Who is building contract with? Legal advice needed

Fast_ted · 10 August 2018 at 10:58AM

Hi,

I signed a building contract for an extension to my home. The builder walked away with a large amount of money and leaving substandard works which needed to be redone. The contract is with a limited company that never existed however the builder had another limited company which is now dissolved. The builder is arguing my contract is with his other company despite no mention of this company on the contract documents. Who is my contract with - the person who carried out the works or his other company?

Thanks,

FT

AndyMc..... · 10 August 2018 at 11:08AM

Think about this one and what you want to achieve.

Unless you sue the individual and he has the means to pay, I can!!!8217;t see you getting the solution you!!!8217;re after.

Fast_ted · 10 August 2018 at 11:14AM

Hi Andy,

It is a small claim so I believe he has means to pay but need to determine if I have a legitimate case to go after him. All contract docs were in the name of the company that didn’t ever exist so can’t see how there can be a contract with his other (now dissolved) company and therefore in my mind the contract defaults to whoever carried out the works but hoping someone with a bit more legal knowledge can confirm this.

System · 10 August 2018 at 11:34AM

Who signed the contract and what details are on the contract? You can only really pursue the contractor detailed on the contract for that, but sounds like a good bit of deception if the company never existed - usually one of the requirements for a contract is for the contractor to provide a certificate of insurance.
A lot comes down to due diligence but you have someone very dishonest here so you really need to pay for proper legal advice on whether you can go after the individual rather than the contracted party imo

EachPenny · 10 August 2018 at 11:37AM

Fast_ted wrote: »

It is a small claim so I believe he has means to pay but need to determine if I have a legitimate case to go after him. All contract docs were in the name of the company that didn’t ever exist so can’t see how there can be a contract with his other (now dissolved) company and therefore in my mind the contract defaults to whoever carried out the works but hoping someone with a bit more legal knowledge can confirm this.

On the face of it, your contract was with an entity that didn't exist, you were induced to enter into that contract by an individual who was at best misleading you, and potentially seeking to defraud you.

Arguably your claim needs to be against this individual, since my rough knowlege of contract law is that you cannot have a lawful contract with an entity which doesn't exist.

Did you do any checks on the non-existent company before paying them? (not intended as criticism, but possibly relevant in any action you can take to recover money).

Fast_ted · 10 August 2018 at 11:44AM

Hi r_sole,

We contacted a architectural firm for a quote and they passed it on to their !!!8216;Construction Manager!!!8217; and the contract was signed by the builder with the company name the same as the Architects but Construction Ltd rather than Architectural Services Ltd at the end. The insurance documents provided did have his other company name but assumed this was an abbreviation (for example if company was All Building Construction Ltd other company was ABC Construction Ltd). We essentially thought we were in contract with Architectual firm who had been going for 17 odd years but have no legal connection to them. The builder was also using an fake name as when we googled his real name we found out he has been ripping people off for years. I have a case management review with the court but need to prove contract is with the individual, as he carried out the work and signed the contract, rather than his other company which he has liquidated.

Fast_ted · 10 August 2018 at 11:49AM

Hi Penny, as my last email to r_sole we did check companies house but as couldn!!!8217;t find the company we assumed (!!! out of me) the construction company and architectural company were one of the same (they shared an office so had the same address, logo etc). He was essentially using the architects as cover to look like a legitimate company - his other company had only been trading for 6 months when we signed the contract. Using a false name, false company etc points to fraud but after speaking to police because he did carry out some works it is seen as a civil matter

EachPenny · 10 August 2018 at 12:46PM

So is the architectural company genuine then? Is there any link between this company and the builder?

Who are the principals at the architectural company? Are they qualified and registered architects? What was your contract with them, and did it state that they would provide advice/recommendations for procuring the construction contract?

It would seem odd for a reputable architectural company to introduce you to a builder with a known (poor) reputation.

You may have grounds for complaint to the architect's professional body, and possibly a claim on their professional indemnity insurance.... but I have a horrible feeling where that is going....

Fast_ted · 10 August 2018 at 1:01PM

Hi Penny,

The Architectural Company is genuine and still going (don't think they are registered architects as architectural services). I never had a contract with them but found them recommended on the mybuilder site for construction works. I think they wanted to extend their service offerings and got in tow with the builder without realising his past (he was using an alias). So they were able to offer construction services (albeit through a seperate company) and he was able to get in with a reputable company.

Still can't seem to get an answer though. I think the contract should be with him personally as all contract documents, emails, quotes etc were in the company name that never existed. In my view I thought I was entering into contact with a reputable company. As the company never existed I think the contract falls to the person who carried out the work and can't see how he can say it was his other company that I wouldn't have gone into contract with as only trading for 6 months. The first I heard of the other company name was when he walked away from the job and we started receiving letters from his solicitor.

teneighty · 10 August 2018 at 1:14PM

In my opinion if the company never existed then the contract is null and void.

This then takes you to a possible verbal contract and the usual test to determine whether a contract exists and who the parties to the contract are. What are the names on the quote (offer) who did you contact to agree the quote (acceptance) and most importantly who received the payments (consideration)?

The fact that you paid them and they built an extension suggests the objective test on intention to create legal relations (contract) is a given.

EachPenny · 10 August 2018 at 1:15PM

Fast_ted wrote: »

The Architectural Company is genuine and still going (don't think they are registered architects as architectural services). I never had a contract with them but found them recommended on the mybuilder site for construction works. I think they wanted to extend their service offerings and got in tow with the builder without realising his past (he was using an alias). So they were able to offer construction services (albeit through a seperate company) and he was able to get in with a reputable company.

Did you pay the architectural company anything for their services? The principals of that company should be named somewhere - their website, correspondence, even a plate by their front door. You need to find out who they are and whether they are qualified.

Who did the design and got approvals (planning/building control) for the extension?

Fast_ted wrote: »

I think the contract should be with him personally as all contract documents, emails, quotes etc were in the company name that never existed. In my view I thought I was entering into contact with a reputable company. As the company never existed I think the contract falls to the person who carried out the work and can't see how he can say it was his other company that I wouldn't have gone into contract with as only trading for 6 months.

I might be wrong, but I don't think you'd make this stick. The contract (if there is one) is with the person or organisation named on the contract you signed (or otherwise agreed to). If that entity doesn't exist then you probably don't have a lawful contract of any kind.

The situation you are in is similar to an internet banking scam where someone contacts you and tells you to deposit some money into a particular bank account. In this case you've been given bank details to 'pay' for building work, but in reality the destination of the money was not what you thought it was.

Who is building contract with? Legal advice needed

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free