Faulty shower pump install - plumber won't refund, what's my claim worth? (England)

lookingForPeace9999

Summary: Plumber installed the wrong type of shower pump, it never worked properly, he couldn't fix it after multiple attempts, went quiet, and I've since had another plumber diagnose and fix the actual issue. Deciding whether to claim just the original cost back, or that plus what I paid to get it fixed properly — before I send a formal letter. Want a sense-check.

Timeline:

• 3 June: Plumber installs a shower pump. Paid £550.
• 4 June: Shower not working correctly from the next day. Only turns on when cold, called him to explain the problem, says to see how it gets on
• 10th June: Shower stops working altogether.
• 19 & 23 June: Two repair visits, issue not resolved.
• 30 June: He quotes £650 to replace the shower valve/handset/head, deeming that to be the source of the issue I agree to this.
• He never follows up, even after I chase him.
• 9 July: I asked him for receipt of the pump. He messages saying he believes it's the valve, not the pump, and offers to swap the pump but says he's "certain" it'll fail again.
• I Hire a new plumber to diagnose the issue, says its not the valve but the pump is not the right type for my system. Paid for new pump and installation, shower now works perfectly.
• 20th July: message previous plumber requesting a refund as he installed a shower pump that wasnt fit for purpose
• 27th July: He replies saying as i have had another plumber fix the issue he cannot guarantee what work was carried out, i reply back with the full technical explanation of why his installation was wrong, provided by new plumber, saying i will require a refund in otherwise i will send a letter before action. No reply from him a week later.

Why the shower pump was not fit for purpose:
I got an independent plumber in. He replaced the valve (based on the original plumber's own theory, which is what I told him initially believing the original plumber was correct ) — issue persisted. He then diagnosed the real problem: the original plumber installed a positive head pump, which needs 0.7m of head height between the tank and the highest outlet to trigger the flow switch. My loft tank is only ~300mm above the shower head — nowhere near enough. He fitted a negative head universal pump instead (works via pressure loss, not a flow switch), and the shower has worked perfectly since.

Cost of the fix: £751.45 (itemised invoice — includes diagnostics, valve/cartridge replacement, the new pump, and fittings).

Where things stand now:
I messaged him on WhatsApp asking for a £550 refund. He's ignored me — this is the second time he's gone quiet on me in this dispute. I'm about to send a formal Letter Before Action but haven't yet, and I'm unsure whether to claim just the £550, or the combined £1,300.45 (refund + the second plumber's invoice).

What I'm asking:

1. Do I have a solid claim for a refund of the original £550?
2. Should I also claim the £751.45 I paid the second plumber to fix it, bringing the total to £1,300.45? Or is it safer/smarter to just go for the £550?
3. Any chance a judge would award less than £550, or is that basically the floor here?
4. He's a limited company (been trading 10+ years, active, no red flags on Companies House) — anything I should know about pursuing a company vs. a sole trader?

Any input appreciated

Ergates

I don't think you can claim both the £550 AND the £751.45 - as that would, essentially, get you the new shower pump for free. If the correct pump had been fitted initially, you'd have had to pay for it.

I think you have a good case for reclaiming the initial bill - as the work wasn't carried out correctly. Plus a reasonable case for any extra work the incorrect fitting caused - i.e the parts of the 2nd plumber's bill that wouldn't have been necessary if the 1st plumber had done his job properly.

lookingForPeace9999

@Ergates thanks for your reply! would it make more sense to just claim for the £751.45 as this was the cost to put right what he had done? Or just the £550? i would have thought the £550 plus labour to put right what he had done wrong would have been fair

Aylesbury_Duck

I largely agree with Ergates.

The initial claim is the £550, however, the original plumber is entitled to the return of the original pump he fitted - from his point of view he may be able to use it on another job.

