I could be wrong posting here but i need help

[imjustanonymous]

Dear All,

Newbie here, not sure if this forum is for those who specifically electricians only or if general people can join for help and advice, so im taking a shot here, if this is the wrong website then please let me know and ill just copy and paste it there or wherever is appropriate

I need help as im in a dispute with someone who i hired to fit an electrical shower. Me and my family live in a housing association house who were East Homes but now are L&Q. In 2016 i started looking for a trader to help fit this shower for me, through word of mouth i came across someone who was hired by a family friend to do some painting job even though he says hes like an all rounder person. He came to view the house and where we wanted the shower and advised etc He said he would take on the job, i wasnt around home at the time due to university and my mum was when the actual works were being done, he did this around Mid 2016. He charged about £400, no proper contract or receipt given. He also had brought in another electrician to actually certify the work and to make it go live, have a copy of this certificate also. Managed to find out this electrician was with the NIC and Napit but no longer is since 2015

The work wasnt good, the conduit pipings he fitted started to fall off from the walls and tape also, he did this around the front main door and i kept having to fix them, he made some holes which werent correct and never repaired them, he left a breaker box not screwed down properly either, contacted him to try and fix this and he said he would come round but never came, after many calls to him and no answer, i gave up and did my diy of the conduit pipes but not the breaker box.

Fast forward to late 2018, L&Q came for a random inspection and basically saw the work and complained for health and safety and complained about the holes etc and basicaly disconnected the shower, we have been out of the shower since around November of last year. The L&Q electrician came and saw this and then went to the person who i hired, to his house left him a note about his work and there was some words between the two exchanged. The person i hired came round instantly said that his work is immaculate and nothings wrong with it. We said that we he needs to fix what the landlord said and he said he would after christmas, now its 2019 and April is almost ending and still nothing.

He came around in the end of February and said that he will charge more for having the conduits fixed, L&Q said he needed to have put metal brackets which he didnt and some exposed wire and to correct the amp also. He said all this costs extra money, i said surely not because he shouldve known this. He then said to me that all this about metal brackets on conduit pipes has only come in the new regulation of 2019 and when he did the work in 2016 it didnt matter he also gave an example of Grenfell to me. He also said id have to pay another electrician to get this certified

What i need to know is this:

Is he right about the regulation for 2019 where all conduit pipes need to have brackets which are near fire exit routes?

Do i have to pay more? I mean shouldnt have offer something

Where can i go to report him and get this work done because isnt listening to me and is adamant that he will only do more work for more money

I can provide pictures of the job but im not sure if this could be the right website, if this is then let me know please and i will because its been so long to get this sorted out, im busy with university and my mums busy with hospital runs with my sister

Any advice or information will be appreciated

Thanks

 

[Pete999]

An old saying I will always remember "If you can p--- you can paint"

I know that's a fact cus I made a right mess of our Kitchen before I had my Prostate Op.

 

[Intoelectrics]

I do admit its my fault for hiring him but it was through referrals so i thought i could trust them also

Who could i go to about taking this to court or reporting him?

I'm not qualified or experienced enough to offer any sort of legal advice. My suggestion would be to speak to citizens advice and/or trading standards. From what you say the landlord's own contractor has looked at the job and condemned it. There might be some merit in getting in a qualified spark to do an independent report. The cost of this maybe recoverable if you did manage to win a court order. But it might be that you end up stumping up to rectify this at your own cost. Like I said I couldn't advise you on this.

Either way, if you want the shower to be safe & operational then its got to be rectified & certified to a standard in accordance with the current regulations.

 

[Pete999]

An old saying I will always remember "If you can p--- you can paint"

I know that's a fact cus I made a right mess of our Kitchen before I had my Prostate Op.

 

[Intoelectrics]

Duplicate post!

 

[John Preston]

did he tie his horse up outside

Erm... don't bring the horse into it!

 

[Intoelectrics]

Erm... don't bring the horse into it!

Whats with the long face?

 

[Spoon]

Please gentlemen.... this type of joviality is only allowed on Fridays... We can't be happy too much....

 

[telectrix]

why not?

 

[davesparks]

An old saying I will always remember "If you can p--- you can paint"

And if you can urinate you can decorate.

 

[45140]

I am sorry and I do not wish to seem argumentative but again I must take issue with some points in your response.

Actually .....you've mostly written the same advice differently expecting a different outcome..

Not correct. Your advice is not correct and mine is materially different in certain areas.

His LLs electrician has disconnected the installation and condemned it, so it is not me advising the OP to claim the cowboy is incompetence the OP has received professional advice stating it as fact, hence why i suggested attaching the LLs assessment..

