. What I meant to convey was that I was initially willing to pay £269 for the job, in addition to the £69 assessment fee. However, what caught me off guard were the unexpected administrative fees, VATs, and the attempt to charge me for 1.5 hours of work.

Looking back, I realise there may have been a significant misunderstanding on my part. Given my previous experiences with similar tasks in my terraced house, I had mistakenly assumed that changing the lighting fixtures would take around 25-30 minutes instead of 1 full hour

If they worked for 1.5 hours, why would they not charge you for 1.5 hours work? During the assessment, did they explicitly say that it would only take an hour to complete the job? 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Kortatu85 said:

I found their services through a Google search, which directed me to a page on their website (see here), where it clearly states that they can assist with interior lighting. It's important to note that interior lighting is typically not categorised as an emergency service, which is why I decided to contact them. There is no mention of fees on their website.

Thank you all for your support throughout this process!

At a brief look they are an agent and contract for the work is with the electrician who turns up. 

Although lighting may not be an emergency service it would still be classed as an urgent repair. 

They've agreed to 1 hour work so the charge should be

£69 callout
£295 1 hour
£36.40 admin
£80.08 VAT
£480.48 total. 

You can pay that amount or pay £69+£295 (£364) and argue the price displayed should include all charges.

I don't know if they told you on the phone that the callout charge was £69 + VAT and 10% admin or not? If they didn't then you should only pay £69 for that element regardless (as they don't appear to have sent anything in writing until after the call out has occurred if I'm reading correctly), you could then pay £69 + 295 (+ admin and VAT on the hourly rate only) totalling £458.40 

Ultimately it's up to you to pay something and explain to them why you feel justified in paying that amount. 

They are a small company (2 employees) who have been in business for 5 years. I would assume if you "under pay" they'll take whatever their cut is and leaving the electrician short, who would have to take action to recover any underpayment I'm not sure. 

Unless my maths above is bad it is concerning they can't invoice the right amount according to their terms, the lowest invoice you've posted above has the admin fee at the wrong amount.