Are removals services covered by Consumer Rights Act 2015?

Okell

Tisiphone said:

... The item was collected but on arrival at his house the men said they were unable to get it through the door without assistance. It  was then taken away and put in storage. My relative has now been told they can't do the job...

Tisiphone said:

Brie said:

was anything said about why they couldn't get it through the door?  We sometimes managed this by taking legs off sofas.  And sometimes by making it obvious there was a tenner or more if the movers could manage.  

It was the angle of the entrance, rather than the size of the item or the door, both of which are standard. The company he booked specialises in this kind of removal. Essentially, the owner - an expert - failed to ask a question of my relative  - a customer with no expertise - resulting in not enough people being sent to do the job. The two guys who showed up said  customers are always asked to send a photo of property entrances but it seems their boss forgot to ask....

Tisiphone said:

FlorayG said:

I think if it won't fit through the door that's hardly the removal company's fault. WILL it fit through the door? What sort of 'extra help' did they say they would need?

It will fit through the door.  The two men who turned up told me that three men should have been sent.

Sounds like it was the removal firm's fault that they didn't send enough men?

In that circumstance I'd suggest that the firm had not provided the service with reasonable care and skill* and - to be honest - I'd expect any reputable firm to offer to reattempt the job with a 3 man team rather than say they can't do it and start charging your relative for storage.

Has your relative pointed out to the firm that he answered all the questions he was asked and that "the boss" never asked for a photograph of the entrance and hall?  It was up to the firm to assess the requirements of the job and to send sufficient men to do the job.

Has your relative spoken to the boss with whom he agreed the job?

Assuming your relative might be elderly or vulnerable, have you spoken to the firm on his behalf?

The firm should be doing the job again at no extra cost, and they should not be charging him storage.  It's arguable that he might also be due a price reduction for their inabilty to do the job properly first time.

*  The relevant parts of the legislation are the Consumer Rights Act 2015, s49 (services to be provided with reasonable care and skill), s54, s55 (right to a repeat performance), and s56 (right to a price reduction).   s57 of the Act prevents the removal firm from trying to exclude liability in respect of not proviidng the service with reasonable care and skill.

Tisiphone

Alderbank said:

Yes, removal services are absolutely covered by CRA2015.

Like all contracts, it depends on what the contract says.

...a relative booked a removals service to bring a large, awkwardly shaped piece of furniture to his house. The item was collected but on arrival at his house the men said they were unable to get it through the door without assistance. It  was then taken away and put in storage. My relative has now been told they can't do the job.

Based on what little you have told us, they successfully did the job of bringing the item to his house.

I think there is more to this story. What exactly did the contract say?

Yes, I was trying to keep it brief. 

 

The contract was made verbally, over the phone; however emails between my relative and the company show the expectation was for the item to be brought inside with mention made of the room it was to go in.

It is a specialist company who only deals with removals of this sort

sheramber

Since they collected the furniture two men were able to move it
  What was the problem getting it into the house/room that it now needed three men?
 

Were stairs involved?

 Was there a tight corner?

Tisiphone

sheramber said:

Since they collected the furniture two men were able to move it
  What was the problem getting it into the house/room that it now needed three men?
 

Were stairs involved?

 Was there a tight corner?

There are some steps, which they'd been made aware of.  The problem seems to be that they needed to lift it, which they hadn't expected (?) and needed a third man to do that. They'd brought ramps which didn't fit.

My view is the company is at fault here for failing to ask for photos or measurements, which apparently is their usual practice. 

DullGreyGuy

Tisiphone said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Did they visit beforehand to see both item and house? Were accurate measurements given beforehand?

What does the contract state? Normally they say you have to make sure stuff can fit

As others picked up, was it literally to his house? In which case that was achieved. Was it to a specified place in the house? 

Most removal companies are a bunch of relatively fit guys that can lug stuff about and these types say fitting is your problem. There are more skilled ones that have carpenters and other trades who can take doors off, windows out, have cranes etc and they can go much further in attempting to get something in or out but the price reflects the higher skill and more expensive equipment. 

To answer your last point first - it's a specialist company who only deals in removals of this sort.

