Advice sought on decorator unwilling to finish work

MigsyBigsy

Hello all,

I am sure this has been posted to death but would like to seek advice or failing that - am I going through the right hoops.

In March we (directors of a building) instructed a decorator to paint the whole building. Quote was received and accepted. Due to the heat and some instances (I am sure he was !!!!!!) he paused for a few weeks here and there.

Long story short, he is now refusing to continue to paint the the whole house until he is paid an additional sum. He is arguing that the was not told to paint the whole house but only half the house even though he now has scaffolding on the side he said he wasn't going to paint. He is arguing this point because in his quote the house was no.7 (it is 7-9).

I have emailed him two letters. The first was to set out our argument and the second was a pre-warning before this goes to court (small claims). He has not responded to the second. Should I now proceed? Sadly he is not registered in Companies House.

In addition, and I cant for the life of me believe I did this, paid for the majority of the works. What a stupid ejeet!

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

eskbanker

In addition, and I cant for the life of me believe I did this, paid for the majority of the works. What a stupid ejeet!

How did you pay?

we (directors of a building) instructed a decorator

Are you acting as an incorporated company? This would mean that you don't have consumer rights as such but can obviously still pursue the decorator for breaching the contract between you…

I have emailed him two letters. The first was to set out our argument and the second was a pre-warning before this goes to court (small claims). He has not responded to the second. Should I now proceed? Sadly he is not registered in Companies House.

If either of these was constructed as a Letter Before Claim then the next step would indeed be to proceed with the steps you warned him of, assuming you have his address.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

At the risk of stating the obvious, the key issue is the extent of documentary support for both parties' positions, e.g. a clearly-defined scope of work.

MigsyBigsy

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82139988#Comment_82139988

Hello,

thank you for the response.

How did you pay? Bank transfer 😔

Are you acting as an incorporated company? Its "just" a freeholder company for the leaseholders of the building - no trading involved at all.

If either of these was constructed as a Letter Before Claim then the next step would indeed be to proceed with the steps you warned him of, assuming you have his address. It was but I think the address included in his flyers are incorrect.

At the risk of stating the obvious, the key issue is the extent of documentary support for both parties' positions, e.g. a clearly-defined scope of work - I have saved all this whatsapp messages

thank you once again.

eskbanker

How did you pay? Bank transfer 😔

Your emoji suggests that you already know that this is the 'wrong' answer!

Are you acting as an incorporated company? Its "just" a freeholder company for the leaseholders of the building - no trading involved at all.

It's not about trading - if you're constituted as a company and instructed the work on that basis, you don't have the benefit of the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act, etc:

…a consumer must be an “individual” (that is, a natural person) – the Act’s protection for consumers does not apply to small businesses or legally incorporated organisations (e.g. companies formed by groups of residents).

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/2/notes

If either of these was constructed as a Letter Before Claim then the next step would indeed be to proceed with the steps you warned him of, assuming you have his address. It was but I think the address included in his flyers are incorrect.

How likely is it that you're going to be able to find out his actual postal address, as this is needed for court action?

At the risk of stating the obvious, the key issue is the extent of documentary support for both parties' positions, e.g. a clearly-defined scope of work - I have saved all this whatsapp messages

But to what extent do the WhatsApp messages define the scope clearly?

LightFlare

If the quote he supplied and you accepted says 7 and only that, then that sounds as if he has done that

If you go to court, his defence will be based on that

Unless you have any communication with him after that date to say otherwise or amend to 7-9 (along with his acknowledgment)

Ectophile

Sadly he is not registered in Companies House.

That doesn't have to be a problem. If there is no company, you sue him personally.

Ergates

"He is arguing this point because in his quote the house was no.7 (it is 7-9)."

If the agreed contract between you was to paint No 7, then taking him to court is probably not going to work in your favour.

Whilst verbal contracts are legally binding - proving them in court, especially when there is a document that says something different, would be very difficult.

pinkshoes

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6683672/advice-sought-on-decorator-unwilling-to-finish-work

What were the other quotes?

E.g. was he significantly cheaper to the point it should have been obvious that it was for just no. 7?

No Consumer rights as you're a company but use your necessary evidence (other quotes, scaffolding etc...) and follow through with your court claim.

MigsyBigsy

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82140612#Comment_82140612

It does note as "7" in the quote and of course, I should have looked at this more clearly. However, there is no 7 in the building. its 7-9. In addition. IF he is going to argue on this, why has he started on the "9" part of the building. He has completed the paint job in the other side - the "9"

MigsyBigsy

but there is no "7". its "7-9". In addition. He has completed the works on the no.9 side of the building

MigsyBigsy

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82141551#Comment_82141551

he was £500 cheaper than the other quotes.