Electrician Overcharge Complaint

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

tightauldgit said:

Not only guidance but reading 14 an 16 together the trader has complied with them. They have shown how the price will be calculated and included all compulsory fees and charges in that price calculation. 

A call out fee of £X

An hourly rate of £X (and note that the OP actually could have been charged 2 hours rather than 1.5 for the part hour)

An admin fee of 0.1x the fees above

VAT to be added to the total of the above. 

If someone says they read the information provided by the trader and didn't know they would have to pay an admin fee or VAT then I simply don't believe them. More likely they didn't properly read what they received. 

You can argue whether the charges seem reasonable (they really don't) but that doesn't mean they weren't explained. 

Sorry I missed this post  

Regarding the part about how the price will be calculated I've seen guidance giving an example of the cost of phone calls (i.e per minute plus connection) or as above per metre of a roll of fabric. 

I don't think that clause is intended to be a get out clause for giving prices exclusive of mandatory charges, that's simply my opinion. 

I maintain it's it's a misleading action 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1277/regulation/5

5.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading action if it satisfies the conditions in either paragraph (2) or paragraph (3).

(2) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph—

(a)if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to any of the matters in paragraph (4) or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph, even if the information is factually correct; and

(b)it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.

The information of + VAT is factually correct but is presented in a way to make the price appear cheaper than it is.

Unless there is some other reason for giving consumers VAT exclusive pricing that I'm missing. It's done for B2B transactions as it's expected the majority of customers will either reclaim the VAT or not pay it.  

tightauldgit

I appreciate that in your opinion it is misleading to quote prices exclusive of VAT however it is (not for the first time) an opinion which seems to be a bit of an outlier and at odds with standard industry practices in a number of industries. including quoting hourly rates for electrician services. That being the case I think it's not helpful to the poster to state it as you do in a way which suggests it to be a fact. 

Looking at the further posts it appears the poster was told it would be £69 for a call out (without mention of VAT) and in that case I would agree that they potentially have been misled (if they can evidence that, memories of phone calls are sketchy at best) but that's still a stretch from saying that showing £X + VAT per hour rates is misleading in every case. 

 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

tightauldgit said:

at odds with standard industry practices in a number of industries. 


 

Personally I don't think industry standards mean much. 

Hotels say deposits are non-refundable.
A number of outlets exclude items from returns due to hygiene whilst ignoring the limit's requirements of them being sealed and then becoming unsealed, that's without getting into the EU ruling on the mattress case.
An entire industry of couriers attempt to limit liability but recent example showed 2 cases where the courts disagreed.
The BBC article highlights another, supermarkets not giving a per 100ml/g/etc breakdown on promo pricing.
National white goods, etc retailers telling you to go to the manufacture when you report an issue with the product. 

I'm not going to say companies are outright breaking the law but would suggest a lack of enforcement and/or any broadness in the law gives them an opportunity to skirt around it to their favour. Blind acceptance of the status quo doesn't make it correct, although of course equally doesn't make it incorrect. 

tightauldgit said:

 That being the case I think it's not helpful to the poster to state it as you do in a way which suggests it to be a fact. 

 that's still a stretch from saying that showing £X + VAT per hour rates is misleading in every case. 

 

Again I should have posted in more depth, I'm regretting popping in for a quick post rather than waffling on as usual