Issues with bathroom supplier

pinkshoes

Skye_0505 said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Skye_0505 said:

Alderbank said:

You don't need to rent an entire apartment for a week in London just to have a shower!

Which borough are you in? If you are in Hammersmith for example, access to pool, showers, etc. at one of their leisure centres for a non-member is £6.20 a session. Three visits in a week should be enough.

I would agree if it was just the shower that was being replaced, but there also isn't a toilet. The supply issue is with the shower parts but it has delayed the whole project. 

Surely the toilet could have been usable by the original end date, and just the shower left to finish?

It sounds picky, but if you're trying to make a claim for consequential costs you have a duty to minimise those costs.

It was a combination of them failing to deliver on the agreed date (5 January) and not delivering any of the supplies (including the toilet) until 9 January and then the order being incomplete (missing shower part) which as a combination has lead to delays.  

But I understand the point that you have a duty to minimise consequential costs and I guess it would be difficult to prove what the builders could or could have done had everything been delivered when it was supposed to. 

Their £100 offer is more than fair as you have not minimised losses.

The majority of the bathroom could have been finished, with the shower being fitted at a later date, and you could have used a local leisure centre for showers.

So when you realised on the 9th that a part of the shower was missing and couldn't be delivered until 28th Jan, did you then just go out and source another shower from elsewhere? As that also would have been sensible and prevented the bathroom fitting being delayed. You could then return the shower for a full refund as they hadn't supplied it in time.