What court would hear this case?

Gavin31

So my mother hired builders to refurbish and extend her house. The work these cowboys did was abysmal – the roof leaks, the windows don’t close properly among other things.. When she refused to pay she was assaulted and knocked to the ground.

Im just wondering is it criminal or civil law? Its a tricky one because theres a tort, which is civil, assault - criminal, and a breach of contract, again civil.

What court would she end up going through?

IRLConor

Gavin31 wrote: »

So my mother hired builders to refurbish and extend her house. The work these cowboys did was abysmal – the roof leaks, the windows don’t close properly among other things.. When she refused to pay she was assaulted and knocked to the ground.

Im just wondering is it criminal or civil law? Its a tricky one because theres a tort, which is civil, assault - criminal, and a breach of contract, again civil.

What court would she end up going through?

Surely both?

Go to the Gardai for the assault and talk to a solicitor about the civil stuff.

foggy_lad

go to the police and report the assault and don't do anything about the bill for the shoddy work if it remains unpaid, spend the money on getting a reputable builder in to do the job properly.

ResearchWill

As already said go to AGS about the assault. Go to a solicitor about the trespass on the person and personal injury civil case same for the civil case re the building dispute, the contract for the building may have an arbitration clause so its possible 3 different courts/arbitrator deals with the 3 matters.

Gavin31

Hi thanks for the replies.

My thinking was that rather than a criminal case for assault there would be 2 civil cases combined, breach of contract and a tort under the offenses against the persons act. Im just piecing things together from what ive read online, i could be WAY off, haha.

I think arbitration is only for commercial contracts, but again i could be way off...

repsol

Gavin31 wrote: »

So my mother hired builders to refurbish and extend her house. The work these cowboys did was abysmal – the roof leaks, the windows don’t close properly among other things.. When she refused to pay she was assaulted and knocked to the ground.

Im just wondering is it criminal or civil law? Its a tricky one because theres a tort, which is civil, assault - criminal, and a breach of contract, again civil.

What court would she end up going through?

You should be careful to protect your mother.The sort of guys who would assault a lady in this manner are unlikely to just leave it at that.I would expect a follow up visit and be ready for it.

ResearchWill

Gavin31 wrote: »

Hi thanks for the replies.

My thinking was that rather than a criminal case for assault there would be 2 civil cases combined, breach of contract and a tort under the offenses against the persons act. Im just piecing things together from what ive read online, i could be WAY off, haha.

I think arbitration is only for commercial contracts, but again i could be way off...

Assault can be both criminal and civil, the offences against the person Act is a criminal act, while a person can bring a criminal case in the District Court it is more usual to allow the Guards to do it, as they can investigate and question etc.

The tort is in fact called trespass on the person, if there is a personal injury element then it can get difficult as one train of thought (deepening on how serious) is that the person will need to go through PIAP in the first instance for the personal injury and then issue two proceeding say in the High Court one a personal injuries summons the second a plenary summons then bring a motion to join the proceedings.

A buildings contract is a commercial contract, most standard buildings contracts even for small building work on private homes contain a arbitration cause, most home owners find this outonly when something goes wrong as they did not read the contract. Also very popular in holiday booking contracts and buying motor cars.

repsol

ResearchWill wrote: »

Assault can be both criminal and civil, the offences against the person Act is a criminal act, while a person can bring a criminal case in the District Court it is more usual to allow the Guards to do it, as they can investigate and question etc.

The tort is in fact called trespass on the person, if there is a personal injury element then it can get difficult as one train of thought (deepening on how serious) is that the person will need to go through PIAP in the first instance for the personal injury and then issue two proceeding say in the High Court one a personal injuries summons the second a plenary summons then bring a motion to join the proceedings.

A buildings contract is a commercial contract, most standard buildings contracts even for small building work on private homes contain a arbitration cause, most home owners find this outonly when something goes wrong as they did not read the contract. Also very popular in holiday booking contracts and buying motor cars.

I would be surprised if these guys drew up a written contract.They sound like scumbags! What avenues would be open to the OP's mother in seeking a payment for her injuries if these guys plead poverty/inability to pay?

