Roofer did shoddy work and has now filed court claim against me

[Kinger122]

When reading up on insurance backed guarantees I found the following:

 

 

If you have issues with the installation work that would normally be resolved under the terms of the installer’s written guarantee, you can claim with GGFi if the installer has ceased to trade due to one of the following reasons:

 

• Liquidation

• Administration

• Bankruptcy

• Receivership

• The death of ALL principal directors of the businesses estates have been declared bankrupt

 

In keeping with the industry, GGFi insurance policies do not cover instances whereby the installer has retired or simply dissolves the business.

 

Important – Credit-Cards – If you originally paid any part of your installation with a credit-card then it will not be possible for GGFi to process a claim. In accordance with the Consumer Credit Act, the GGFi insurance policy is superseded by the credit-card insurance policy. In such circumstances, you will need to contact your credit-card provider to discuss your claim.

 

 

I was wondering would it be a good idea to pay via credit card and then use the consumer credit act to claim for the money if the roof continues to leak?

[caro]

It's always a good idea to pay for anything over £100 by credit card as you're then covered by section 75 of the CCA if there's a problem.

[Kinger122]

It's always a good idea to pay for anything over £100 by credit card as you're then covered by section 75 of the CCA if there's a problem.

 

Thanks. so how much comeback would I have and what could I claim for?

 

 

As materials are not fitted to manufacturer spec and there is a breach of contract am I still covered?

[caro]

Thanks. so how much comeback would I have and what could I claim for?

 

 

As materials are not fitted to manufacturer spec and there is a breach of contract am I still covered?

 

Up to £30k. There's a link to section 75 here. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/75

[caro]

Actually reading it, it does say an agreement not secured on land, although it doesn't say buildings. You might need to investigate that further.

[f16]

As I understand it, Kinger is paying for Labour and Materials.

So it should be covered

[Kinger122]

As I understand it, Kinger is paying for Labour and Materials.

So it should be covered

 

 

 

I think I'm covered. Any other feedback would be appreciated. I think this part is applicable to this case.

 

 

"

Section 75 only helps the consumer where there has been either a breach of contract or a misrepresentation by the supplier of the goods and services. These are legal terms. But for the purpose of section 75 and put very simply:

 

• A breach of contract is where the supplier fails to do what the contract says it must, either expressly or by implication.
  For example, there is a breach of contract where goods that have been paid for are not supplied at all, or are not up to standard.
  

 

• A misrepresentation is an incorrect statement of fact that causes the consumer to go ahead with the contract.
  For example, there is misrepresentation if the supplier persuades a consumer to buy an expensive piece of software - by telling him wrongly that it will be compatible with his existing PC operating system.
  

[f16]

"Get ya buckets out"

Heavy rain all weekend and into the early part of next week !!!!!

Just to put a smile on your face. :-D

 

Good work to day. .... A lot of "ground covered" and some more possible options.

See what the "Legal Crew" think.

F16

[f16]

Another question for the "Legal Crew"

 

Can Kinger ask Mr Roofer to put in writing what works were carried out to repair the roof ??

 

Good luck with your "Squad" of "roofers" at 8.30 tomorrow Kinger.

 

I bet they send "The Chuckle Brothers"

[Kinger122]

Another question for the "Legal Crew"

 

Can Kinger ask Mr Roofer to put in writing what works were carried out to repair the roof ??

 

Good luck with your "Squad" of "roofers" at 8.30 tomorrow Kinger.

 

I bet they send "The Chuckle Brothers"

 

Another update. The roofers attended this morning and did not know what work needed to be carried out. They asked me and I told them I was not sure. The roofer climbed on the roof anf inspected the velux windows. The roofer then announced that the flashings were "bone dry" and left shortly afterwards.

 

Where do I stand legally? Can I go back to the court now as they have not rectified any of the issues. Not even the ones that were mentioned in court, such as the exposed wooden battens and damaged flashings.

[f16]

Kinger

 

I gather the roofer is now "suggesting" the leak is coming from the first floor flat roof,

Passing down the "cavity" on to the ground floor new roof under the tiles and on to the tilers felt,

Traveling sideways 4 to 6 M (not down the 13.5 degree pitch) SIDEWAYS

To affect all 3 Veluxes.

 

Proper clever rain you've got then !!!!

That's the Biggest load of tosh ever.

 

So I was right.... They sent "The Chuckle Brothers".

 

There are so many legal Questions as to the next move.

 

1. If you use a credit card will S75 protect you ?

2. Should you go back to Court now ? (roofer not corrected leaks)

3. Should you pay for "Independent building inspectors report ?

4. Will the report be accepted by the court on this case ? OR do you take the roofer to Court on a new case ?

[f16]

Kinger

 

I gather the roofer is now "suggesting" the leak is coming from the first floor flat roof,

Passing down the "cavity" on to the ground floor new roof under the tiles and on to the tilers felt,

Traveling sideways 4 to 6 M (not down the 13.5 degree pitch) SIDEWAYS

To affect all 3 Veluxes.

 

Proper clever rain you've got then !!!!

That's the Biggest load of tosh ever.

 

So I was right.... They sent "The Chuckle Brothers".

 

I will add further to that:

 

"IF" the "roofer" (In your dreams mate) has got it right.

Then you would have "Water damage and mold" on the walls of the first floor bedroom

below the flat roof.

 

You may eventually end up with mushrooms growing out of the walls !!!! ....

