Contractor caused damage to property

Dilbert_Investor

I had a contractor delivery and fit an appliance.  During the visit they damaged the front door (which we only discovered reviewing CCTV).  The company agreed to a repair we advised might not work due to the nature of the damage.  It didn’t work so they agreed a replacement, which we organised.

It went quiet after we sent the invoices in and after repeated chasing they now say they will only pay for the repair and make a ‘goodwill’ contribution towards the door.  This leaves us considerably out of pocket.

They are not denying liability but point out we wont be successful in a claim as we cannot prove they agreed the replacement (as it was over the phone).  We obviously don’t have the evidence as we assumed this large company could be trusted when we spoke.  They say this isn’t intended to intimidate us.

My question is did we actually need evidence of their ‘approval’ before proceeding?

To my mind, they caused the damage, I put us back into the position before the damage, so they should be liable whether they approved or not.

Thanks.

born_again

How much damage was there. Given not seen till CCTV reviewed?

Dilbert_Investor

They showed themselves out, so the deep gouge in the outside of the UPVC door wasn’t seen until we next went out.  CCTV confirmed they caused the damage.

user1977

Are they claiming they're not required to pay you anything? Or just quibbling about the "betterment" element of you getting a new door?

Dilbert_Investor

They will pay to repair as first agreed and then 50% ‘goodwill’ towards the replacement door (which was only 2 years old at the time).

They had previously agreed to the replacement, but now say we cannot prove it hence the goodwill contribution.

Okell

If you are saying (1) that CCTV clearly shows them causing* the damage to the door, and (2) that it is not possible to repair the door, and that it has had to be replaced as new, then I'd just send them a Letter Before Claim saying that if they haven't paid up in 14 days that you will be suing them for negligently* causing the damage.

I don't see that it matters whether they agreed to pay the full price and are now reneging on that "promise" or not.  If they negligently caused the damage then they are liable to put it right.  If that means a new door - then they need to pay for a new door...

There might be a "betterment" argument about that (ie that you aren't entitled to a new door because it wasn't a new door that they effectively destroyed) but how much value would a two year old door have lost?

I'm pretty certain the front door of my house is over 100 years old and I'd have thought it reasonable to expect a modern door to last at least, what - 20 years, 25 years, more?

So I'd expect you to have a valid claim for at least 90 - 92% of the replacement new door.


Handy hint:  In this sort of situation, where you agree something with someone over the 'phone that you are concerned they may later renege on, tell them over the 'phone that you will confirm the agreement by email and make sure you do that.  If they don't reply to your email asking for their confirmation, at least you know where you stand from the outset.

* I'm assuming that these people present themselves as professional deliverers and installers of appliances, that they should have realised that they owed you a duty of care not to damage your property, and that the damage was foreseeable.  Of course, if they are just white van cowboys who re doing it all for a tenner...

Dilbert_Investor

Just by way of an update.

In response to the letter before claim, the company are still maintaining that there there was no agreement ‘in writing’ to pay for the replacement and we would need the ‘prove’ in court that they had agreed as the onus is on us as the claimant to show they agreed.  They go on to point out this isn’t meant to be intimidating.

It doesn’t seem right that they can walk away from paying to put their damage right just before we cannot prove they agreed.  Again, they are not disputing they caused the damage.

saajan_12

I wouldn't focus solely on the verbal agreement if they're not going to agree to it. You still have the fact that they caused the damage and so are liable to remedy. Since the repair didn't work, the cost to remedy is the replacement door + fitting (less some minor depreciation). At most your worry might be the cost of the failed repair, but perhaps you can show they did ask you to try that first? 

Dilbert_Investor

Thanks.  Yes, they wanted us to try the repair first even although we said it might not work.

DullGreyGuy

Dilbert_Investor said:

Thanks.  Yes, they wanted us to try the repair first even although we said it might not work.

Did you say it may not work? Or did a door expert state it wouldn't work?

What was the quote for a repair?
What was the cost of replacement?

Okell said:

There might be a "betterment" argument about that (ie that you aren't entitled to a new door because it wasn't a new door that they effectively destroyed) but how much value would a two year old door have lost?

I'm pretty certain the front door of my house is over 100 years old and I'd have thought it reasonable to expect a modern door to last at least, what - 20 years, 25 years, more?

So I'd expect you to have a valid claim for at least 90 - 92% of the replacement new door.

This isn't like the CRA where the merchant can deduct "use" where its likely lifespan comes into it but is the more traditional question of what the item was worth secondhand the moment before it was damaged. Seems UPVC doors go for £400-£750 generally, I would be highly surprised if they are selling for 91% of that on eBay secondhand. 

A quick check puts most of the UPVC doors sold as secondhand on eBay at sub £100 

Dilbert_Investor

The contractor said the repair might not work.

Failed repair was £300 and replacement was about £900.