No visits were requested. Accurate measurements of the item were given, the company owner also said he was familiar with the model. The door is standard size.

The contract was made  verbally.

The email trail makes it clear the expectation on both sides was to bring the item into the property.

It appears that this company usually takes bookings via an online form which asks for photos; however my relative was given their phone number and on this occasion the company owner took all the details verbally and didn't ask for any pictures.

There is no such thing as a standard sized door, B&Q sell 7 different widths of front doors with a good distribution of options across 6 of the sizes. There's over 15cm difference from the widest to the narrowest and these sorts of things even mms matter on if something will fit in normal orientation or need extra people to be able to lift and pivot it. 

Without knowing details of where its going, what the path is going to be like etc its not possible to say how many people are going to be needed. I assume you were not in the original phone call so cannot say for certain if they company suggested a visit and your relative either declined or said it wouldnt be possible or such. It could be he said it'd fit no problems hence a crew of two were booked but in reality it wasnt plain sailing and a larger crew was needed. 

Similarly you dont know if they gave different prices based on a different crew size and your relative chose to have the smaller crew to save money. On our penultimate move we were given the option of a crew of 3 or 4 with them saying it was borderline if they needed an additional person and spelling out the consequences if the 3 ran out of time (we took the punt on 3 and did some packing ourselves and thankfully it paid off. 

Tisiphone

Okell said:

Tisiphone said:

... The item was collected but on arrival at his house the men said they were unable to get it through the door without assistance. It  was then taken away and put in storage. My relative has now been told they can't do the job...

Tisiphone said:

Brie said:

was anything said about why they couldn't get it through the door?  We sometimes managed this by taking legs off sofas.  And sometimes by making it obvious there was a tenner or more if the movers could manage.  

It was the angle of the entrance, rather than the size of the item or the door, both of which are standard. The company he booked specialises in this kind of removal. Essentially, the owner - an expert - failed to ask a question of my relative  - a customer with no expertise - resulting in not enough people being sent to do the job. The two guys who showed up said  customers are always asked to send a photo of property entrances but it seems their boss forgot to ask....

Tisiphone said:

FlorayG said:

I think if it won't fit through the door that's hardly the removal company's fault. WILL it fit through the door? What sort of 'extra help' did they say they would need?

It will fit through the door.  The two men who turned up told me that three men should have been sent.

Sounds like it was the removal firm's fault that they didn't send enough men?

.In that circumstance I'd suggest that the firm had not provided the service with reasonable care and skill* and - to be honest - I'd expect any reputable firm to offer to reattempt the job with a 3 man team rather than say they can't do it and start charging your relative for storage.

Has your relative pointed out to the firm that he answered all the questions he was asked and that "the boss" never asked for a photograph of the entrance and hall?  It was up to the firm to assess the requirements of the job and to send sufficient men to do the job.

Has your relative spoken to the boss with whom he agreed the job?

Assuming your relative might be elderly or vulnerable, have you spoken to the firm on his behalf?

Thank you.  This is what I think as well, though I wasn't sure if removals were covered by the Consumer Rights Act

The company we're dealing with is a specialist piano removals firm and the object in question is a piano. My relative bought it for me so the contract is with him but it belongs to me.  He's been dealing with them so far but wants me to take over as he's got other things going on

He initially contacted them for a quote via an online form, the offer was made and accepted via email.  They did also speak on the phone but at no time was he asked to send photos or measurements and there's no requirement or facitility to attach them to the form.  He sent an email asking if the removers needed any further information and got no reply.

He's since been in contact as follows:

On the day, the company owner rang him to say they couldn't get it in and followed up with an email saying it had been taken to storage and he would 'formulate a plan' on his return from holiday, 2 weeks later

3 days later my relative got in touch to ask about costs relating to the storage and what if they were unable to do the job? He got a reply with the cost of storage and promise to recommend another company if they could not complete the job.

2 weeks later (1 week ago) the owner emailed to say, they felt the risk of damage to the removers or the piano was too high for them to do the job as agreed, but they would deliver the piano to the address of our choice, my relative to pay for this! He was also given a deadline of the 1st week in May to remove the piano from storage.