ResearchWill

repsol wrote: »

I would be surprised if these guys drew up a written contract.They sound like scumbags! What avenues would be open to the OP's mother in seeking a payment for her injuries if these guys plead poverty/inability to pay?

Instalment orders, judgment mortgage, possible prison for contempt of court. My own personal view unless you know there is money there don't waste your time or money taking them to court, it will only give you a headache and a legal bill.

BTW anyone entering into a refurb and extension project with roof work and no contract is really really silly, it can only go one way. Good builders have proper contracts that set out everything, cowboys do it all on a fag packet, that should be the first warning.

repsol

ResearchWill wrote: »

Instalment orders, judgment mortgage, possible prison for contempt of court. My own personal view unless you know there is money there don't waste your time or money taking them to court, it will only give you a headache and a legal bill.

Thanks for that Will.Could you explain Judgement Mortgage please?

ResearchWill

repsol wrote: »

Thanks for that Will.Could you explain Judgement Mortgage please?

Its in simple terms the registering a mortgage against someone's property, for the amount of the judgement, if the property is sold the judgement must be satisfied for the new buyer to get good title. Not much good if the person has a property worth a100k with a bank mortgage of 200k only works if plenty of equity.

Gavin31

ResearchWill wrote: »

Assault can be both criminal and civil, the offences against the person Act is a criminal act, while a person can bring a criminal case in the District Court it is more usual to allow the Guards to do it, as they can investigate and question etc.

The tort is in fact called trespass on the person, if there is a personal injury element then it can get difficult as one train of thought (deepening on how serious) is that the person will need to go through PIAP in the first instance for the personal injury and then issue two proceeding say in the High Court one a personal injuries summons the second a plenary summons then bring a motion to join the proceedings.

A buildings contract is a commercial contract, most standard buildings contracts even for small building work on private homes contain a arbitration cause, most home owners find this outonly when something goes wrong as they did not read the contract. Also very popular in holiday booking contracts and buying motor cars.

Thanks for the info Will, much appreciated

repsol

ResearchWill wrote: »

Its in simple terms the registering a mortgage against someone's property, for the amount of the judgement, if the property is sold the judgement must be satisfied for the new buyer to get good title. Not much good if the person has a property worth a100k with a bank mortgage of 200k only works if plenty of equity.

Thanks Will.Is the family home exempt from this?

ResearchWill

repsol wrote: »

Thanks Will.Is the family home exempt from this?

That depends. Some interesting reading http://www.hayes-solicitors.ie/news/JudgmentCreditorsLoseOut.html

repsol

ResearchWill wrote: »

That depends. Some interesting reading http://www.hayes-solicitors.ie/news/JudgmentCreditorsLoseOut.html

Thanks Will. A colleague of mine is suing a person for assault and the assailant is not disputing liability but is offering small money and crying poverty.We have done a bit of digging and it seems he is worth a few quid.Solicitor has asked for a statement of means.

Gavin31

So the best thing we can do is get the Gardai to bring a case against the builders for assault and bring a breach of contract case separately in civil court?

Are we looking at the district court in both cases?

Tom Young

Charter? ... No legal advice.

ResearchWill

Gavin31 wrote: »

So the best thing we can do is get the Gardai to bring a case against the builders for assault and bring a breach of contract case separately in civil court?

Are we looking at the district court in both cases?

AGS will decide on the first, your solicitor when he has all the information after meeting you and spending an hour or so of his time asking you questions will advice on the correct court.

valleyoftheunos

the Director of Public Prosecutions or Gardai will decide on the criminal case, most likely the District Court.

In civil cases the District court can make awards of up to about €6,500 if your claim is worth more than that it will have to go to the Circuit Court which can make awards up to €38,000. Your solicitor will know exactly which court is the most appropriate one depending on your claims.

eoinkildare

There is also the offence of Demanding Money with Menaces which would cover the manner in which they tried to force your mother to pay.
Fraud would seem to apply in relation to the faulty work if you can prove intent. Making gain or causing loss to another through fraudulent means...

Eoin

valleyoftheunos

eoinkildare wrote: »

There is also the offence of Demanding Money with Menaces which would cover the manner in which they tried to force your mother to pay.
Fraud would seem to apply in relation to the faulty work if you can prove intent. Making gain or causing loss to another through fraudulent means...