In your earlier post you reply state "..Contractually, and very begrudgingly, I'd offer him the opportunity to hire someone competent to do the work stating in the letter your belief he is not competent, attach your list of faults from your LLs assessor."
I don't believe the landlord has ever stated in writing that the installer was incompetent, (and I would lay £1 to a penny that neither the landlord nor anyone inspecting that installation will state in writing that the installer was incompetent), yet you have told the OP to make that allegation. The competence of the installer is for now a matter for conjecture, until he has been demonstrably proven to be incompetent by a person whose judgement would be acceptable to a Court. However what should not be pursued are allegations of competence. The facts of the quality of the work speak for themselves. Let others form their own judgements as to whether poor installation quality also demonstrates incompetence.

Actually you don't, you've mostly written the same advice differently expecting a different outcome..

No I have not, I have given sound advice based on my training and experience as a Contracts Manager with legal training. This is materially different to yours in a number of areas.

Sadly you wont see a penny back from him...

...in your opinion, we'll see though.

Yes we will, as you have pre-judged the decision of the Court, and your comment has already caused the OP to doubt the wisdom of proceeding

In my opinion, without a written contract or other sound proof a contract has been entered into and between whom then there is precious little for MCOL to settle.

Yet you also state "......Contractually, and very begrudgingly...."
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable. How often do YOU insist on a proper written and signed Contract before undertaking work ?

 

[GBDamo]

I am sorry and I do not wish to seem argumentative but again I must take issue with some points in your response.

Not correct. Your advice is not correct and mine is materially different in certain areas.
In your earlier post you reply state "..Contractually, and very begrudgingly, I'd offer him the opportunity to hire someone competent to do the work stating in the letter your belief he is not competent, attach your list of faults from your LLs assessor."
I don't believe the landlord has ever stated in writing that the installer was incompetent, (and I would lay £1 to a penny that neither the landlord nor anyone inspecting that installation will state in writing that the installer was incompetent), yet you have told the OP to make that allegation. The competence of the installer is for now a matter for conjecture, until he has been demonstrably proven to be incompetent by a person whose judgement would be acceptable to a Court. However what should not be pursued are allegations of competence. The facts of the quality of the work speak for themselves. Let others form their own judgements as to whether poor installation quality also demonstrates incompetence.
No I have not, I have given sound advice based on my training and experience as a Contracts Manager with legal training. This is materially different to yours in a number of areas.

Yes we will, as you have pre-judged the decision of the Court, and your comment has already caused the OP to doubt the wisdom of proceeding
Yet you also state "......Contractually, and very begrudgingly...."
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable. How often do YOU insist on a proper written and signed Contract before undertaking work ?

Firstly, please don't selectively quote what I have written to prove your point.

I know a contract can be written, oral or implied hence;-

In my opinion, without a written contract or other sound proof a contract has been entered into and between whom then there is precious little for MCOL to settle.

The issue the OP has is;-

He has entered into a contract with the installer, however agreed.

The installer completed his work but has had his work condemned by a third party, one who was not part of the initial contract.

This third party has deprived the OP of goods or services he paid for.

This has been done by the third party disconnecting the installation.

So who is claiming off of whom and for what?

Does the Tenancy Agreement, a contract entered into between the Tenant and the Landlord, have supremacy over the contract entered into between the Tenant and the Installer?

Does the contract entered into between the Tenant and Landlord allow for the actions taken by the Landlord or his Agent?

If not the OP is claiming off his Landlord

Does the Landlord or his Agent have sufficient expertise to deprive the Tenant of his paid for gods or services? Reasonableness test.

If not the OP is claiming off his Landlord however, this becomes a very messy argument.

Assuming the Landlord has all his ducks in a row and has the contractual right and the expertise, to deprive the OP of his goods or services, another question arises.

Who owns this installation?

Is it the landlord?

Is it the Tenant?

Is it the installer?

This brings us back to the Tenancy Agreement (TA).

If the TA stipulates that all alterations or additions to the fabric of the building become the property of the Landlord, which seems to be implied by the Landlord or his Agents actions, then the OP, although having paid for the work, does not have ownership and therefore has no case in court.

So the OP needs to determine if he has ownership.

If he does, then the LL had no right to deprive him of his goods or services.

He should serve the LL

If he doesn't he has no case.


And, as you rightly point out I an no lawyer yet can see the mess this is.

This is by no means clear cut. I am not prejudging the outcome, unlike yourself, but highlighting the complexity of it.

If you think I am making it unnecessarily complex just think what a real lawyer will do with it.

 

[45140]

GB Damo
I note your response and the underlying tone, and the fact you have clearly been busy Googling, albeit extracting and quoting a whole series of points which are completely irrelevant to the matter in hand, and only contribute to muddying the water.
I have passed comment in this thread based on my work experience as a former Contract Manager, with legal training in that area, and with experience of managing major Contracts, and contractual disputes, including those which resulted in Court Actions. I also have experience of recoveries through the small claims Court and on-line claims process.
You state your occupation to be a domestic installer in your profile, so I take this to be your area of expertise. Whilst you may have some knowledge/experience of Contract Law, you gave some very poor advice in an earlier post that, in my opinion, would have damaged the OPs chances of recovery and indeed would potentially have left them exposed to a claim for defamation. I find that element very telling in respect of your exposure to legal claims work.

