customer dispute - help

[lcfc sheff]

hi, I'll try simplify this the best I can

 

we sold flooring to a customer and recommended a fitter who we'd recommend to all, we however don't recommend him anymore.

 

the flooring after 3 years begins to have faults. again we (the shop) didn't fit it but the recommended fitter we have recommended for many jobs.

 

We priced the work but he ultimately got paid separately and we're not sure if he was paid by cash/card etc or how much (he carried out jobs like fitting the skirting which isn't something we priced). what I want to work out is through the eyes of the law are we responsible for the work of himself or would it be seen as himself? (again he isnt employed by our company).

 

 

we have rang and emails citizens advice etc and it seems to key element of this is he's been paid directly by the customer, we think in cash; which means we aren't liable, is this correct? I can't find anything about this scenario on the internet.

Edited 2 September by lcfc sheff

[Tommy G]

What paperwork have you got? I’m not legal expert but have dealt with litigation and disputes plenty of times so know my way round it. 
 

Presume at this stage you haven’t admitted any kind of liability - I’d advise to keep any comms between you in writing, emails etc. 

 

The cost of the job will ultimately be the deciding factor for the customer to take anything further 

[lcfc sheff]

14 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

What paperwork have you got? I’m not legal expert but have dealt with litigation and disputes plenty of times so know my way round it. 
 

Presume at this stage you haven’t admitted any kind of liability - I’d advise to keep any comms between you in writing, emails etc. 

 

The cost of the job will ultimately be the deciding factor for the customer to take anything further 

there is quotes for the work that had been undertook. but ultimately saying to pay the fitter directly for his fitting and not us. problem is we don't know what he was or how he was paid as he carried out other work they agreed between themselves (fitting the skirting) therefore I think means they made a contract between themselves?

 

we advised it could be a mix between product and fitting fault, but never have took liability. everything is well documented. including the customer being thrilled with our the service (the shop that has supplied the product) and were "over the moon" with the recommended fitters work.

 

the cost is reasonably high, we have had 3 different bodies including the citizens advice etc who have said she should be dealing with the fitter and not us but I just wanted to make sure I'm not missing a trick here as we've been threatened with court. I'm not sure if shes bluffing or has something up her sleeve.

 

sorry I understand this may be hard to understand over messages!

 

 

[lcfc sheff]

 we offered to sort out the subfloor issues (free labour and pay for materials), replace the product (at cost) which is a mix of faulty and installation error and fit the new product for free. but she has ultimately rejected it. 

 

we have been advised that is in fact too generous and shouldn't have offered anything at all but its hard to trust that from people and ulimately the threat of court is scary.

Edited 2 September by lcfc sheff

[MPH]

Keep a record of her rejection. However if it goes to court, there’s a chance that the judge will fall back to your offer.. the issue then is court costs..

[Jon the Hat]

If you have a contract for supply only the onus would be on her to prove product fault.  Unlikely you would be found responsible for the fitters work.

 

You may not have helped yourself with the offer of remediation, but I would think you could argue in court if necessary that this was a decision made for customer relations and not based on legal liability.

 

Out of interest why did you drop the fitter?

[Raj]

Is the fault due to workmanship or the flooring?

If itbtge later then your responsible.

If it's the work, it's the fitter.

Also after 3 years its upto the Customer to proceed the fault under consumer law

[Crinklyfox]

I'm no expert on contract law but I have recently had LVT flooring fitted together with carpets.  I had quotes which stated that the fitter was to be paid separately.

 

I had one contract, which was with the provider of the LVT and carpets.  When we had problems with the LVT fitter my recourse was to approach the shop with which I'd signed a contract.  I had no direct influence over the LVT fitter as he was appointed by the shop, not myself.  So far as I was concerned the company with which I had contracted for the work were responsible for all of it.  If I had contracted separately with the fitter it would have been another matter.

 

In my case the matter was resolved amicably without recourse to law but I wouldn't use that fitter again.

[Daggers]

9 hours ago, lcfc sheff said:

hi, I'll try simplify this the best I can

 

we sold flooring to a customer and recommended a fitter who we'd recommend to all, we however don't recommend him anymore.

 

the flooring after 3 years begins to have faults. again we (the shop) didn't fit it but the recommended fitter we have recommended for many jobs.

 

We priced the work but he ultimately got paid separately and we're not sure if he was paid by cash/card etc or how much (he carried out jobs like fitting the skirting which isn't something we priced). what I want to work out is through the eyes of the law are we responsible for the work of himself or would it be seen as himself? (again he isnt employed by our company).

 

 

we have rang and emails citizens advice etc and it seems to key element of this is he's been paid directly by the customer, we think in cash; which means we aren't liable, is this correct? I can't find anything about this scenario on the internet.