... Mushrooms live in a dark place and they are fed on Bull$hit.

Just the sort he is "feeding you"

[f16]

Kinger,

 

If your mans right "(The roofer)"

 

Then seriously. ......

 

It's time I hung up my Hi vis. jacket, hardhat and "Kicked my boots off". ....

And I started "talking to the trees"

 

I'm "Elvis Presley" If he has got this right !!!!

[Mike_hawk]

Kinger

 

Not entirely sure how the roofer has reached this conclusion or how that would sit with the order. Has it communicated its thoughts to you in writing?

 

I suppose your next logical step [assuming you are dissatisfied with its explanation] is to apply to vary the order to allow instruction of a SJE. Whether that would be granted is another matter entirely

[Kinger122]

Kinger

 

Not entirely sure how the roofer has reached this conclusion or how that would sit with the order. Has it communicated its thoughts to you in writing?

 

I suppose your next logical step [assuming you are dissatisfied with its explanation] is to apply to vary the order to allow instruction of a SJE. Whether that would be granted is another matter entirely

 

 

 

There has still been no contact made from the roofer. Do I sent them an email asking them why they have not contacted me or shall I just wait? The roofer did not explicitly state that the leak was due to my existing house, but he had mentioned in the past due to the fact that my separate flat roof is due for replacement.

 

 

If I were to go down the route of contacting the court, would I mention the expert witness, or just inform the court that the other party has not complied with the order?

 

 

I have also contacted Velux today, as the middle electrical window is groaning and creaking badly. It had been a bit jerky when opening and closing initially. They have agreed to send someone out to inspect with regards to the warranty on the window. I am hoping that any report or response they subsequently provide may help if the issue with the window is down to workmanship rather than a warrantable issue.

[Mike_hawk]

I think I'd have to email and ask what its intentions are first. Instructing SJE, would have to be on application to carry any weight. You could write to the court per the order but that would leave the matter open for the DJ to dispose of by whatever remedy s/he sees fit.

[Kinger122]

I think I'd have to email and ask what its intentions are first. Instructing SJE, would have to be on application to carry any weight. You could write to the court per the order but that would leave the matter open for the DJ to dispose of by whatever remedy s/he sees fit.

 

Hi Mike, Would I be able to claim on section 75 if I paid via credit card if the judge rules in favour of the roofer? I have done some research and I can't find anything to state that I wouldn't be covered.

[Mike_hawk]

Don't think I'd want to try, you may be successful but the order would still be effective if the other side chose to proceed to judgment. Payment would imply the order had been complied with.

[Kinger122]

I think you misunderstood what I meant. I mean if it goes back to court and I have to end up paying the roofer despite the pitch not being rectified and building control issuing a certificate

[Mike_hawk]

I understood the question but you were asking whether you could use s.75 as a shield and I don't believe it is possible, the other side would have to be in breach of agreement...... in this instance in breach of a court order or judgment

[Kinger122]

I understood the question but you were asking whether you could use s.75 as a shield and I don't believe it is possible, the other side would have to be in breach of agreement...... in this instance in breach of a court order or judgment

 

my mistake. So the court order would supersede the initial contract with the roofer, even if the roof was still leaking after full payment was made?

[Mike_hawk]

my mistake. So the court order would supersede the initial contract with the roofer, even if the roof was still leaking after full payment was made?

 

Yup, that would be my understanding........ much the same as the myriad of regulated cases on here.

[f16]

I understood the question but you were asking whether you could use s.75 as a shield and I don't believe it is possible, the other side would have to be in breach of agreement...... in this instance in breach of a court order or judgment

 

Correct me if I'm wrong. (I don't do legal. ... So if I come across as a "Bone head" sorry !!! )

 

At the moment the roof is still leaking.

So the roofer has not "complied" with the Court order on 3 counts.

1. The roof is not repaired.

2. Building control can not sign the roof off until it stops leaking. (is repaired)

3. Insurance certificate can not be issued due to the above 2 points.

 

Lets "assume" that the roof was repaired and all 3 above were complied with.

 

Would S75 cover Kinger on the fact that materials are not fitted to manufactures spec ???

[Kinger122]

Correct me if I'm wrong. (I don't do legal. ... So if I come across as a "Bone head" sorry !!! )

 

At the moment the roof is still leaking.

So the roofer has not "complied" with the Court order on 3 counts.

1. The roof is not repaired.

2. Building control can not sign the roof off until it stops leaking. (is repaired)

3. Insurance certificate can not be issued due to the above 2 points.

 

Lets "assume" that the roof was repaired and all 3 above were complied with.

 

Would S75 cover Kinger on the fact that materials are not fitted to manufactures spec ???

 

I cant understand how the court order affects the credit card. Whether I paid in the beginning ot paid after a judge instructed surely is irrelevant? Im thinking this as section 75 covers you due to poor workmanship/faulty goods. The instruction to pay by a court would surely be separate and how would things be any different had I just paid up in the beginning to then have problems with the roof after?

[caro]

If a court says that the work is ok, you could not claim under section 75 that it wasn't. Doesn't matter if the court order is wrong, that is what would count above your opinion (even if your opinion is correct). You would need the court to agree with you and it would be up to the court to decide what should or shouldn't be paid. You can't use one law, and if you don't like the outcome of that, use another to get your own way. It doesn't work like that. You'd need the court to decide differently.