Eoin

A criminal case for fraud won't get the OP or his mother any damages though. They will still need to persure a civil claim, most appropriately through contract.

eoinkildare

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

A criminal case for fraud won't get the OP or his mother any damages though. They will still need to persure a civil claim, most appropriately through contract.

Unless the DJ awards compensation but this wouldn't be guaranteed.

valleyoftheunos

eoinkildare wrote: »

Unless the DJ awards compensation but this wouldn't be guaranteed.

That's compensation as a victim as distinct from damages for breach of contract, they are two different things. Compensation would not be based on the cost of putting the building work right etc.

Corkbah

ResearchWill wrote: »

Instalment orders, judgment mortgage, possible prison for contempt of court. My own personal view unless you know there is money there don't waste your time or money taking them to court, it will only give you a headache and a legal bill.

BTW anyone entering into a refurb and extension project with roof work and no contract is really really silly, it can only go one way. Good builders have proper contracts that set out everything, cowboys do it all on a fag packet, that should be the first warning.

I would have to disagree there ... my dad worked as a plasterer for over 50yrs and not once was there a contract drawn up between him and a client (at one stage in the 80's he had approx 30 workers working for the firm)

I worked very closely with him during the 90's and have seen through the books throughout the years (assisting himself).

Good builders do the job properly and repair any post work problems for free/cheap (assuming it was their fault that a repair was needed.)

ResearchWill

Corkbah wrote: »

I would have to disagree there ... my dad worked as a plasterer for over 50yrs and not once was there a contract drawn up between him and a client (at one stage in the 80's he had approx 30 workers working for the firm)

I worked very closely with him during the 90's and have seen through the books throughout the years (assisting himself).

Good builders do the job properly and repair any post work problems for free/cheap (assuming it was their fault that a repair was needed.)

Well in my personal opinion any builder today doing a extension including roof work with out a contract is mad, anyone getting this work done without a contract is equally as mad.

Corkbah

ResearchWill wrote: »

Well in my personal opinion any builder today doing a extension including roof work with out a contract is mad, anyone getting this work done without a contract is equally as mad.

do you have much experience in the construction industry ?? I mean actually on a building site or doing renovations, using scaffolding, plastering, bricklaying etc ?

I think you are looking at this from too much of a legal position, the vast majority of builders in this country are self employed or partnerships - who are usually then subcontracted by a contractor - depending on the job size.

a contractor may have a contract, but at ground level there is never a physical contract - similarly with someone who would be doing a single house extension .. no contract.

Tell me this ..... if you have a leak in your kitchen sink ? ... do you ask the plumber to give you a written contract before he/she does the job ??? its the same situation - only slightly larger scale.

ResearchWill

Corkbah wrote: »

do you have much experience in the construction industry ?? I mean actually on a building site or doing renovations, using scaffolding, plastering, bricklaying etc ?

I think you are looking at this from too much of a legal position, the vast majority of builders in this country are self employed or partnerships - who are usually then subcontracted by a contractor - depending on the job size.

a contractor may have a contract, but at ground level there is never a physical contract - similarly with someone who would be doing a single house extension .. no contract.

Tell me this ..... if you have a leak in your kitchen sink ? ... do you ask the plumber to give you a written contract before he/she does the job ??? its the same situation - only slightly larger scale.

This thread is about the contractor, we are not talking about sub contractors. I also made it very clear that I was talking about a extension and roof work. That would be a big job. I am not talking about a small job or sub contractors.

It is not the same as a leak in the sink.

The OP said "So my mother hired builders to refurbish and extend her house. The work these cowboys did was abysmal – the roof leaks, the windows don’t close properly among other things.. When she refused to pay she was assaulted and knocked to the ground." Does not sound like a leak under the sink to me or something of a slightly larger scale.

And just so you can see exactly what I wrote,

"Well in my personal opinion any builder today doing a extension including roof work with out a contract is mad, anyone getting this work done without a contract is equally as mad."

Corkbah

you may see roofing and an extension as a big job ... I don't !

building a housing estate is a big job.

Suppose its easier to quantify it in numbers of people ... a single house to retile the roof and build a three wall and roof extension - a good team of 3-5 guys would do it in maybe 11-12 days (depending on weather)....not a big job !

