Really keen for your thoughts on this as I've been asked to help sort for a family friend. I have my own thoughts but want to gauge them against others.
Old Dear's(OD) house had a drainpipe hanging off the side and needed it fixing urgently because water would seep into the house or something. She contacted a builder to help who is apparently a very nice man and was eager to provide his assistance. Let's call him Bruce. Bruce has his own company and employs several people. Maybe 20?
Bruce arranged for him and his scaffolding guy to visit the property to see what was needed and to provide a quote. Scaffolding guy turned up first, had a look and in conversation, OD asked how much scaffolding they'd need. The guy said it would probably need around a grand's worth and said the boss would be there soon. The boss (Bruce) turned up and he and OD had a discussion about the job. Agreed that in addition to replacing the guttering it would be good to replace the rotten wood fascias, 2 roof tiles, put a new cowl on that OD had bought, do a little repointing and remove rubbish. After the meeting, Bruce sent OD pricing via text on two bases, cash price or non-cash price. I'm shocked that he put that in writing but I guess that's a matter for him...
OD was quite good for her and made a list of all the jobs that were agreed to be done and sent a photo of said list to Bruce, noting at the bottom the agreed price of £3,400 on completion. Bruce wrote back saying there was an extra thing (Job X and Y) in there that didn't think he'd agreed to as it would need scaffolding on three sides, not two that scaffolding guy had costed and so would increase the price. There then ensued some lengthy texts from OD explaining that Job X and Y had been discussed in the quoting and that £3,400 was the maximum that she could afford. Bruce said he'd not included it in his costings on a different message. So OD said she'd look into getting it done another time when someone with roof ladders could do it. Bruce then said to do Job X the extra scaffolding cost would be £120 and OD said £3,520 took the price for the job over the top for her so she wasn't going to proceed. Bruce said that the £3,400 was still the price for the work, it was just the scaffolding that was extra. In the end he agreed to absorb the additional scaffolding cost to do the work. OD confirmed that was fair and agreed "£3,400 in all" Happy days.
Day of the job OD gets a call asking for a grand in cash for the scaffolding. She's surprised by this as agreement was payment on conclusion. She contacts Bruce and he apologises saying she should have been made aware that this is their normal practice for the scaffolding as the scaffolding has been "completed" at that point. OD heads to the bank in a bit of a panic. Issues with sickness and obtaining certain materials mean that the job is not completed for two weeks. Then they do snagging and then boss Bruce wants to check the work before they take the scaffolding down, so that's another two weeks. Bruce is now happy so scaffolding comes down and collects payment from a neighbour as OD is on holiday.
Bruce says wires have been crossed on payment. OD says no, already paid £1k in cash so balance of £2.4k paid, £3,400 in total. Bruce says £3,400 is the cost for his company Brucie Buildings and the £1k is a separate cost for the scaffolding company. It has not been clear that there were separate companies and both are owned by Bruce and are within the same office, understandably. OD communicates that Bruce quoted for a job and therefore it was assumed that everything needed was included in the quote. There is no evidence of a separate written quote for anything additional like scaffolding.
They've both been texting each other about this, and tbh, both sound a bit worried by it all. Bruce says he's not a conman and seems very concerned to potentially be thought of that way. "You agreed with my lads £1,000 for the scaffolding... We agreed £3,400 for the work" OD says she is feeling very confused and can't cope with dealing with the stress and is going to hand it over to someone else to communicate with them (Muggins). He suggests if they meet they can discuss and put this misunderstanding behind them. He now seems upset that she's upset/uncomfortable, and has offered for her to speak to one of the girls in the office instead. She still can't face it. Too much stress etc etc.
What is RoF's collected take based on the information above? Yes it's only a grand but it's a grand that OD would struggle to find. Anecdotal comments from neighbours suggest that £3.4k was a fair price bu £4.4k would be regarded as steep and raise eyebrows. I have no idea as I have no experience here with building work or scaffolding or disputes in this area. I have previously advised OD to get at least three quotes before getting work done but apparently this was an emergency.
Options appear to be:
1. Pay the grand and have done with it
2. Refuse to pay and wait for Bruce to bring court proceedings. Query his appetite given his alternative pricing practices.
3. Negotiate.
Thoughts?
P.s. Thanks in advance and sorry this was so bloody long!
0
0
2.
0
0
2. - OD should sit on her money and let norty builder fight her for it. It won’t be worth his while to do anything formal. But she will have to put up with annoying bollox from him for a bit.
0
0
Meet with builder, talk and try to resolve.
0
0
Try and resolve but Bruce sounds a bit dodgy with the whole "different company" thing since the scaffolder referred to him as "boss".
FYI - scaffolding can cost £1k++
2
0
Scaffolders are aunts but seems like Bruce is in the wrong having agreed his cost was all in. Tell him you'll give him £250 as a gesture of goodwill and that's the end of it unless he wants a referral to trading standards.
0
0
Blackmail?
0
0
I had to threaten a scaffolder with a lot worse to get him to finally take the scaffolding down.
0
0
I would probably split the difference saying I accepted there was miscommunication/he isn’t a conman but still OD genuinely thought the price was 3500 and that’s what it looks like in the texts so both sides have to take a hit. If both companies are Bruce’s he will probably agree to this after a bit of huffing and puffing and be done with it.
That said on the facts as you describe them I reckon Bruce is in the wrong here and probably knows it.
As an aside don’t underestimate what absolute lying scumbags people can be or how much of an act they will put on when it comes to these sorts of disputes. I once had a sparks send me a picture of his ‘nephew’ in intensive care to explain why he had gone awol for over a week. It later transpired he had sent a picture of a random kid from the internet and was on another job…
2
0
The scaffolding was included in the original £3,400 per the above statement, impossible to argue otherwise. If that is roughly how it was written in their text exchanges then tell the cheeky git to get stuffed. This is not legal advice.
0
0
Meet Bruce at the local with some tasty geezers and tell him if he tries to mug off aged relatives again he can have a word with you in private
Or just offer him some cash to f off
0
0
Builders can get nasty, and if OD is on her own, she won't want to worry about this.
I would offer Builder £350 in full and final simply to give everyone closure.
0
0
Challenge him a dance off?
0
0
I find it odd that 30% more takes it from reasonable to steep. Also doesn't add up that she's created this mega list of jobs as that's "all she can afford". Also not clear if this is the cash or VAT price. All of it suggests perhaps she is a bit confused, and maybe he wasn't clear enough.
I think you just have to be pragmatic. There's no point in dragging it out. Cough up £600 noting that £120 of that was technically payable anyway for the extra scaffolding, and suggest he wears the remaining £400. In the end if this guy has generally been a decent builder for other people it is worth not completely souring a relationship, even if it is just to have some continuity if e.g. the repair doesn't work as expected. The only time I would refuse to pay is if I think he has literally ripped the person off.
0
0
Bruce does not want it on the record that he is offering to do jobs for cash.
The extra scaffolding point seems right A he can’t argue anything different as his comment expressly indicates that scaffolding is part of the quote as the extra bit impacted that quote
Call his bluff - and stand firm. He’s not going to trash the house. He doesn’t want to go to court because the issue about offering to do the job for cash will be on the record
0
0
From the right wing wimps who brought you "Ukraine should give up land to Putin or he might escalate" *cower cower quake appease*
No. He is running a gaslighting scam on an old person and paying him off isn't going to stop him. Get advice from trading standards for which I think you need to go through the citizens advice bureau these days and don't give an inch.
1
0
The idea that all builders have burly mates that will knock your house down if you refuse to be conned by them is ridiculous. They rely on reputation-
0
0
I agree with Parsnip. Those long texts are unclear and the builder is using them as he does not want to pay tax. If Bs texts are unclear to someone on their own then he should bear responsibility for it. A decorator recently ask me if I could pay cash. I said no I wanted an invoice. He then sent me very long high quote. As I pay tax I decided I don’t want to do business with someone like that or have him on my property. It’s one thing doing odd jobs cash in hand but another setting up your whole business to avoid tax imo.
0
0
Might be a criminal offence under the ccr but years since i looked at that.
1
0
I assume this amounts to either a distance or off-premises contract. If so, did Bruce comply with his pre-contractual information requirements under Sch 2 of the CCRs, particularly in respect of ODs right of cancellation/ traders right to charge for services delivered during cancellation period if consumer expressly consent to the commencement of delivery during the cancellation period? If not (and I doubt he did) you might want to point Bruce towards s.31 and s.36(6) CCRs and tell him to go swivel, and tell him he's lucky he's not being reported to CMA/ Trading Standards.
0
0
I should have added, assuming info requirements not met, OD needs to exercise right to cancel, then not pay.
Note, Bruce could argue that work was an emergency, in which case right of cancellation won't apply. However, sound like it wasn't emergency work in the sense envisaged under the regs.
1
0
Bruce is trying his luck and needs to be slapped down.
End.
0
0
Send warren round to beat them all up. Jim too.
0
0
Some classic lawyer bellendry on here. All the "playas" on here prob get an automatic 30% uplift from any trade to deal with the fact they are whiny pedants when time comes to pay.
1
0
Based on what I've read, there was an agreement for the work to be done at £3,400.
If the work can't be done without scaffolding, it's clearly the contractor's obligation to arrange for the scaffolding unless expressly agreed otherwise.
Again, based on what I've read, OD agreed to pay £3,400 for the work and did not agree to pay anything for scaffolding.
Based on my experience of dealing with these sorts of disputes, however, I would be astonished if there wasn't something somewhere which undermines OD's case in some way, large or small. When talking to lawyers there's a strong tendency to 'forget' the emails that could result in unfavourable advice.
1
0
Update: All had gone quiet on this until this weekend. Bruce says he wants to meet up “to sort this situation out.”
Told OD to respond asking for his email address and relative would be in touch. She asks for this and he replies
“How come you need my email OD?”
She replies
“My relative is helping me with this as you know I was finding it stressful. If you let me have your email address they’ll contact you.”
He replies
“Ive been trading for 25years and ive never had a situation like this
Were ive not been able to resolved an mis understanding without sorting between both partys.” [so much sic]
Followed by:
“OD is stressing me out.. as im put of pocket. And to have to get someone else involved when me snd you did the deal is wrong.
Just to put you in the picture the plastics costed me £1600 without labour... I dont see how you can honestly think I could do all that work for 2500 its crazy.
Im not prepared to have a email sent to me just so we can resolve this situation.”
Until now, OD has maintained Bruce is such a lovely guy. Even this evening she said “He is generally a pleasant mannered man. A very successful business man.” And she’s worried that he’s feeling stressed
But what the actual fvck?!?! This man is trying to manipulate a lovely little old lady in her 70s, who he knows is very sweet and nice and feels bad that he feels bad. And he’s trying to isolate her from proper advice and representation from a friend/family because he knows he’ll have more chance of pressurising her and wearing her down than he would someone removed from the situation. I’m actually quite cross.
Also, there’s no way it cost £1600 for some plastic fascia to go around three sides of a small two up two down semi. You can get 5m lengths for £40, and cheaper actually. So where the fook is he buying his materials?
From an initial position of being sympathetic and potentially negotiating something I think he can now very much do one and hope he avoids the fullness of my wrath.
To me it smacks of manipulation, pressure and bullying. Does anyone read it differently, ie should we be kinder to Bruce, or is he an out and out toerag?
2
0
I would just call him yourself and see what he has to say and ask him for his email address.
1
0
Nope, he sounds very much like he is, in fact, a wrong un (as well as being functionally illiterate, it seems).
I particularly love this line:-
"Im not prepared to have a email sent to me just so we can resolve this situation"
As if receiving an email is some sort of burdensome / intrusive act that it's just too, too much to expect him to allow his email account to be bothered in that way.
1
0
Give him a call. Tell him he doesn't have a leg to stand on (that's my reading from the above). Tell him you're a lawyer.
See what his reaction is.
Then tell him that you are a very reasonable person. And the job was done well (was it?). You'll give him £250 to end this matter. (You don't want the OD hassled). If that's not acceptable then he can go down the legal route.
2
0
Bruce employs 20 people and doesn't do email?
He has a nice life. He can afford to lose the £1,000.
He obviously wants to keep harassing OD for as long as it takes to get his own way.
Phone him once from her phone. Follow up with a text from her phone with whatever number you'll contact him from in future. Get her to block his number.
Tell him she's not doing too well and you're caring for her for now. Imply power of attorney imminent. Imply manly / legal / police / revenue connections or whatever. Probably only need the first.
Explain that his texts say the scaffolding is included but that you understand he may have meant differently since [his] texts can be confusing. What a pity there's no other paper trail. Still, OD has been misled and is now quite unwell. But you are willing to leave it, assuming he can confirm all money due paid.
0
0
Force me jaw -‘tell him you’re a lawyer’ - that kind of advice will end you up with an SRA investigation and probably fine / suspension if the builder happens to have any lawyer look at it at any point. Quite a risk.
1
0
Get her to ring Trading Standards.
Dodgy builders are up their street.
They can help.
1
0
Tell her to tell him she has contacted Trading Standards and won't be doing anything until she has spoken fully to them.
Tell her to tell him he is not to contact her other than by email. Preferably use your email.
If he then messages or calls her, complain to the police of harassment.
Although this is small claims territory, consider making a formal offer of the agreed balance as a full and final settlement.
Do not meet him. Don't play the negotiations by his rules.
0
0
Wow. Bruce won’t quit. Message from OD
I woke to another Bruce text sent just after 8. Wants to speak face to face as needs closure this isn't fair and I can even go into the office and discuss it with the girls... (his partner is there)
Am just going to get his number, tell him all contact is via me from now on and express concerns about his pressure tactics, notwithstanding I have been assured he is a “very nice man.”
And no, I would never bring out the “I’m a lawyer” card. He will probably cotton on when I refer to legal concepts and legislation, and he may Google me at some point but I don’t think Bruce would be bothered by status, he’s just anxious to involve any independent person.
0
0
I think it's fair to say - "Look, I've been asked to look at this by OD. As it happens I'm a lawyer, but i'm looking at this in a non-professional capacity, but it's only fair I disclose that. If you'd like to involve a lawyer of your own, that's entirely your right - but happy to speak directly to you, if you're happy with that.
0
0
I've found with these types that saying I really hope I don't have to take it up with my litigator colleagues usually brings them to their senses. Naturally I would be paying my colleagues for their work as a client but builders seem to think that the legal profession will still do favours and thus I'll have unlimited legal resources at my disposal.
0
0
It’s not even about her litigating. If he wants his extra cash he’d have to. He can if he wishes.
0
0
This implies the scaffolding was included in the £3,400. I'd offer him £120 to go away, with 24 hours to accept.
0
0
Problem if he is dodgy is he can probably remove enough of the work to be a real pita from a ladder.
Ultimately all this is rather unseemly when the OP could have covered the entire cost by selling one of their lesser watches.
0
0
Sails what you’re saying would land you in the shot with the SRA should the builder tell his lawyer or any friend of his that is a lawyer. Lawyers can’t user their professional standing in this way as it undermines public confidence and trust in the profession
0
0
Surely it would be unfair not to let the builders know that you've acquired a particular set of skills.
0
0
Apparently not. The SRA would probably have you bummed for it
0
0
So telling a builder that I plan to instruct a solicitor is not allowed?
0
0
No
telling them you’re a lawyer and will use your colleagues tho would be caught
it’s under the ‘ taking unfair advantage of your position’ rule
0
0
They already knew I was a lawyer and I merely said I hoped I wouldn't need to instruct my colleagues to resolve the issue.
0
0
Makes
no
difference
You’re threatening them and implying you have the weight and resources of your firm behind you
best self report and beg for leniency
0
0
Oh it wasn't meant as a threat. I just happened to be wearing that red gown and wig when the builders came round.
0
0
As opposed to threatening them with the weight and resources of another law firm.
0
0
Yes - exactly that
0
0
+1 for Dogwarden (both posts). I’d put in writing not to contact OD direct but do it through you as OD is finding the communication upsetting and alarming. That way, if he continues you have proof of harassment.
0
0
telling them you’re a lawyer and will use your colleagues tho would be caught - it’s under the ‘ taking unfair advantage of your position’ rule
Got a source for that? I seem to remember a case involving a dentist (?) but I believe the solicitor in that went way beyond the line and into bullying.
The new Code doesn’t give indicative behaviours any more.
Join the discussion