Advice before small claims court

screech_78

I also think you’ve got too ahead of yourself, sorry. 

I work for a very large company so processes probably a little different, but first step in damage to property claims is determining liability. This can take a few days as crew need to be interviewed etc. If liability is with us, then it depends on the cost of what customer is claiming for. Something small will be settle right away but anything over £250 must go through our insurers. 

Our insurers work for lots of different retailers and they aim to finalise claims within 6-8 weeks. It will involve having the damage inspected or asking the customer to gain a few quotes. 

You need to be careful too as you’re not necessarily due the full cost of a replacement floor. If the flooring was still available, a repair would be possible. If not, it will come down to how old it is as getting the full cost brand new would be betterment. 

I can see you coming unstuck in the fact that you’ve went ahead and bought new flooring already. As mentioned already, it isn’t that you would be claiming for. 

PeppinPie1

born_again said:

PeppinPie1 said:

I have not contacted my insurer as I didn’t think I would need to. I paid the fee to get the floor replaced myself and assumed I would just get that money back when the moving company reimburses me. 

I didn’t think I would need to claim on my insurance the day I owned the house and increase my premiums next year..

Many Ins co will have agreements with companies to do work for them. Sadly you may have jumped the gun a bit here. In taking on yourself to replace the flooring, rather than wait for their insurance to deal with.

Given the mention of finding on facebook, are they a limited co or a one man & a van type? & do they actually have any insurance cover for damages?

I have just followed advice given to me by CAB. The moving company provided me no documentation saying this was the process and I had to wait. 

They are I assume a sole trader and have employees as the owner was NOT at my property doing the actually moving. His company is not on companies house. 

PeppinPie1

screech_78 said:

I also think you’ve got too ahead of yourself, sorry. 

I work for a very large company so processes probably a little different, but first step in damage to property claims is determining liability. This can take a few days as crew need to be interviewed etc. If liability is with us, then it depends on the cost of what customer is claiming for. Something small will be settle right away but anything over £250 must go through our insurers. 

Our insurers work for lots of different retailers and they aim to finalise claims within 6-8 weeks. It will involve having the damage inspected or asking the customer to gain a few quotes. 

You need to be careful too as you’re not necessarily due the full cost of a replacement floor. If the flooring was still available, a repair would be possible. If not, it will come down to how old it is as getting the full cost brand new would be betterment. 

I can see you coming unstuck in the fact that you’ve went ahead and bought new flooring already. As mentioned already, it isn’t that you would be claiming for. 

In regards to this I was told by the company they would cover the FULL cost of the floor and fitting. The total cost of the invoice. I have this in writing.
i only “jumped the gun” as I was advised to do all this by CAB

powerful_Rogue

PeppinPie1 said:

born_again said:

PeppinPie1 said:

I have not contacted my insurer as I didn’t think I would need to. I paid the fee to get the floor replaced myself and assumed I would just get that money back when the moving company reimburses me. 

I didn’t think I would need to claim on my insurance the day I owned the house and increase my premiums next year..

Many Ins co will have agreements with companies to do work for them. Sadly you may have jumped the gun a bit here. In taking on yourself to replace the flooring, rather than wait for their insurance to deal with.

Given the mention of finding on facebook, are they a limited co or a one man & a van type? & do they actually have any insurance cover for damages?

I have just followed advice given to me by CAB. The moving company provided me no documentation saying this was the process and I had to wait. 

They are I assume a sole trader and have employees as the owner was NOT at my property doing the actually moving. His company is not on companies house. 

Did CAB give this to you in writing or did you take notes?

PeppinPie1

powerful_Rogue said:

PeppinPie1 said:

born_again said:

PeppinPie1 said:

I have not contacted my insurer as I didn’t think I would need to. I paid the fee to get the floor replaced myself and assumed I would just get that money back when the moving company reimburses me. 

I didn’t think I would need to claim on my insurance the day I owned the house and increase my premiums next year..

Many Ins co will have agreements with companies to do work for them. Sadly you may have jumped the gun a bit here. In taking on yourself to replace the flooring, rather than wait for their insurance to deal with.

Given the mention of finding on facebook, are they a limited co or a one man & a van type? & do they actually have any insurance cover for damages?

I have just followed advice given to me by CAB. The moving company provided me no documentation saying this was the process and I had to wait. 

They are I assume a sole trader and have employees as the owner was NOT at my property doing the actually moving. His company is not on companies house. 

Did CAB give this to you in writing or did you take notes?

I went to see them in person and spoke to them over the phone and chat. 

I have notes of what they told me yes - which is why I sent the letter advising him of consumer law. 

The moving guy then text me to complain I sent a letter to him and again refused to reimburse me. 

I then went to see them in person who advised me the next step is small claims court but to call the advice line as well. 

I called up and they advised me to sent a further letter further outlining consumer law and how he should have refunded my “consequential losses” within 14 days (I didn’t do this as the moving company once again advised me I would not be reimbursed as “it’s with insurance” 
I also spoke to an organisation the moving company is part of who endorses moving companies as they have a complaints process - I got nowhere with this as they advised me they don’t get involved (though on their website it states they mediate between complainer and the company) and this led to the moving company having a go at me for doing this and trying to ruin his business.

Ectophile

Was the 14 days what the CAB asked you to put in the LBA?

It's normal for an LBA to give the other party a reasonable time to make things right, before you start the legal action.  14 days is a very popular time to pick.

There's nothing in legislation that sets out the time of 14 days, it's just what is widely held to be a reasonable amount of time for the other party to respond.

PeppinPie1

Ectophile said:

Was the 14 days what the CAB asked you to put in the LBA?

It's normal for an LBA to give the other party a reasonable time to make things right, before you start the legal action.  14 days is a very popular time to pick.

There's nothing in legislation that sets out the time of 14 days, it's just what is widely held to be a reasonable amount of time for the other party to respond.

Yes it is what they advised me to put. 

DullGreyGuy

powerful_Rogue said:
Just getting the one quote and the work done isn't really ideal if your taking this to court. 

Normally you get three quotes to show the average price. 

Its a fairly complex and interesting field, there was a not to distance appeal court case that went into in a fair bit of detail and its a pity I didnt think to bookmark the judgement. 

You legally are claiming for the loss of value, the courts accept the cost of repair is a fair proxy for this (this is fundamentally wrong on a number of levels but its what the judges have declared). 

Whilst the courts expect you to take reasonable steps to mitigate your losses their judgement of "reasonable" is fairly light. Take a non-fault car accident where you hire a car whilst yours is in for repair... courts have said a like for like car is acceptable even if you could have mitigated your losses by hiring a lower mark or smaller vehicle.

The case in question was about the fact a certain insurer has outsourced its repair management to its sister company who charge the garage's invoice price plus 10%. The other party argued that this wasnt mitigating losses but the appeal judge deemed it was reasonable. 


There is no legal requirement to get 3 quotes nor pick the cheapest even if you do get multiple quotes. By having more than one quote and by choosing a cheaper quote it can help you prove the costs were reasonable but judges, as noted above, dont kick tyres too hard on this type of thing. 

born_again said:

PeppinPie1 said:

I have not contacted my insurer as I didn’t think I would need to. I paid the fee to get the floor replaced myself and assumed I would just get that money back when the moving company reimburses me. 

I didn’t think I would need to claim on my insurance the day I owned the house and increase my premiums next year..

Many Ins co will have agreements with companies to do work for them. Sadly you may have jumped the gun a bit here. In taking on yourself to replace the flooring, rather than wait for their insurance to deal with.

There is a bid difference between claiming off your own insurance, which is governed by the terms of the policy, or claiming off a third party insurance. 

If it were their own insurance the T&Cs will normally given them the right to determine how the claim should be settled and so by using your own workman before the insurer decides leaves you exposed to them saying their own people would have done it for 30% less and so basing settlement on that value not what the OP had paid. 

The TPI however cannot dictate these types of matters to the OP, their role is to cover the legal liability of their insured. So given the OP says the damaged flooring was brand new they were always free to have it repaired/replaced themselves. Had they waited then maybe the insurer would have appointed someone and so the OP wouldn't have had a period of time out of pocket but it would have been a period of time with a big rip in the flooring in the middle of their new kitchen instead. 

Okell

PeppinPie1 said:

Ectophile said:

Was the 14 days what the CAB asked you to put in the LBA?

It's normal for an LBA to give the other party a reasonable time to make things right, before you start the legal action.  14 days is a very popular time to pick.

There's nothing in legislation that sets out the time of 14 days, it's just what is widely held to be a reasonable amount of time for the other party to respond.

Yes it is what they advised me to put. 

I think you've probably got hold of the wrong end of the stick and/or CAB haven't explained it to you very well.

I assume CAB have told you that you have a claim under s49 and s54 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (legislation.gov.uk) in that the service was not carried out with reasonable care and skill.*

That legislation says nothing about you being entitled to be reimbursed within 14 days.

I suspect that what CAB actually told you (and what @Ectophile has suggested) is that before you could take legal action you would have to send the defendant a Letter Before Claim (aka Letter Before Action) setting out the legal basis for your claim and giving the defendant a reasonable period of time to respond, otherwise you would issue a court claim against them.  I suspect that CAB suggested that you give them 14 days in which to respond.  But there is no legal requirement for 14 days - you could have given them 21 days or 28 days or a calendar month or whatever.  You could even have given them 7 days but a court would probably consider that unreasonable.

The problem with sending a Letter Before Claim prematurely (ie before you've had proper discussions with the defendant) is that it's basically giving the other side an ultimatum to pay up within the specified timescale, otherwise you will sue them in court.  Once the timeline has expired, if you don't follow through with your threat to sue them, your threat runs the risk of being seen as empty and not something you will follow through on

A Letter Before Claim is really a last resort before suing someone, and some people would say you shouldn't send one unless you are 100% prepared to follow through with it.

What stage are you currently at.  You've sent a letter before claim giving them 14 days.  Have they responded at all within the 14 days?


*I'd suggest you also have an additional or alternative claim in straightforward negligence against the people who actually damaged the flooring.

PeppinPie1

Okell said:

PeppinPie1 said:

Ectophile said:

Was the 14 days what the CAB asked you to put in the LBA?

It's normal for an LBA to give the other party a reasonable time to make things right, before you start the legal action.  14 days is a very popular time to pick.

There's nothing in legislation that sets out the time of 14 days, it's just what is widely held to be a reasonable amount of time for the other party to respond.

Yes it is what they advised me to put. 

I think you've probably got hold of the wrong end of the stick and/or CAB haven't explained it to you very well.

I assume CAB have told you that you have a claim under s49 and s54 of the in that the service was not carried out with reasonable care and skill.*

That legislation says nothing about you being entitled to be reimbursed within 14 days.

I suspect that what CAB actually told you (and what @Ectophile has suggested) is that before you could take legal action you would have to send the defendant a Letter Before Claim (aka Letter Before Action) setting out the legal basis for your claim and giving the defendant a reasonable period of time to respond, otherwise you would issue a court claim against them.  I suspect that CAB suggested that you give them 14 days in which to respond.  But there is no legal requirement for 14 days - you could have given them 21 days or 28 days or a calendar month or whatever.  You could even have given them 7 days but a court would probably consider that unreasonable.

The problem with sending a Letter Before Claim prematurely (ie before you've had proper discussions with the defendant) is that it's basically giving the other side an ultimatum to pay up within the specified timescale, otherwise you will sue them in court.  Once the timeline has expired, if you don't follow through with your threat to sue them, your threat runs the risk of being seen as empty and not something you will follow through on

A Letter Before Claim is really a last resort before suing someone, and some people would say you shouldn't send one unless you are 100% prepared to follow through with it.

What stage are you currently at.  You've sent a letter before claim giving them 14 days.  Have they responded at all within the 14 days?


*I'd suggest you also have an additional or alternative claim in straightforward negligence against the people who actually damaged the flooring.

To be clear CAB told be explicitly I should have been reimbursed within 14 days and I shouldn’t have to wait for their insurance before the company pays me. 

This was told to me on chat, in person and on the phone. 

I have sent the LBA and the moving company replied and told me to go ahead as he’s not paying up as it’s with his insurance. But moving company never explained to me is his insurance that pay me only that he is covered by insurance and will pay for the new floor. 

Had CAB told me I should wait I guess I wouldn’t be in this mess

I do not know what to do at this point… 
my autistic brain is telling me to run away from it all and accept the £400 loss