ResearchWill

Corkbah wrote: »

you may see roofing and an extension as a big job ... I don't !

building a housing estate is a big job.

Suppose its easier to quantify it in numbers of people ... a single house to retile the roof and build a three wall and roof extension - a good team of 3-5 guys would do it in maybe 11-12 days (depending on weather)....not a big job !

Maybe you don't, the last building dispute i had was a extension original contract price was €65,000, that's big in my book maybe not yours. I personally think any large investment in your home is best protected by a contract, don't know why you don't.

This started, because I mentioned there may be a contract which may have an arbitration clause, in direct response to the OP's question. When a poster pointed out that considering the action of the builder, the likelihood of a contract was slim. To which I replied any large job and yes I do think anything more than €5 to €10k as a large job as it is i believe to most people (for a lot of people in this country 10k is six months salary) should have a contract, any builder entering your home to do such work should at least have set who is liable for what etc., completion date, contract price, scope of works, additions. You may not think someone paying out 5 10 50 or 100k should have a contract I think they should. There are standard fill in the blank contracts available to builders, its not rocket science to use it. Just as a question at what price point do you think a contract should be needed, from your post it seems even if I am building a new house as its not an estate of house its only a small job, sure no need for a contract.

Now can we get back to the OP's question.

Corkbah

ResearchWill wrote: »

Maybe you don't, the last building dispute i had was a extension original contract price was €65,000, that's big in my book maybe not yours. I personally think any large investment in your home is best protected by a contract, don't know why you don't.

This started, because I mentioned there may be a contract which may have an arbitration clause, in direct response to the OP's question. When a poster pointed out that considering the action of the builder, the likelihood of a contract was slim. To which I replied any large job and yes I do think anything more than €5 to €10k as a large job as it is i believe to most people (for a lot of people in this country 10k is six months salary) should have a contract, any builder entering your home to do such work should at least have set who is liable for what etc., completion date, contract price, scope of works, additions. You may not think someone paying out 5 10 50 or 100k should have a contract I think they should. There are standard fill in the blank contracts available to builders, its not rocket science to use it. Just as a question at what price point do you think a contract should be needed, from your post it seems even if I am building a new house as its not an estate of house its only a small job, sure no need for a contract.

Now can we get back to the OP's question.

This started with you saying that if a builder doesn't have a contract he's a cowboy !! ...and this annoyed me enough to respond because I saw it as wrong/incorrect and felt hurt at the implication that someone like my father who has worked honestly for over 60years can be regarded as a "cowboy".

EDIT: you never answered my earlier question

do you have much experience in the construction industry ?? I mean actually on a building site or doing renovations, using scaffolding, plastering, bricklaying etc ?

...I'm guessing you don't !

Procrastastudy

I'm spending about 3K having a bathroom done. The person doing it will be signing a contract or not getting the job. Simple really. Where I'm going to get said contract drawn up though is a matter for my college FLAC

Corkbah

Procrastastudy wrote: »

I'm spending about 3K having a bathroom done. The person doing it will be signing a contract or not getting the job. Simple really. Where I'm going to get said contract drawn up though is a matter for my college FLAC

so... you are expecting that the person doing the bathroom will know exactly what he/she is dealing with by simply looking ... what happens if the pipes are not fitted as they should have been by the original builder or if there is wiring where there shouldnt be any ?

will the builder be expected to have this in the contract ...will you put it into the contract (please) ... I'm sure the majority of builders will quote you higher than normal if you are going to get them to sign a contract.

Best of luck - I'm sure you would get the job done properly and with less hassle without a contract, be sure and use a recommended person (usually recommended by word of mouth is best...ask family/friends ..not randomers online)

ResearchWill

Corkbah wrote: »

This started with you saying that if a builder doesn't have a contract he's a cowboy !! ...and this annoyed me enough to respond because I saw it as wrong/incorrect and felt hurt at the implication that someone like my father who has worked honestly for over 60years can be regarded as a "cowboy".

EDIT: you never answered my earlier question ...I'm guessing you don't !

I clearly said and I was responding to this thread, cowboys do it all on the back of a fag packet. I did not say if a builder does not have a contract he is a cowboy, I said if its all done on the back of a fag packet he is a cowboy.

