Trader Dispute - collection of materials after failed wood stove installation

Tunstallstoven

Hi all

TLDR:  Wood stove installation. I supplied stove, trader quoted for fitting and supplying materials for flue, etc. No formal contract or T&Cs. Trader completed the work poorly. Trader came back a second time to try to re-do the work properly but failed. OFTEC Inspector visited and deemed the installation non-compliant. I have not paid. Have agreed installer can have majority of the supplied goods back. QUESTIONS: Can I insist that I (or a third party) prepare the goods ready for the trader to collect? Or can the trader insist on visiting to dismantle the goods ready to take them away (I don't want him to due to fears of damage to property).



[I'm usually more of a details kind of person, but I appreciate not everyone has the time for that!!!  So I thought I'd start with the short version above, but then flesh it out below in case anyone wants or needs more detail...]

I had a new wood stove fitted by a local trader in March. I purchased the stove and the trader quoted for fitting it, including providing and installing the hearth and flue system. There was no formal contract, just a brief quote in a WhatsApp message. I've not paid anything to date.

After the initial install I raised numerous issues with the trader, including several quite serious safety concerns. He came back a month or so later to correct these, but despite telling me he'd resolved them, I found afterwards that he hadn't. He had in fact managed to make some worse. I raised an official complaint with OFTEC. They visited for an inspection, the report from which agreed with me and deemed the installation non-compliant.

I've told the trader that I plan to employ a third party to complete the necessary work identified by OFTEC. I don't trust the trader as he has lied to me on numerous occasions and because some of his work is dangerous and of a very poor standard. I don't think he knows (or cares; I can't decide which) how to do the job properly. I therefore proposed that I will remove the materials he installed and let him know when he can collect them; apart from the hearth which I'd keep as it has been cut bespoke, would be difficult and disruptive to remove, and could go towards compensating me for my inconvenience and consequential losses (for example - the roof has been leaking since he installed the stove).

Whilst seemingly agreeing to all this in principle, the trader is now insisting that he return to the property to remove the materials himself. I do not want him working on my property again both for the reasons given above and because I'm concerned he may cause further damage. Furthermore, the flue will need to be removed at the same time that a new one is installed, otherwise I'll be left with a large hole in my roof!

My first question: Does he have any right to insist he does the work in removing the goods?

One other thing... I believe the trader has broken the contract as he did not exercise reasonable care or skill (and have told him such). However, the trader is claiming that this does not apply as I've not paid anything.

My second question: Is he correct in saying that?

Would much appreciate any help or guidance anyone can offer.

Huge thanks

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Tunstallstoven said:

Can I insist that I (or a third party) prepare the goods ready for the trader to collect? Or can the trader insist on visiting to dismantle the goods ready to take them away (I don't want him to due to fears of damage to property).

If you do get someone else to dismantle what is going to do about it? Just take plenty of photos to show the condition of the items.  

If you keep anything he supplied it should be paid for other than if you have any foreseeable loses to claim as damages from the service not being carried out with due care and skill. 

Say for example your hearth was £200 and the second fitter is going to charge you £100 to uninstall then you'd pay £100 for the hearth. 

Appreciate the inconvenience side of things but there isn't generally an award for that so it's just extra costs you can show which stemmed from the breach   

Alderbank

Tunstallstoven said:

One other thing... I believe the trader has broken the contract as he did not exercise reasonable care or skill (and have told him such). However, the trader is claiming that this does not apply as I've not paid anything.

My second question: Is he correct in saying that?

Yes, he is correct. In fact the contract never existed.

A very ancient principle of English contract law is that both parties must bring 'consideration' to the deal to confirm that it it a legal partnership arrangement. 
The consideration can be in any form such as labour or goods but money is now the most common. The law doesn't say how much, it doesn't have to be the full amount, but it must be 'sufficient'.

Since you confirm you haven't paid anything there is no legal contract. This defence is not often used because it works both ways - if there was never a contract then he owes you nothing and you owe him nothing either.

Any materials or tools he brought into your house are still his of course. He can ask for them back but he can't force his way in. You can call the police to prevent his forcing entry. They will however order you to bring his possessions out into the street for him to collect.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Alderbank said:

Tunstallstoven said:

One other thing... I believe the trader has broken the contract as he did not exercise reasonable care or skill (and have told him such). However, the trader is claiming that this does not apply as I've not paid anything.

My second question: Is he correct in saying that?

Yes, he is correct. In fact the contract never existed.

A very ancient principle of English contract law is that both parties must bring 'consideration' to the deal to confirm that it it a legal partnership arrangement. 
The consideration can be in any form such as labour or goods but money is now the most common. The law doesn't say how much, it doesn't have to be the full amount, but it must be 'sufficient'.

Since you confirm you haven't paid anything there is no legal contract. This defence is not often used because it works both ways - if there was never a contract then he owes you nothing and you owe him nothing either.

Any materials or tools he brought into your house are still his of course. He can ask for them back but he can't force his way in. You can call the police to prevent his forcing entry. They will however order you to bring his possessions out into the street for him to collect.

This isn’t correct Consideration includes a promise, i.e OP agreed to pay when the job was done, thus a contract was formed.

Ectophile

Alderbank said:

Tunstallstoven said:

One other thing... I believe the trader has broken the contract as he did not exercise reasonable care or skill (and have told him such). However, the trader is claiming that this does not apply as I've not paid anything.

My second question: Is he correct in saying that?

Yes, he is correct. In fact the contract never existed.

A very ancient principle of English contract law is that both parties must bring 'consideration' to the deal to confirm that it it a legal partnership arrangement. 
The consideration can be in any form such as labour or goods but money is now the most common. The law doesn't say how much, it doesn't have to be the full amount, but it must be 'sufficient'.

Since you confirm you haven't paid anything there is no legal contract. This defence is not often used because it works both ways - if there was never a contract then he owes you nothing and you owe him nothing either.

Any materials or tools he brought into your house are still his of course. He can ask for them back but he can't force his way in. You can call the police to prevent his forcing entry. They will however order you to bring his possessions out into the street for him to collect.

That makes no sense at all.  A contract is formed as soon as both parties agree an exchange of something of value (money, goods or services).  It doesn't make any difference if the customer hasn't paid any money yet.  The contract has already been made at that point.