In the circumstances I cannot see how any continuing debate with you will add value, and for the benefit of all I suggest we consider the exchange between us closed.

 

[GBDamo]

GB Damo
I note your response and the underlying tone, and the fact you have clearly been busy Googling, albeit extracting and quoting a whole series of points which are completely irrelevant to the matter in hand, and only contribute to muddying the water.

Ok, my tone is a little wanting mea culpa, got my "some bloke on the internet says i'm wrong" head on.

However I do think you have misrepresented what I have said and formed a argument around that misrepresentation, not intentionally but through
misunderstanding.

I'm flattered you think I've been Googling but all I contributed here is from personal experience with Employment Tribunals and various Magistrates Court appearances, seven in total, all wins and all self represented, or representing others.

In a previous life I was trained in Employment Law and learnt a few valuable lessons being taken to the cleaners on behalf of my employer. Every time was procedure and, what you call muddying the waters, is what wins cases.

I have passed comment in this thread based on my work experience as a former Contract Manager, with legal training in that area, and with experience of managing major Contracts, and contractual disputes, including those which resulted in Court Actions. I also have experience of recoveries through the small claims Court and on-line claims process.

I don't doubt any of the above for a minute.

You state your occupation to be a domestic installer in your profile, so I take this to be your area of expertise. Whilst you may have some knowledge/experience of Contract Law,

My current occupation is a little misleading I'll admit.

you gave some very poor advice in an earlier post that, in my opinion, would have damaged the OPs chances of recovery and indeed would potentially have left them exposed to a claim for defamation. I find that element very telling in respect of your exposure to legal claims work.

This is the crux, this is where I think we differ,

Contractually, and very begrudgingly, I'd offer him the opportunity to hire someone competent to do the work stating in the letter your belief he is not competent, attach your list of faults from your LLs assessor."[\quote]

To break it down;-

The OP has to allow the installer the opportunity to make good, without doing so he cannot bring a case before MCOL.

The OP is also contractually obliged by his Tenancy Agreement to his landlord to make sure the works are done to the Landlord or his agents standard.

As the assessment of the works required is already in writing it should be appended to the letter to the initial installer.

The "your" in bold above I think is the contentious bit and should be "your Landlords"

In the circumstances I cannot see how any continuing debate with you will add value, and for the benefit of all I suggest we consider the exchange between us closed.

Fair play, have a goob bank holiday weekend.

 

[freddo]

I'm impressed that the 20A DP switch hasn't melted yet. I hope there isn't 2.5mm from there back to the CU!

 

[45140]

GB Damo
OK thank you for the courteous reply. Lets leave the water behind the bridge.

To explain my reasoning on the competence issue.

If I were the OP I would want to go for the simplest solution through the small claims court with the most basic of claim details, e.g. "I am owed for what needed to be paid to make the work good". I still believe that approach will slide through as there is a high chance that matey boy will do what most do, which is to ignore the various letters, and ultimately the Court papers. Job then is a good one, case in OP favour all to do then is pass to the High Court for enforcement as they will seize goods to the value of, and recover the High Court charge.

If matey boy does seek legal advice I am sure he will be told to offer to come to an arrangement and settle as a first step.

If however we throw in an accusation of incompetence, in my opinion that is likely to do two things. In the Court it will raise a number of questions that the OP really does not want asked because in effect he has engaged what can only be described as a handyman to undertake work that has very serious safety implications. That will not play well with a judge, who could go down the Caveat Emptor route if he is having a bad day.

Matey boy may well also take exception and decide to fight, and were he to do this then it is likely that he may turn it back onto the OP, e.g. "...no I was not competent which is why I got someone in to test, but OP knew that because he wanted a cheap job and therefore should share a portion of the cost for using a non-trained person...... I did my best but I am not an electrician...did not know about the trunking....", etc, etc. The other issue is that Matey Boy could whizz down the DI route, and then say well here is proof I to demonstrate I am competent I have done this sort of work for years and my here is my DI Certificate. Due to family, etc, worries I was obviously having a bad day, etc, etc, ........ and by the way Mr OP my solicitor will be in touch regarding defamatory posts on a website forum. The OP in any case would never be able to get anyone from the landlord's side to put anything in writing to say matey boy is incompetent - they would be bloody fools to do so - leaving OP to explain the basis on which HE is competent to judge competence and good night Vienna all that needs to be done is to decide the number of zeros on matey boys cheque.

I think you appreciate where I am coming from here, now.

Respect to you for having fought employment cases, far too many awful employers out there these days giving two fingers to the law and treating workers like pooh.

Have a good remaining Easter, hope the weather keeps up.