Distinterior
Established Member
Are we allowed to guess, as I may have an inclination as to what it may be....?
Thoughts on billing
- Thread starter bertterbo
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Distinterior
Established Member
Is the plumbing issue anything to do with too low water pressure or flow rate...?
Blackswanwood
Still Learning
If I understand correctly you have asked for the installer to fit the product after they have confirmed it is suitable and they have done so without without caveat. If it doesn’t then work it is an issue for them to put right.
This could involve doing other work so the product works or a full refund and putting things back to where they were at the outset (removal of the product).
Clearly if they have done the work having said (in writing or verbally) that they are unable to confirm the product will be able to do what you want from it would change this.
This could involve doing other work so the product works or a full refund and putting things back to where they were at the outset (removal of the product).
Clearly if they have done the work having said (in writing or verbally) that they are unable to confirm the product will be able to do what you want from it would change this.
Distinterior
Established Member
Asked the plumbing company to specify & SUPPLY and fit,...if I understood the OP correctly......
Did they visit your property in person or was it virtually ( face time call ) or similar . If they physically visted your property then they should have know what to expect and plan the work accordingly . However if it falls into the unforeseen or it was not visible until other parts or fixtures were removed then it’s down to that initial conversation . It’s quite difficult to judge and I think that why other members ( myself included ) are asking What the product is . It’s just to put your situation into perspective . So the product is unique to one company ? My question to the company is why wasn’t these issues identified at the time of the visit or face time call ..
@bertterbo , by you being so secretive about the "product", it is impossible to
give you any usefull advice.
For example, we have no way of knowing if you are talking about a length of
dodgy pipework, an errant thermostacically controlled mixer tap, an ordinary
tap, or a boiler.... ? Need I go on ?
We are not MI5 here, and I'm sure your issue is not a national secret. Just
spit it out, for goodness sake.
give you any usefull advice.
For example, we have no way of knowing if you are talking about a length of
dodgy pipework, an errant thermostacically controlled mixer tap, an ordinary
tap, or a boiler.... ? Need I go on ?
We are not MI5 here, and I'm sure your issue is not a national secret. Just
spit it out, for goodness sake.
niall Y
Established Member
If the OP doesn't wish to say , then that is his prerogative. If I understand the original question correctly - then he was simply asking if he was being unreasonable in thinking that he shouldn't have to pay the extra cost involved.
The simple answer is that if he was given a quote in writing, then , no he shouldn't. If it was a verbal agreement - sight unseen, then he will have to pay for the extra two hours labour. I do not think that this is unreasonable.
A workman is worthy of his hire, and if a job takes a certain amount of time, and a certain amount of materials, then that is what the job actually costs to do. When you employ someone, it shouldn't be that either party wishes gain advantage at the expense of the other. It should not be a game of winners and losers.
It could well be that the reason for the extra cost lies in in the fact that the OP's pluming system isn't configured correctly - something the plumber would only discover during the job.
If there had been a proper contract and it had gone to court, then the court might well have found in favour of the OP . Court judgments might well be legally correct , but they are not always fair. It is up to both parties to act in a reasonable manner before it ever reaches this stage.
I have myself often incurred extra costs when working for customers, because of things that were unforeseen. And, sometimes it is expedient to meet the customer halfway, and share the cost between you.
The simple answer is that if he was given a quote in writing, then , no he shouldn't. If it was a verbal agreement - sight unseen, then he will have to pay for the extra two hours labour. I do not think that this is unreasonable.
A workman is worthy of his hire, and if a job takes a certain amount of time, and a certain amount of materials, then that is what the job actually costs to do. When you employ someone, it shouldn't be that either party wishes gain advantage at the expense of the other. It should not be a game of winners and losers.
It could well be that the reason for the extra cost lies in in the fact that the OP's pluming system isn't configured correctly - something the plumber would only discover during the job.
If there had been a proper contract and it had gone to court, then the court might well have found in favour of the OP . Court judgments might well be legally correct , but they are not always fair. It is up to both parties to act in a reasonable manner before it ever reaches this stage.
I have myself often incurred extra costs when working for customers, because of things that were unforeseen. And, sometimes it is expedient to meet the customer halfway, and share the cost between you.
Last edited:
If you purchase a product and then get a tradesman to fit it then down to you, a good tradesman might tell you that it might not be suitable or is the wrong product but unless it is a safety issue then many will just do the job. The only other reason why they would not fit something is if it physically does not fit where the customer wants it, but this does not always stop them trying. This is probably easier with electrical equipment or products that come under some regulation but without knowing what the product is then it is just an open ended question.
In your case you requested ?????? which was both supplied and fitted by the tradesman and it should have met your expectations, if not then the company doing the work is liable. You did not ask for ?????? and ask them to modify it to suit or have any input into the product purchase so they are at fault and failed to supply and fit ??????? that is fit for purpose.
For large jobs then you really must have a contract that stipulates what the work involves and the labour cost, an estmate of material cost with a provision that the customer pays all material cost as they are increasing and then a clear statement that any extra work required by the customer or subsequently required to undertake the job but not known at the time of contract is an extra cost.
From an electrical perspective, if you have a job but on initial inspection you have reservations about the condition of the existing installation and that any work you do could be comprised by the original installation then you make this clear to the customer, you cannot be held accountable for being open and honest even if you don't get the job. I would undertake a quick test and inspection without any charge just to be able to confidently give a customer a fair quote and minimise any unknown surprises as for me reputation was important.
So can the OP please state what the product is that is causing the issues otherwise it is a never ended guessing game.
In your case you requested ?????? which was both supplied and fitted by the tradesman and it should have met your expectations, if not then the company doing the work is liable. You did not ask for ?????? and ask them to modify it to suit or have any input into the product purchase so they are at fault and failed to supply and fit ??????? that is fit for purpose.
For large jobs then you really must have a contract that stipulates what the work involves and the labour cost, an estmate of material cost with a provision that the customer pays all material cost as they are increasing and then a clear statement that any extra work required by the customer or subsequently required to undertake the job but not known at the time of contract is an extra cost.
From an electrical perspective, if you have a job but on initial inspection you have reservations about the condition of the existing installation and that any work you do could be comprised by the original installation then you make this clear to the customer, you cannot be held accountable for being open and honest even if you don't get the job. I would undertake a quick test and inspection without any charge just to be able to confidently give a customer a fair quote and minimise any unknown surprises as for me reputation was important.
So can the OP please state what the product is that is causing the issues otherwise it is a never ended guessing game.
I recently quoted to repair a close coupled w/c - new waste connection and repipe the basin waste that was connected to the pan connector . Got to the job and added into the mix was - oh and the toilet is not flushing correctly - I’ve not quoted to repair the flush I told him as that is another job completely different to what I’ve come to do , so added on the cost of extra parts and labour and off I went -. Refitted pan and all is well . Stripped the cistern from said Wc to find a crack in the Wc under the cistern - game over - when I told the customer he was not happy until I reminded him he never mentioned the flush issue and given the age of the Wc / cistern I’d of advised a complete new one . So I met the customer half way to show good will on my part and agreed to fit a new w/c + cistern at a slightly reduced rate - again as a goodwill gesture . All agreed and fitted next day . I feel that I didn’t have to do this but it’s better to come to an agreement than fall out .. and of course he’s got several properties and will be back as his previous plumber took his money and didn’t come back ..
Similar threads