The original post and my response,

"Quote:
Originally Posted by repsol
I would be surprised if these guys drew up a written contract.They sound like scumbags! What avenues would be open to the OP's mother in seeking a payment for her injuries if these guys plead poverty/inability to pay?

Then my response

Instalment orders, judgment mortgage, possible prison for contempt of court. My own personal view unless you know there is money there don't waste your time or money taking them to court, it will only give you a headache and a legal bill.

BTW anyone entering into a refurb and extension project with roof work and no contract is really really silly, it can only go one way. Good builders have proper contracts that set out everything, cowboys do it all on a fag packet, that should be the first warning."

I don't see me using the word cowboy, in relation to all builders just a specific type as in the OP. if I got upset every time my profession is slated as a whole on this forum I would be a mental wreck by now.

ResearchWill

Corkbah wrote: »

so... you are expecting that the person doing the bathroom will know exactly what he/she is dealing with by simply looking ... what happens if the pipes are not fitted as they should have been by the original builder or if there is wiring where there shouldnt be any ?

will the builder be expected to have this in the contract ...will you put it into the contract (please) ... I'm sure the majority of builders will quote you higher than normal if you are going to get them to sign a contract.

Best of luck - I'm sure you would get the job done properly and with less hassle without a contract, be sure and use a recommended person (usually recommended by word of mouth is best...ask family/friends ..not randomers online)

That's exactly what a contract will do, it will set out the scope of work and what is and is not covered.

Corkbah

ResearchWill wrote: »

That's exactly what a contract will do, it will set out the scope of work and what is and is not covered.

so do you expect a person to get a redraft of the contract if there is something not in it originally .... would that not delay the work and cause an increase in costs ?

ResearchWill

Corkbah wrote: »

so do you expect a person to get a redraft of the contract if there is something not in it originally .... would that not delay the work and cause an increase in costs ?

No need they are called additions and any half decent contract will set out how they are to work. Lets take the bathroom example above. A good decent builder gives a quote if 3000, a simple standard contract is entered into with a scope of works (just the quotation). Then say after taking out the shower its discovered there had been a leak, some damage to floor and wall, builder says to owner that's not in scope of works, it will cost 500 extra house owner says fine agrees addition and work continues. I really don't see the problem.

meathstevie

Coming from a policing point of view there's a few angles here, did the person(s) who carried out the work falsely pretend to be builders in order to make financial gains from something that was made to look like it was a good job while they knew it was sjite ? Fraud. The assault while demanding money; depending on the exact event; demanding money with menaces, attempted robbery or just plainly assault. If new damage to the building is caused or there's a clear loss in global value of the building due to the crap work, as in knowingly causing the damage or causing it through reckless behaviour; criminal damage.

Or you may decide to go down the civil route but I wouldn't be surprised if it's really that bad that it's pretty much a here today gone tomorrow kind of outfit.

ResearchWill

Corkbah wrote: »

This started with you saying that if a builder doesn't have a contract he's a cowboy !! ...and this annoyed me enough to respond because I saw it as wrong/incorrect and felt hurt at the implication that someone like my father who has worked honestly for over 60years can be regarded as a "cowboy".

EDIT: you never answered my earlier question ...I'm guessing you don't !

BTW I did not get upset at the following comment, "the entire legal system in Ireland is a money racket as far as I'm concerned." a but sure lawyers are all up to no good and ripping people off. But let's not say some builders are cowboys o might just upset some builder to make a claim that some are a bit dodgy, but its quite ok to say all people involved in the legal system are involved in a money racket.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=82571338

Corkbah

ResearchWill wrote: »

BTW I did not get upset at the following comment, "the entire legal system in Ireland is a money racket as far as I'm concerned." a but sure lawyers are all up to no good and ripping people off. But let's not say some builders are cowboys o might just upset some builder to make a claim that some are a bit dodgy, but its quite ok to say all people involved in the legal system are involved in a money racket.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=82571338

attack the post not the poster !! .... you trawl through previous posts to find one which may or may not have offended you.... and post it in an effort to say ...well I didn't get offended by your post so you shouldn't be offended by mine (in a vague effort to justify you own post)

you made a sweeping statement which I was offended by - I do not work in the construction industry but was upset/annoyed at your statement because the implication was there that if someone in construction didn't use a contract they must be a cowboy builder, I was ONLY defending the statement saying that its not true and you feel the need to disagree.