You have an itemised cost of £751.45 from the second plumber, which includes diagnostics, valve/cartridge replacement, the new pump, and fittings. Which of those items were only required to address the work of the first plumber, and which would have been incurred anyway, had you never engaged the first plumber and the second guy had done the original job?

e.g. if the second plumber had done the job in the first place for £700, then your claim from the first plumber would be £550, plus £51.45, plus the return of the wrongly-installed pump.

lookingForPeace9999

hi @Aylesbury_Duck thanks for your response.

the £550 the initial plumber charged included the cost of the pump £138 (which was not fit for purpose) and labour.

the new plumber charges as follows

• Universal pump: £383.99
• Labour (diagnostics, cartridge, pump install): £250
• Thermostatic cartridge: £84.80
• Fittings/elbows/couplers: £32.66
  

what exactly can i claim for her? The new plumber only installed the valve because i told him to do so, based on the previous plumbers assessment of why the shower pump wasnt working (he tried to blame anything but the work he carried out) and i didnt (and still dont know) enough about plumbing to understand he was incorrect/being misleading

So what should i be claiming for?

sorry for all the questions, this has cost me a lot and has been really upsetting!

thanks!

Aylesbury_Duck

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82090097#Comment_82090097

On the basis of what you've put here, it seems that you would claim £550 from the first plumber and make the pump he fitted available for him to collect.

You appear to have contradicted yourself when it comes to the valve. In your opening post you said:

"I Hire a new plumber to diagnose the issue, says its not the valve but the pump is not the right type for my system. Paid for new pump and installation, shower now works perfectly." There's nothing in your itemised list from the second plumber that mentions a valve.

Yet you later say that the second plumber installed the valve.

I'd just keep it clean - claim the £550 and make it clear that the incorrectly installed pump is available for collection. Had you never met the first plumber, it appears that engaging the second plumber for the job would have cost £751.45.

You certainly shouldn't try to claim for both - that would be obvious betterment.

lookingForPeace9999

hi @Aylesbury_Duck apologies for the mix up, there's a lot of context here and im trying to avoid huge walls of texts as i know its a pain to read, so trying to make it brief where possible and as a result confusing things.

To be clear, i hired the second plumber to install a new valve after the first plumber had said the issue was the valve and then ghosted me. I contacted the second plumber, explained that the previous plumber said it was the valve. The second plumber came, took measurements, sourced the valve, second visit he installed the valve, it did not work, he then diagnosed the actual issue of the original pump by going into the loft and seeing that my tank was not a suitable height for the original pump. Third visit the new plumber had sourced the pump and fittings installed it and then the shower was working.

my point, and indeed my question was, can i claim for the valve and the initial call out charges of the second plumber , as the only reason as had the new valve installed, was because the first plumber blamed it, rather than his own installation. so part of that  £751.45 was unnecessary work due to the  excuse the previous plumber gave about the valve.

£170 investigation call out charges and £80 for the valve, which were NOT necessary as the issue was with the pump not the valve

so can I claim for the cost of the refund of £550 and the £170 and £80?

Aylesbury_Duck

Hmm. My view is that the purchase and installation of the new valve is on you and the second plumber. You instructed the second plumber to install the valve, but he(?) should really have assessed the whole set-up first, rather than relying on second-hand information from you, when you got it from someone who had already demonstrated they weren't competently able to fix the original problem.. That way, the new plumber would have only had to visit twice - the first time to assess the set-up and diagnose the problem, the second to install the new pump.

The investigation/callout charge would have been incurred anyway, and the extra visit from the second plumber was a result of poor practice on his part. I still think you only have grounds to claim the original £550.

lookingForPeace9999

@Aylesbury_Duck that makes sense thank you so much for clarifying!

This has been a tremendous pain, the original plumber has been a pain and made this all so much harder so I appreciate your advice on this!

Aylesbury_Duck

You're welcome. Others may take a different view about the pump and consequential costs, but if this going to end up in court, you need to show that there's a rationale behind the amount you're claiming, and that it's reasonable.

Do you have a registered address for the first plumber? The other thing to consider is that if he doesn't respond to the letter and you do have to see it through, winning in court is one thing, getting him to pay may be another challenge. There is also a lengthy wait for court, so if he doesn't respond to the threat of court action, this isn't going to be resolved quickly.

Ergates

You could argue that the cost of the thermostatic cartridge was incurred due to the first plumbers mistake - however, as Aylesbury_Duck says, it's not quite so clear cut.

Personally, I'd leave it out of any claim to avoid the plumber having grounds to challenge the main claim. (If that makes sense?). But I'm quite risk averse, so prefer to keep things simple.