Thus far, you’ve had replies from two accountants, a whatever MPH is, and a Raj - and you need advice from someone who specialises in consumer law and agency. Now, if I were you, I’d go see someone who specialises in consumer law and agency if you’re remotely bothered about winning in court.

[lcfc sheff]

8 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

If you have a contract for supply only the onus would be on her to prove product fault.  Unlikely you would be found responsible for the fitters work.

 

You may not have helped yourself with the offer of remediation, but I would think you could argue in court if necessary that this was a decision made for customer relations and not based on legal liability.

 

Out of interest why did you drop the fitter?

Multiple problems. He ended up not wanting to work due to a problem with his son he had working for him and not paying particularly well. (Thus their relationship broke down eventually) 

[lcfc sheff]

4 hours ago, Raj said:

Is the fault due to workmanship or the flooring?

If itbtge later then your responsible.

If it's the work, it's the fitter.

Also after 3 years its upto the Customer to proceed the fault under consumer law

It’s a mixture of both. But technically if the floor is at fault the company we buy it from would be responsible but if they inspect the floor they have told us they will likely just say it’s a fitting fault 

[lcfc sheff]

4 hours ago, Raj said:

Is the fault due to workmanship or the flooring?

If itbtge later then your responsible.

If it's the work, it's the fitter.

Also after 3 years its upto the Customer to proceed the fault under consumer law

It’s been 4 years since. 

[Raj]

2 minutes ago, lcfc sheff said:

It’s been 4 years since. 

Surely if the workmanship was THAT bad the Customer would have complained within a reasonable period of time?

Sounds like the Customer is trying it on here?

 

How long would you expect an issue to be highlighted from a Customer for "bad workmanship" in previous justified issues? $ years seems alot.

 

I wouldn't complain about a carpet being fitted incorrectly after a 4 year period?

[lcfc sheff]

3 hours ago, Crinklyfox said:

I'm no expert on contract law but I have recently had LVT flooring fitted together with carpets.  I had quotes which stated that the fitter was to be paid separately.

 

I had one contract, which was with the provider of the LVT and carpets.  When we had problems with the LVT fitter my recourse was to approach the shop with which I'd signed a contract.  I had no direct influence over the LVT fitter as he was appointed by the shop, not myself.  So far as I was concerned the company with which I had contracted for the work were responsible for all of it.  If I had contracted separately with the fitter it would have been another matter.

 

In my case the matter was resolved amicably without recourse to law but I wouldn't use that fitter again.

We obviously did try to come to a middle ground. We recommend the fitter but in no way do we say they must use him. We didnt pay him any sort of money for his services it always came from the customer. 
 

we appreciate if a problem occurs it’s us that recommended them but we can’t be responsible for someone’s work when we weren’t ultimately there, were told repeatedly how good the work was initially four years ago, they paid for and arranged separate work such as the skirting (thus entering a contract between them).

 

was the fitter an employ of the shop or separate? 

[lcfc sheff]

2 minutes ago, Raj said:

Surely if the workmanship was THAT bad the Customer would have complained within a reasonable period of time?

Sounds like the Customer is trying it on here?

 

How long would you expect an issue to be highlighted from a Customer for "bad workmanship" in previous justified issues? $ years seems alot.

 

I wouldn't complain about a carpet being fitted incorrectly after a 4 year period?

I believe the law is actually 5 years but I may be interpreting it wrong. 
 

It’s a rare scenario. If we have to say re-stretch a carpet even if it’s been down 10 years we will do it out of good will. 
 

the problem is. A fitter we gave a price for to do the job hasn’t done it correctly, subfloor prep incorrect, thought leading to product failure. They obviously have had other side things done between them as well and obviously paid him separately. We advised them to obviously take it up with him but they are insistent on attacking us 

[Crinklyfox]

2 minutes ago, lcfc sheff said:

We obviously did try to come to a middle ground. We recommend the fitter but in no way do we say they must use him. We didnt pay him any sort of money for his services it always came from the customer. 
 

we appreciate if a problem occurs it’s us that recommended them but we can’t be responsible for someone’s work when we weren’t ultimately there, were told repeatedly how good the work was initially four years ago, they paid for and arranged separate work such as the skirting (thus entering a contract between them).

 

was the fitter an employ of the shop or separate? 

The fitter was self-employed.

 

When I worked in manufacturing we occasionally used subcontractors, we as a company were responsible for the contracted work, no matter if it was carried out by a direct employee or a subcontractor.  The key was the contract which covered the scope of work and the payment requirements.

[lcfc sheff]

Ultimately I think we’ve got more than enough to get us out this scenario but I really suppose just wanted to know if anyone has gone through anything similar?

[lcfc sheff]

Just now, Crinklyfox said:

The fitter was self-employed.

 

When I worked in manufacturing we occasionally used subcontractors, we as a company were responsible for the contracted work, no matter if it was carried out by a direct employee or a subcontractor.  The key was the contract which covered the scope of work and the payment requirements.

Right but did you yourselves pay the subcontractors or did the customer? 

[Crinklyfox]

1 minute ago, lcfc sheff said:

Right but did you yourselves pay the subcontractors or did the customer? 

We paid the subcontractors.  The customer paid us.

[glenny_fox]

the obligatory AI response -

 

Key Points to Consider:

1. Contractual Relationship:

   • Since the fitter was paid directly by the customer and wasn't employed by your company, the contractual relationship appears to be between the customer and the fitter. This generally means the fitter, not your company, would be liable for any issues with the installation.

2. Recommendations and Liability:

   • However, recommending a fitter can create an implied warranty or expectation of quality. If a customer can prove that they relied on your recommendation and the work was substandard, there might be some liability, especially if the recommendation was made in a way that suggested an endorsement or guarantee of quality.

3. Time Factor:

   • The fact that the issues arose after three years could be relevant. Many warranties or guarantees on workmanship might not extend that long, and it might be harder for the customer to claim that the fault lies with the original installation rather than wear and tear.

4. Evidence of Payment:

   • If the fitter was paid directly by the customer (especially in cash), and there's no clear documentation linking your business to the transaction, this strengthens your position that the liability is with the fitter, not your company.

Potential Legal Standpoint:

• Your Liability: Given that the fitter was paid directly and not employed by your company, it's likely that your liability is limited. The direct payment suggests that the customer engaged the fitter independently.

• Your Duty of Care: You might still have a duty of care in recommending a fitter, but this is usually limited unless there was negligence in the recommendation, such as recommending someone you knew was unqualified or had a history of poor workmanship.

[lcfc sheff]

21 minutes ago, glenny_fox said:

the obligatory AI response -

 

Key Points to Consider:

1. Contractual Relationship:

   • Since the fitter was paid directly by the customer and wasn't employed by your company, the contractual relationship appears to be between the customer and the fitter. This generally means the fitter, not your company, would be liable for any issues with the installation.

2. Recommendations and Liability:

   • However, recommending a fitter can create an implied warranty or expectation of quality. If a customer can prove that they relied on your recommendation and the work was substandard, there might be some liability, especially if the recommendation was made in a way that suggested an endorsement or guarantee of quality.

3. Time Factor:

   • The fact that the issues arose after three years could be relevant. Many warranties or guarantees on workmanship might not extend that long, and it might be harder for the customer to claim that the fault lies with the original installation rather than wear and tear.

4. Evidence of Payment:

   • If the fitter was paid directly by the customer (especially in cash), and there's no clear documentation linking your business to the transaction, this strengthens your position that the liability is with the fitter, not your company.

Potential Legal Standpoint:

• Your Liability: Given that the fitter was paid directly and not employed by your company, it's likely that your liability is limited. The direct payment suggests that the customer engaged the fitter independently.

• Your Duty of Care: You might still have a duty of care in recommending a fitter, but this is usually limited unless there was negligence in the recommendation, such as recommending someone you knew was unqualified or had a history of poor workmanship.

Thank you. This is basically our thoughts at the moment. It’s very confusing as you get some people saying we could still be liable but a lot saying not.

 

in terms of this. There is a fitting guarantee of a year from fitters in general. Obviously this isn’t the shops guarantee but directly related to the sub. She firstly acknowledged a plank lifting at the back door 3 years after the fitting. 
 

moduleo (It’s click lvt) I believe did have a guarantee at the time. We however have been advised due to the subfloor preparation from the fitter an independent inspector is 100% going to rule it a fitting fault rather than the product.

Edited 3 September by lcfc sheff

[Raj]

Do you do season ticket holder discounts for carpets!!!!!

[lcfc sheff]

3 minutes ago, Raj said:

Do you do season ticket holder discounts for carpets!!!!!

Depends how this case goes! 🤣

[lcfc sheff]

Thank you all for your words. I respect it’s a difficult situation. What I wanted to come to a better conclusion

[Trav Le Bleu]

I'm not an expert (I'm a postman ) but I do know, cos this happened to me, that when an individual makes a claim on their insurance (in my instance it was my RM van and they were doing the old whiplash thing (which apparently can be horrendous at 5 mph)) and the insurance company tells them to do one, then the insurance company threaten to prosecute you directly (in this, obviously it wasn't even my van) in the hope that you'll pay up from simple fear and intimidation. My union told me to ignore the letter I'd received and I never heard anything more.

 

Could be something similar here. She's had no luck with the person she might get recompense from, so she's chancing that she can intimidate you instead.

 

Edited 3 September by Trav Le Bleu