We both replied to let him know he would now be dealing with me and that I would be away until the 29th.  

Okell

Has your relative actually paid for this service yet?

If he has, and they are offering to deliver it to another address of his choice, is he going to have to pay again for that delivery?

Does the deadline of 1st May mean they won't be charging storage up to that date?

Who is the company?  Can you give a link?


The basic position is that the firm agreed to provide a service to your relative.  If your relative provided all the information that the firm requested of him, but they can't complete that service then they are in breach of contract.

Your relative's remedies are to ask them to try again and/or get a refund (partial or full).

If the firm has taken on more than they can chew - because they didn't ask for all the relevant information from your relative in the first place - then I'd suggest it should be up to the firm to come up with a solution that works for you - and if that means sub-contracting to firm that knows what they are doing, that's what they need to sort out - at no extra cost to you.

Tisiphone said:

Okell said:

Tisiphone said:

... The item was collected but on arrival at his house the men said they were unable to get it through the door without assistance. It  was then taken away and put in storage. My relative has now been told they can't do the job...

Tisiphone said:

Brie said:

was anything said about why they couldn't get it through the door?  We sometimes managed this by taking legs off sofas.  And sometimes by making it obvious there was a tenner or more if the movers could manage.  

It was the angle of the entrance, rather than the size of the item or the door, both of which are standard. The company he booked specialises in this kind of removal. Essentially, the owner - an expert - failed to ask a question of my relative  - a customer with no expertise - resulting in not enough people being sent to do the job. The two guys who showed up said  customers are always asked to send a photo of property entrances but it seems their boss forgot to ask....

Tisiphone said:

FlorayG said:

I think if it won't fit through the door that's hardly the removal company's fault. WILL it fit through the door? What sort of 'extra help' did they say they would need?

It will fit through the door.  The two men who turned up told me that three men should have been sent.

Sounds like it was the removal firm's fault that they didn't send enough men?

.In that circumstance I'd suggest that the firm had not provided the service with reasonable care and skill* and - to be honest - I'd expect any reputable firm to offer to reattempt the job with a 3 man team rather than say they can't do it and start charging your relative for storage.

Has your relative pointed out to the firm that he answered all the questions he was asked and that "the boss" never asked for a photograph of the entrance and hall?  It was up to the firm to assess the requirements of the job and to send sufficient men to do the job.

Has your relative spoken to the boss with whom he agreed the job?

Assuming your relative might be elderly or vulnerable, have you spoken to the firm on his behalf?

... 2 weeks later (1 week ago) the owner emailed to say, they felt the risk of damage to the removers or the piano was too high for them to do the job as agreed, but they would deliver the piano to the address of our choice, my relative to pay for this! He was also given a deadline of the 1st week in May to remove the piano from storage...  

So is he saying that no matter how many men are allocated to the job, they might injure themselves?

And if they damage the piano, it'll be covered by their insurance won't it?

Tisiphone

Thanks, that's so helpful. An excellent point about the number of men, which I included in my email to him! 

Curiously, he chose to respond by ringing my relative although he's been told repeatedly to deal with me. I think he's made the mistake of thinking my relative, who is fatally polite and no longer young, must be a bit of a pushover.

He did pay before delivery but after collection and yes they're proposing that he should pay for storage, including the weeks when the owner was on holiday and also to have the piano delivered elsewhere!!

DullGreyGuy

Tisiphone said:

Thanks, that's so helpful. An excellent point about the number of men, which I included in my email to him! 

Curiously, he chose to respond by ringing my relative although he's been told repeatedly to deal with me. I think he's made the mistake of thinking my relative, who is fatally polite and no longer young, must be a bit of a pushover.

He did pay before delivery but after collection and yes they're proposing that he should pay for storage, including the weeks when the owner was on holiday and also to have the piano delivered elsewhere!!

Why is it curious? Your relative is the one in contract with them and the one liable for any debts. 

To make decisions between you and them binding would require a host of additional paperwork and most likely done by a deed of novation or reassignment which as a deed makes execution more complex as signatures have to be witnessed etc. 

