Jump to content


Goods & Service Act?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5075 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

My friend paid a plumber nearly £900 in advance by cheque in march to install a new gas boiler , long story short - he never came to do it and was just full of excuses and still hasnt done the work but did cash my cheque at the time . I need a LBA to send him to let him know that he will be taken to court if he dosent return the money or do the work - any suggestions or point me in the direction a template letter??:-) and under which act can he be sued ?

 

thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't really need to quote any legislation, just the facts.

 

"Mr Plumber, on xx/xx/xxxx you agreed to fit a boiler. You were paid £900 in advance by cheque, numbered 0000000 to do this. This cheque you cashed, and the money left my account on xx/xx/xxxx. You have failed to fit the boiler as agreed. I want my money back. I give you 14 days to do this."

 

No reply then do a 7 day letter saying that you are going to take court action.

 

Simple.

 

Trouble is, getting your money back might not be that simple. Establish the identity of the plumber, and whether he is a proprietor or acting under the umbrella of a Ltd Co. Find out if he owns his own property.

 

At the end of the day, you might be sending good money after bad.

On some things I am very knowledgeable, on other things I am stupid. Trouble is, sometimes I discover that the former is the latter or vice versa, and I don't know this until later - maybe even much later. Read anything I write with the above in mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You don't really need to quote any legislation, just the facts.

 

It is the legislation (and case law) that gives rise to the rights the OP is seeking to rely on. It need not be quoted, but with any case where one tries to prove a point, providing the authority for your case goes a long way to show one is not messing about.

 

without doing so, you are basically saying "the case is as such because I say it is, so there.". Quite likely to get chucked in the bin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is the legislation (and case law) that gives rise to the rights the OP is seeking to rely on. It need not be quoted, but with any case where one tries to prove a point, providing the authority for your case goes a long way to show one is not messing about.

 

without doing so, you are basically saying "the case is as such because I say it is, so there.". Quite likely to get chucked in the bin.

 

But in this case you don't need to quote the legislation. It is basic common law of contract.

 

The OP has paid money to another person in return for a specific service to be undertaken. That is the contract. The plumber is in breach of contract (though this can be argued on points of law as time has not yet been made of the essence) as the service paid for has not been undertaken.

 

The OP can make the case more complicated, but there is no need. It is simple, so can be kept that way.

On some things I am very knowledgeable, on other things I am stupid. Trouble is, sometimes I discover that the former is the latter or vice versa, and I don't know this until later - maybe even much later. Read anything I write with the above in mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot for all your input - ive come up with this:

 

 

 

Date: 25th June 2007

Ref : Refund of monies paid.

Dear Mr.xxxxxx

It is now 3 months since I gave you a cheque for £890.00p in good faith for work to be carried out in my home yet despite numerous phone calls in which you promised to get the job done as soon as possible, you have failed to honour our verbal agreement.

Under the supply of goods and services act 1982 I demand that you repay the amount of £890.00 to me. I have now engaged another plumber to do the work as you have broken our verbal contract. I would refer you to :

The supply of goods and services act 1982 – part 2 (14)

Implied term about time for performance

(1) Where, under a contract for the supply of a service by a supplier acting in the course of a business, the time for the service to be carried out is not fixed by the contract, left to be fixed in a manner agreed by the contract or determined by the course of dealing between the parties, there is an implied term that the supplier will carry out the service within a reasonable time.

I have enclosed a copy of my N1 claim form that is completed and I shall submitting this online through MCOL on (date) if by that date I have not received a cheque from you for £890.00p.

......................

What do you think guys?:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good. Straight to the point, relevant legislation quoted and the N1 form included to show you mean business. couldn't do better myself.

 

btw, the bit about what to put in the letter - although rights arise under common contract law, it is enshrined in legislation (which is supercedent to common law).

 

Good luck and let us know how you get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you:) the money on my law books wasnt wasted then! - but what does this mean?:

btw, the bit about what to put in the letter - although rights arise under common contract law, it is enshrined in legislation (which is supercedent to common law). :o I dont understand legal jargon yet - but im hoping to very soon!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have enclosed a copy of my N1 claim form that is completed and I shall submitting this online through MCOL on (date) if by that date I have not received a cheque from you for £890.00p.

 

Great letter, apart from the paragraph above.

 

Using the courts should always be the last resort, and going straight for proceedings could be struck out if you get a stroppy judge.

 

A better end would be a deadline of say 7 or 14 days providing you with either the money or reasons why returning the money is not justifiable.

 

Once the deadline is passed, then its a Letter Before Action including your paragraph above.

On some things I am very knowledgeable, on other things I am stupid. Trouble is, sometimes I discover that the former is the latter or vice versa, and I don't know this until later - maybe even much later. Read anything I write with the above in mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a bit tipsy, so please excuse any inaccuracies....

 

"common law" basically arises from court cases - what judges decide what is right, essentially. These are cases where one person contests the actions of another. In higher courts, such as the High Court or Court of Appeal, the decisions made are quite powerful, and lower court are bound to follow the decisions made.

 

However, Parliament also makes law in the form of statutes - the written law which must be followed. Laws made by parliament take precedence over anything else (besides Europe - that is irrelevant here).

 

As such, quoting legislation is ideal when enforcing your rights, as it is the legislation which gives you those rights in the first place. Court cases do also, as Esio Trot has pointed out, but statutes in this case carry more weight than case law.

 

I hope that makes sense - an extremely brief (to the extreme) introduction to English Law. And an alcoholically induced one at that. I shall re-read in the morning, but I am sure it is correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...