Customer not paying

[e-spark]

I believe that once items are installed they're considered part of the fabric of a building and aren't so easily recoverable.

until uncle gripper turns up.....

 

[nicebutdim]

until uncle gripper turns up.....

There's always that; but I believe you run the risk of prosecution, despite technically owning the goods in question.

 

[Simon47]

It'll be fine. If you've updated to say it's paid in full then the court action wills top

I believe that once items are installed they're considered part of the fabric of a building and aren't so easily recoverable.

With the usual IANAL bit ...

If they won't pay for it, and won't let you recover possession of it, would that then fit a criminal charge of "theft by keeping" ? Possibly 3(1) of the Theft Act 1968 :
3“Appropriates”.
(1)Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to an appropriation, and this includes, where he has come by the property (innocently or not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by keeping or dealing with it as owner.
The actions would appear to fit :
1Basic definition of theft.
(1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly.

Alternatively, fraud under the Fraud Act 2006 :
11Obtaining services dishonestly
(1)A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he obtains services for himself or another—
(a)by a dishonest act, and
(b)in breach of subsection (2).
(2)A person obtains services in breach of this subsection if—
(a)they are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or will be made for or in respect of them,
(b)he obtains them without any payment having been made for or in respect of them or without payment having been made in full, and
(c)when he obtains them, he knows—
(i)that they are being made available on the basis described in paragraph (a), or
(ii)that they might be, but intends that payment will not be made, or will not be made in full.
The tricky bit here being that all someone has to do is say that they intended to pay for them, but now don't have the money because <insert sob story> - and then it's hard to prove that they intend not to pay.

And in both cases, you'd have the uphill task of persuading the police to actually do anything. However, mentioning that failure to pay could result in prosecution for theft and/or fraud is likely to make all but the professional fraudsters take notice.

No doubt there's a sh*t load of case lore on this sort of stuff.

 

[baldelectrician]

It'll be fine. If you've updated to say it's paid in full then the court action wills top

With the usual IANAL bit ...

If they won't pay for it, and won't let you recover possession of it, would that then fit a criminal charge of "theft by keeping" ? Possibly 3(1) of the Theft Act 1968 :
3“Appropriates”.
(1)Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to an appropriation, and this includes, where he has come by the property (innocently or not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by keeping or dealing with it as owner.
The actions would appear to fit :
1Basic definition of theft.
(1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly.

Alternatively, fraud under the Fraud Act 2006 :
11Obtaining services dishonestly
(1)A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he obtains services for himself or another—
(a)by a dishonest act, and
(b)in breach of subsection (2).
(2)A person obtains services in breach of this subsection if—
(a)they are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or will be made for or in respect of them,
(b)he obtains them without any payment having been made for or in respect of them or without payment having been made in full, and
(c)when he obtains them, he knows—
(i)that they are being made available on the basis described in paragraph (a), or
(ii)that they might be, but intends that payment will not be made, or will not be made in full.
The tricky bit here being that all someone has to do is say that they intended to pay for them, but now don't have the money because <insert sob story> - and then it's hard to prove that they intend not to pay.

And in both cases, you'd have the uphill task of persuading the police to actually do anything. However, mentioning that failure to pay could result in prosecution for theft and/or fraud is likely to make all but the professional fraudsters take notice.

No doubt there's a sh*t load of case lore on this sort of stuff.

I have been stung before and have learned my lesson

Now EVERY job (above £50) gets terms and conditions and a quote / estimate together with cooling off terms

This separates out the wheat from the chaff

The ones that were going to try it on don't use you and the small amount who are at and do use you are fluffed as you have them sewn up like a kipper if they try and con you.