I've too many times has the "deal with my son", you then come to agreement with the son and then the father says there's no way they're doing that so you are back to square 1 and restarting the process again. I think they are being sensible keeping it with the contracted party. 

Tisiphone

There've been a couple of exchanges of emails since my last post and we are essentially going round in circles. My position is, the situation is of his making, the job still needs to be done and not at our expense.  His is that he wouldn't have taken the job  if my relative (R) had described access to my flat accurately. He's now moved my piano to another storage unit - again without consultation, to be paid for by us, and threatens to 'dispose' of it if we don't pay for both lots of storage and another removal by 2nd June.

I think we'll have to take legal action and I don't see how he expects to defend his position. 

His latest email with my comments :

To clarify, the terms of our contract were based on the delivery of the piano from Maidenhead to a London address with what was described as easy access. Unfortunately, upon arrival, it became clear that the access was unsafe for both our team and your instrument, rendering the agreed delivery unfeasible, per our terms and conditions, linked above the quote form completed by .... His T&Cs allow for an increase in charges when "any entrance is not suitable for the clear passage of goods". It's hard for him to argue that. His guys couldn't do it, other piano removers haven't seen a problem.

The quote form clearly requests that photos be provided and measurements taken to assess access accurately. In this case, the only photo submitted was of the collection address. No photo or description was provided for the delivery location, which is where the access issue arose. His form gives an email address for attachments "if you have any photos". He gave the quote after receiving the form + 2 phone calls with R and didn't ask for any. He also didn't reply when R asked if he needed further information 10 days before delivery.  R did describe access to my flat, accurately if briefly.

This site cannot reasonably be described as “easy access,” even by someone outside the profession. Neither R nor I foresaw any difficulty getting the piano into the flat, even the night before delivery when I had a very heavy 7 foot sofa and a large dresser delivered. The issue was the weight of the piano, not dimensions and we had no idea they planned to use ramps rather than lift it. The email he's referring to was sent after the quote was made and accepted and they'd spoken at length on the phone.

Additionally,... confirmed during a phone call that he had never seen the delivery address in person. Surely this would have been the moment to have asked for photos? (He could also, having not asked for photos,  have googled it and would have seen a photo of my building with my entrance clearly visible).

 In accordance with our policy, we request further detail whenever access information is omitted or indicates any additional access considerations. This was not the case with the correspondence with ... He didn't request it and R didn't know that he had omitted anything.....he asked and got no reply!!

The piano was placed into secure short-term storage when delivery was deemed unsafe. Both you and ...were informed of this in our phone call on 7th April, and this is further supported by ...'s email enquiring about storage charges. Untrue. He told neither of us what he was going to do with the piano on the 7th, it stayed in the van and his team left. When we spoke, he said he would come up with a solution and get back to us. Later that evening he told us he'd put it into storage and would come up with a plan when he got back from holiday on the 18th (we didn't hear from him till the 21st,).  R's email simply asked what about charges, meaning who pays.

As discussed, the initial storage facility was temporary due to the owner vacating the premises. The piano has since been moved to... Again, this was done with no consultation.

We have absorbed the cost of this secondary relocation as a gesture of goodwill. However, the cost for the initial storage — as agreed with ... — remains outstanding and must now be settled. R has never agreed anything about storage.

Further to this, we are satisfied that every action we have taken has been within the law, and we have gone above and beyond to accommodate the situation — including relocating on an alternative collection date based on your timelines, He offered to deliver to a ground floor address of my choice (I have none available) on less than required notice and at our cost

securing 2 x additional storage, absorbing 2 x relocation costs, and providing clear recommendations for next steps. The storage was done on his own whim, the relocations were, back from my flat when they couldn't deliver and out of his chosen storage facility because it closed.

If the piano is not collected from... by Monday 2nd June, we will deem you not to wish to relocate and will dispose of the instrument. I don't believe he has the right to do this.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I plan to reply that we will be satisfied with one of two possibilities, 1. he arranges redelivery with another firm or 2 he refunds R and we arrange redelivery ourselves within a week of the refund and otherwise we commence legal proceedings.