Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

CPHart bathroom fitter claim issued - My claim is in relation to two bathrooms that have been installed incorrectly


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 668 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi there,

 

any help much appreciated.

 

I had agreed a bathroom to be installed to be completed by a sole trader who was at the time an approved fitter by a very large, prestigious (?) well known limited company.

 

I agreed on a quote for around 10k to install the bathroom, this was provisionally agreed and as per his quote 10% deposit £1000 was transferred to his personal account.

 

 

It would the follow to appear that the aforementioned installer had a falling out with the limited company, and become no longer an approved fitter for the ltd company.

 

Now the whole point of me hiring him to install my bathroom was that he was approved by a much larger company, so his work would be guaranteed by them, thus there was less chance of him a) walking away from the job half done or b) should any problems arise after the installation the ltd co. would arrange for them to be rectified, basically the job would be underwritten/ guaranteed by the larger ltd company.

 

So once I received the email from the Ltd company and confirmation from the installer stating that he is no longer on their approved list of fitters and his work would not be guaranteed by the limited company, I changed my mind and decided not to go with him and his quote.

 

The only problem is that i have already paid £1000 deposit and as per his quote it states:

 

Payment terms:

10% non-refundable deposit, to be paid to secure booking prior to commencement of works

 

I have already spoken with the installer through email correspondence and whilst he has not said specifically he will not return my deposit, he is insisting that the deposit is non refundable.

 

Do I have any chance of getting my deposit back? As I no longer want him to install my bathroom as his workl will not be guaranteed.

 

Is this a breach of contract as the implied terms of the contract (ie being underwritten by a larger ltd company) are no longer part of the contract.

 

Also his details were passed to me through the ltd company so there is no doubt he came through them, even though he was carrying out the job as a sole trader.

 

Hope this all makes sense and would love to hear back from any knowledgable members.

 

Best wishes

 

BB

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

not so knowledgeable :) but, it seems, as you say, that if the contract included an underwriting and that is no longer available, then the contract may be voided and put back?

also, there may be a case re the underwriter seeing as you say they have outsourced it on being instructed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there Ford,

 

thanks for your input, yes this is my understanding, so if we were to go to court, which at the moment is likely, the ltd co. would be accountable and obviously wouldnt be wasted time as they clearly have assets however its headache also, so would be better to resolve amicably.

 

Best Wishes

Link to post
Share on other sites

presume then you did an order direct with hart, and then went with one of their 'approved' outsourced installers.

i see on their site that they say

'Finding the right installer is as important as finding the right bathroom. Your C.P. Hart sales advisor can put you in touch with one of our approved and manufacturer acceredited bathroom installers. They will all be completely independent of C.P. Hart, and your contract would be directly with the installer. One significant advantage, however, is that all of the installers we have approved are familiar with C.P. Hart products. We regularly monitor the performance of our approved bathroom installers and advise them on C.P. Hart quality standards.'

https://www.cphart.co.uk/installation/

Link to post
Share on other sites

You make certain suppositions about the obligations and value of the firms approval of the fitter. They do make it clear that they are NOT subcontractors but CP Hart are merely introducing the fitter to you and that menas being approved is thus a meaningless term.

However, you should enquire why the person is no longer "approved" as it could be a very minor reason or something that is significant to your contract with him.

What is not clear is how CP Hart have any obligatiions to you, have you bought the materials from them and then they recommend/push someone to fit it? Do you pay separately for labour and materials? These are important things as they show who you actually have a contracyual relationship with and what the limits of that is. In reality they never did fully guarantee his work

 

Ultimately the bloke either can do his job or he cant and you can claim against him if he does things wrong. At the moment you dony have a legal reason to cancel the contract and get your full deposit back.

I dont like the way the company does business, it is like a carpet store subbing out the fitting but them saying they are not responsible for anything about the carpet at all. I would be putting pressure on them to reach an agreement with all parties regarding the deposit. I would ahve thought that the fitter keeping a small sum to cover his actual costs of what he has done so far is equitable but if he hasnt lifted a finger or spent a penny on your materials then the contract itself will mkost likely be considered as having unfair terms and this will be a btter apporach to getting you money back than arguing about a meaningless term regarding approval

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats the issue; what is the full circumstances and terms in all.

OP posted that they received

'..confirmation from the installer stating that he is no longer on their approved list of fitters and his work would not be guaranteed by the limited company'
does this mean there would have been a co. guarantee if still approved, or just that the installer is saying their work isn't g'teed by the co. anyway?

 

then there is the co. saying they 'can' put someone in touch with an installer for their products, independent installer, contract is with the installer. ie no outsourcing/subcontracting?

any commission involved?

