How would you stop cowboy builders before they cause problems?
Comments
-
Doozergirl wrote: »
Things do go wrong, the measure then is how it is dealt with.
This is a very important point.
At the moment, if things go wrong, and the builder doesn't want to fix it, they can just walk out. It's then up to the consumer to take civil action.
In many occupations, if something goes wrong, the person can't just walk out. They are regulated by an ombudsman or similar body, and have to have the situation investigated by someone within the body who can come to a fair conclusion.
This would surely be a step forward for both genuine builders and customers?0 -
This is a very important point.
At the moment, if things go wrong, and the builder doesn't want to fix it, they can just walk out. It's then up to the consumer to take civil action.
In many occupations, if something goes wrong, the person can't just walk out. They are regulated by an ombudsman or similar body, and have to have the situation investigated by someone within the body who can come to a fair conclusion.
This would surely be a step forward for both genuine builders and customers?
Your second and third paragraphs are equivalent.
the regulated body can still down tool's its just the ombudsman is the next step over court... but the process is similar, the consumer still has to do the chasing.0 -
martinsurrey wrote: »Your second and third paragraphs are equivalent.
They are not equivalent at all, although they are related points.
the regulated body can still down tool's its just the ombudsman is the next step over court... but the process is similar, the consumer still has to do the chasing.
But the consumer does not have the costs, and if the trader is found to be wrong they can be suspended and prevented from trading. For example, estate agents are not allowed to trade if they do not belong to one of the regulatory bodies, so they have an incentive to co-operate in resolving any complaints.
Also, a regulator is usually much quicker than a civil court. Much better for both parties. Justice delayed is justice denied and all that. At present it typically takes at least a year to take someone to a civil court, whereas regulators have 30 to 60 days or thereabouts.0 -
But the consumer does not have the costs, and if the trader is found to be wrong they can be suspended and prevented from trading. For example, estate agents are not allowed to trade if they do not belong to one of the regulatory bodies, so they have an incentive to co-operate in resolving any complaints.
Also, a regulator is usually much quicker than a civil court. Much better for both parties. Justice delayed is justice denied and all that. At present it typically takes at least a year to take someone to a civil court, whereas regulators have 30 to 60 days or thereabouts.
I am only aware of 2 compulsory ombudsman schemes, Estate Agents and Chartered Surveyors.
We never see any threads on here about dodgy estate agents or surveyors do we? Oh no wait....0 -
This is a very important point.
At the moment, if things go wrong, and the builder doesn't want to fix it, they can just walk out. It's then up to the consumer to take civil action.
In many occupations, if something goes wrong, the person can't just walk out. They are regulated by an ombudsman or similar body, and have to have the situation investigated by someone within the body who can come to a fair conclusion.
This would surely be a step forward for both genuine builders and customers?
If there is a building contract in place there is a mechanism for rectifying defective works - seriously, read up on jct contracts and them come back with anything you think is missing, just because you chose not to use a contract doesn't mean there isn't a way that consumers can be covered0 -
Rosemary7391 wrote: »I think you might be being a tad unrealistic there. I can be generally savvy, get reccomendations, check details etc and be on the look out for "just too cheap" but to suggest that I ought to know how cement is mixed before I pay someone to put it on my house is ludicrous. That's why I'm paying someone else to do it!
You are not quoting me correctly. I said where was the electric mixer? This could also be petrol engined but that is getting pedantic. What you are overlooking is the consumer employed a cowboy. To combat a cowboy in this instance it is fundamental to ask how and where will they be mixing the mortar. If the reply is in an old bucket up on your roof then clearly one shows them a swift exit. Let us be clear here. A bucket is an article to carry water in, and not a suitable article for mixing mortar.
As an aside I suspect this was not the full story on the failure since contractor number two had no idea what number one really did as he was not there at the time. But that is another story.
All this is down to the consumer. It is bizarre that they funded a survey which came up with ridge tile issues yet did not follow this through. The consumer could then have entered discussion with the surveyor, checked their competence, sought surveyor recommended contractors, had a specification issued, had the work done and had the work inspected. Instead they decided to pay for the work to be done twice.0 -
Consider today as an example of cowboy consumers employing cowboy contractors. I am a Neighbourhood Watch Coordinator who knows of a cowboy who cruises my home area looking for victims. This contractor met one of my neighbours around four weeks ago. I happened to be coming home and passed the two in discussion. Afterwards I went to the neighbour, explained about the cowboy and explained about two instances when work I was aware of had gone wrong. I said "his procedure is to shaft you like this... If one checks like this it becomes immediately apparent the work is bodged."
I have come in this afternoon to see the neighbours have engaged the cowboy, he is doing exactly as I warned, and the neighbours are sat in their home allowing the cowboy a free hand to work without them inspecting the flaws they were warned about.
A timely example of every day cowboy consumers aiding and abetting cowboy builders.0 -
the_r_sole wrote: »If there is a building contract in place there is a mechanism for rectifying defective works - seriously, read up on jct contracts and them come back with anything you think is missing, just because you chose not to use a contract doesn't mean there isn't a way that consumers can be covered
Don't attempt to patronise me, you won't be successful.
I would never enter into an agreement without a written contract, unlike many cowboys who prefer to avoid contracts if they can. Even with a written contract, the cowboy builder can, and does, run off when things go wrong. What is wrong with making it compulsory for builders to use a written contract?
I can see that you are very much on the side of the cowboy builder. I am much more interested in the views of consumers who would like to improve things, rather than people who want to maintain the status quo.
At present it is compulsory for traders, if a contract is agreed off-premises, to issue a cooling off notice. I have had many different trades in since I moved here a couple of years ago, and not one of them has complied with their legal obligation to give me a cooling off notice.0 -
Hopefully some consumers will be along who want to discuss ways in which the currently unregulated building industry could be improved.
At present, there is a lot more regulation goes in to someone who wants to put baked beans into a tin and sell them for 50p than someone who takes many thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of pounds to do construction work that can kill people.
It is no surprise that people in the industry don't want any change - people rarely do.
However, one of the most common types of case in the civil courts relates to cowboy builders, and I don't see why steps could be taken to ensure incompetent people find it much more difficult to trade as builders when they have no idea what they are doing.0 -
Consider today as an example of cowboy consumers employing cowboy contractors. I am a Neighbourhood Watch Coordinator who knows of a cowboy who cruises my home area looking for victims. This contractor met one of my neighbours around four weeks ago. I happened to be coming home and passed the two in discussion. Afterwards I went to the neighbour, explained about the cowboy and explained about two instances when work I was aware of had gone wrong. I said "his procedure is to shaft you like this... If one checks like this it becomes immediately apparent the work is bodged."
I have come in this afternoon to see the neighbours have engaged the cowboy, he is doing exactly as I warned, and the neighbours are sat in their home allowing the cowboy a free hand to work without them inspecting the flaws they were warned about.
A timely example of every day cowboy consumers aiding and abetting cowboy builders.
Why is this the consumer's fault? Perhaps they are vulnerable? We live in a civilised society, and we don't regulate the consumer, we regulate the people who are selling their goods and services.
If you think it should be the other way around, you should be campaigning to remove regulation of doctors, dentists, people producing and serving food, electricians and all the other occupations that are regulated. I bet you have never done this.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards