S75 and court action?

Grumpy_chap

Alderbank said:

Grumpy_chap said:

...does the CC still hold a liability even though the dispute was in motion before the CC was even utilised?

Yes.

The contract for services in dispute is that the OP agreed to pay an agreed price and the trader agreed to carry out a service.
The consumer has fulfilled his contractual obligation, however the claim is that the trader is in breach of his duty by not carrying out the service with the expected level of care and skill, hence the liability.

Well, the rules is the rules.

However, IMO, that is an abuse of the S75 protection and another example of why S75 is not fit-for-purpose in the context of modern CC use.  To make the CC liable for remediation when there was already a dispute before the CC carried any liability is quite absurd and cannot possibly be what any legislator envisaged when the rules were written.

I actually think, in this case, the best resolution would have been if the OP refused to pay and the installer of the replacement roof had to either remedy or pursue the OP via the courts.  All that has happened now is the OP has the faulty roof and does not have the £15k and has to pursue either S75 or court action.
For a sum of £15k, one assumes that the CC will impose some quite stringent investigation, probably not far short of the level of information that would be required for court, rather than simply rolling over and paying out.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Grumpy_chap said:

I actually think, in this case, the best resolution would have been if the OP refused to pay and the installer of the replacement roof had to either remedy or pursue the OP via the courts.  All that has happened now is the OP has the faulty roof and does not have the £15k and has to pursue either S75 or court action.

If we was talking a smaller sum I agree but for £15k my understanding is costs can mount in the court process, OP may well be better off doing as they have done.

Grumpy_chap said:

For a sum of £15k, one assumes that the CC will impose some quite stringent investigation, probably not far short of the level of information that would be required for court, rather than simply rolling over and paying out.

born_again has said the it's a bottomless pit, £15k is probably a lot of money to you or I, to a bank it may be pennies.

Not to suggest they won't scrutinise it more than a claim for a few hundred pounds but ultimately if the breach is shown on the balance of probability through an expert report (if OP can get one) and the remedy is mitigated it doesn't leave the bank many options. 

They could commission their own inspection, fight the OP in court, risk complaints to the ombudsman but that all  increases their risks of losing even more money to defend a claim that relatively speaking may not be that much.    

born_again

Personally I think OP would get a lot of push back if they paid the £15K under protest, As CC would be saying that as you have worded it as such & it has been paid after the event. They would refuse & let it go to FOS to judge on. 

Would the co even take £15 on a CC given the charges on this amount? My guess is no.

sheramber

born_again said:

Personally I think OP would get a lot of push back if they paid the £15K under protest, As CC would be saying that as you have worded it as such & it has been paid after the event. They would refuse & let it go to FOS to judge on. 

Would the co even take £15 on a CC given the charges on this amount? My guess is no.

OP says he has paid it on credit card. 

Okell

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Okell said:

ElsieAtOps said:

... Now, let's assume that I paid them £15k on a credit card ('under protest' according to CAB advice).
The cost of a replacement would now be £20k, say.

Can I (hopefully) recoup £15k via S75 and then take court action under consumer law for the remaining £5k to get someone else to put the job right (redo it)?...

If you paid £15k for the job and you got that £15k back because the job was a "bad 'un", I'm not convinced that you can then claim a further £5k from them if that's what you should have paid someone else to do it properly in the first place.  Do you follow?

eg you had a job that needed doing and someone quoted you £15k to do it.  The job didn't work out and you got your £15k back.  You're back where you started - the job still needs doing and you've got your £15k back.  Why would they owe you another £5k for someone else to do the job properly for £20k?

Maybe I'm not understanding or maybe you aren't explaining it very well?

But OP should be in the position they would have had been in had the breach not occurred? 

Yes - but perhaps I'm missing something.

If the OP simply made a bad choice and went for the lowest quote of £15k when they should have paid £5k more in the first place to get the job done properly, I don't see why the first contractor should have to pay the £5k extra that the OP should have paid in the first place.  The OP paid £15k and he's got £15k back.

But if the second contractor is now saying it's going to cost £20k because it's going to cost an extra £5k to sort out or to remedy problems created by the first contractors substandard work, then yes, the OP ought to be able to claim that extra £5k from the first contractor.

It's not clear to me what the OP is saying the £20k quote covers

Grumpy_chap

born_again said:

Personally I think OP would get a lot of push back if they paid the £15K under protest, As CC would be saying that as you have worded it as such & it has been paid after the event. They would refuse & let it go to FOS to judge on. 

Would the co even take £15 on a CC given the charges on this amount? My guess is no.

That is actually good to know.
If S75 was available for a case where the CC was used and a dispute already exists, so the payment is "under protest", that would be akin to buying insurance after crashing the car.

powerful_Rogue

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Okell said:

ElsieAtOps said:

... Now, let's assume that I paid them £15k on a credit card ('under protest' according to CAB advice).
The cost of a replacement would now be £20k, say.

Can I (hopefully) recoup £15k via S75 and then take court action under consumer law for the remaining £5k to get someone else to put the job right (redo it)?...

If you paid £15k for the job and you got that £15k back because the job was a "bad 'un", I'm not convinced that you can then claim a further £5k from them if that's what you should have paid someone else to do it properly in the first place.  Do you follow?

eg you had a job that needed doing and someone quoted you £15k to do it.  The job didn't work out and you got your £15k back.  You're back where you started - the job still needs doing and you've got your £15k back.  Why would they owe you another £5k for someone else to do the job properly for £20k?

Maybe I'm not understanding or maybe you aren't explaining it very well?

But OP should be in the position they would have had been in had the breach not occurred? 

So someone is looking to get their kitchen re-done and all the quotes are £15k.

Dave down the pub says 'I can do that for £2k, exactly as the other companies would. Customer agrees and pays the £2k on credit card.

After the job is done, it's awful and nothing like expected.

Are you saying they could go to the credit card company and they would pay for someone to fit the £15k kitchen?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

powerful_Rogue said:

So someone is looking to get their kitchen re-done and all the quotes are £15k.

Dave down the pub says 'I can do that for £2k, exactly as the other companies would. Customer agrees and pays the £2k on credit card.

After the job is done, it's awful and nothing like expected.

Are you saying they could go to the credit card company and they would pay for someone to fit the £15k kitchen?

Hypothetical tangent  

OP hasn't said why it's £20k now, that could be prices have risen (this has been going on 18 months), extra work is required to remove the existing or maybe another company is just more expensive.

Paying £5k less isn't necessarily a red flag, the bloke who will do your kitchen or driveway for £2k won't be around by the time it starts falling apart, OP has been in dialogue with the company and they've attempted to fix the issues.

There's nothing here to suggest OP has paid bottom dollar and got what they deserve  

sheramber

Oy could be 5k to remove the faulty roof and 15k to install the new one.

Grumpy_chap

sheramber said:

Oy could be 5k to remove the faulty roof and 15k to install the new one.

One might assume that the original cost for the new composite roof included the removal of the original roof, so removing the new composite roof should not add another 30%.