Link to post
Share on other sites

10K for a bathroom...

A bit steep if you ask me, unless you convert your lounge into a bathroom.

Anyway, if you haven't got the material from cp hart, cancel the order and they'll immediately wave the £1k you already paid.

If you already got the material, call them and ask to return everything.

With that sort of money involved, surely they'll sacrifice 10%.

Unless the £10k was just for the installer to get labour and material, in which case you are stuffed.

Make sure he's got assets before starting any court action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

test

  • Like 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BBHB,

 

It would be good if you could give us an update and tell us a few details like :-

 

1. Who you are looking to take to court now, and why.

 

2. Why it's now £10K and not the £1K deposit you referred to in late 2017.

 

3. Who did you buy the bathroom items from and at what cost.

 

4. What did you pay for fitting.

 

Please include other brief details that may help us understand the latest scenario.

 

😎

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Be careful.......10K means Fast Track and not small claims.

  • Thanks 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

My claim is in relation to two bathrooms that have been installed incorrectly and deemed not fit for purpose by a registered Expert Witness M.B who has produced a CPR 35 compliant report. The claim is summarised in Irwin Mitchell LLP(IM) pre action letter dated ------------ 

 

My claim is for a total £36,722.00 excluding costs. The defendant has moved address since the issue of IM’s letter and had claimed not to have received the letter and accompanying support documentation. I have tracked the defendant to their new address and had all the IM documentation resent and signed for.

 

The defendant is claiming ill health and an inability to pay. In the interest of attempting to reach a settlement with the defendant I reduced the claim to £15,000. The defendant has continued to refuse to pay and I now have little choice other than to ask the courts to intervene on my behalf.

 

As a gesture and to assist the defendant in settling the claim I wish to proceed on the basis of the reduced sum of £15,000.

little update as to the claim, a claim has been issued on Money claim online

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have instructed  Irwin Mitchell LLP(IM) to act ?   £36,722.00 excluding costs. down to  £15,000 is one hell of a drop how are you genuinely going to justify that with in the claim ?

 

How much did you pay for the two bathrooms initially ?

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi there, 

 

Irwin Mitchel were initially instructed to run the case and the case had more than 51% chance of succeeding (their criteria) once I.M found out that the defendant does not own his current property they decided to change their stance and say they won't follow through with the case, not sure how the defendant not owning his house effects the prospects of success of the case.

 

14,000 was the labour done 

36,000 is the estimate to redo the bathrooms

Link to post
Share on other sites

18K a bathroom ...wow ...would love to see your home :classic_ohmy:

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Op, these figures not only are excessive, but are unreal.

How can 2 bathrooms cost 36k?

I have been in the trade decades and built bathrooms in rich Richmond from scratch, pipes, waste, the lot.

Sometimes I wanted to price myself out of a job and quoted 10k.

That was the top and would've given me at least 6k profit.

Building a bathroom is not like painting the sistine chapel. 

I lost track of your case, but have you been to court and got a ccj?

As mentioned before, if the other party hasn't got assets, you'd be left with more expenses to pay .

A drop from 36k to 15k makes me and everyone else think that your claim was grossly inflated from the start.

I know judges don't even know the price of a pint of milk, but seriously, even they would struggle to believe that 2 bathrooms would cost 36k.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

thanks very much for your post King,  much appreciated.

MCOL was submitted on 05th September so only recently.

you state that if the other party doesn't have any assets, will be left with more expenses to pay, could you elaborate on this?

Regards 

BB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simply you can squeeze a dry sponge as much as you like, but you won't get any water.

In other words, if you obtain a ccj (win in court), and note the IF, you will be faced with enforcing the ccj.

Of course the best route would be hceo (more fees), but if this guy hasn't got any assets they will not be able to collect anything for you.

At that point you would be left with a piece of paper saying he owe you in excess of £35k and court fees to pay.

As his credit rating would be trashed, he could even apply for bankruptcy and write off more debts.

He would then need to wait 6 years before being clear and start again.

At that point even if he became richer than bill gates, you won't be entitled to anything. 

So unless you're sure he's got assets, think very carefully about throwing more money at this.

Especially with an over the top figure which will inevitably raise the judge's eyebrow.

Honestly,  as an experienced builder I tell you that £35k for 2 bathrooms is a massive figure, unless you like gold taps like Saddam Hussein. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just re-read this.

Irwin Mitchell LLP(IM) dropped the case because without a property in his name and/or a stable job, there would be no chance to make him pay the potential ccj.

I suppose you were on a conditional fee agreement with them (no win, no fee).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...