Do you have ANY firsthand experience of the construction industry...actually working in it and not simply hiring someone ? (my third time asking without an answer...simple Yes or No question.)

ResearchWill

Corkbah wrote: »

attack the post not the poster !! .... you trawl through previous posts to find one which may or may not have offended you.... and post it in an effort to say ...well I didn't get offended by your post so you shouldn't be offended by mine (in a vague effort to justify you own post)

you made a sweeping statement which I was offended by - I do not work in the construction industry but was upset/annoyed at your statement because the implication was there that if someone in construction didn't use a contract they must be a cowboy builder, I was ONLY defending the statement saying that its not true and you feel the need to disagree.

Do you have ANY firsthand experience of the construction industry...actually working in it and not simply hiring someone ? (my third time asking without an answer...simple Yes or No question.)

And as I said I did not say any builder not using a contract is a cowboy, I said any builder who does it on the back of a fag packet is a cowboy there is a difference. The statement was also in reply to a specific point made by a poster. I can't help it if you get offended by me calling a cowboy exactly that.

I also said I did not get offended by the post nor did I trawl through posts, in fact if you look at the thread I quoted you will see I posted to that thread after you on the 8th January.

If I had called all builders cowboys then you may have a point but I did not, nor do I think it. Nor at any time did I attract you the poster, I nearly pointed out that you are guilty of what you claim I did, which in fact I did not do.

No I have not worked in the construction industry. If you read my posts you will see I am a barrister, my experience is based on the problems I have experienced in legal issues when either bad contracts or no contracts are used. Hence my advice to use a builder who goes to the trouble of drafting up proper paper work.

Now if you want me to defend the comment a builder that does it all on a fag packet I stand over that comment, on the other hand if your saying I said all builders are cowboys I never ****ing said it. You must have terrible issues if you watched this tv show http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00mrfvy

You on the other hand accused me and my profession of being a money racket, and even though I posted in that thread I did not have a freak attack, because I stayed on the topic, and did not get all upset at a perceived slight. Really guys like you make me question why I post here.

BTW if you want to keep this topic off point, I will just ignore you, if on the other hand you want to comment on the topic which is a very simple question of the OP's I will engage.

Corkbah

ResearchWill wrote: »

And as I said I did not say any builder not using a contract is a cowboy, I said any builder who does it on the back of a fag packet is a cowboy there is a difference. The statement was also in reply to a specific point made by a poster. I can't help it if you get offended by me calling a cowboy exactly that.

I also said I did not get offended by the post nor did I trawl through posts, in fact if you look at the thread I quoted you will see I posted to that thread after you on the 8th January.

If I had called all builders cowboys then you may have a point but I did not, nor do I think it. Nor at any time did I attract you the poster, I nearly pointed out that you are guilty of what you claim I did, which in fact I did not do.

No I have not worked in the construction industry. If you read my posts you will see I am a barrister, my experience is based on the problems I have experienced in legal issues when either bad contracts or no contracts are used. Hence my advice to use a builder who goes to the trouble of drafting up proper paper work.

Now if you want me to defend the comment a builder that does it all on a fag packet I stand over that comment, on the other hand if your saying I said all builders are cowboys I never ****ing said it. You must have terrible issues if you watched this tv show http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00mrfvy

You on the other hand accused me and my profession of being a money racket, and even though I posted in that thread I did not have a freak attack, because I stayed on the topic, and did not get all upset at a perceived slight. Really guys like you make me question why I post here.

BTW if you want to keep this topic off point, I will just ignore you, if on the other hand you want to comment on the topic which is a very simple question of the OP's I will engage.

you are simply trying to split hairs - the statement you made was a general one which in my opinion implies that if there is no contract the builder is a cowboy, The OP never mentioned a "fag packet".

With the original post the person asked "which court would hear the case ?" ...in my opinion the answer is simple .... based on the information available if the OP reported the alleged assault to the Gardai - there would be an investigation and a possible criminal court action.

if the OP is seeking to try return the monies they would have to take a Circuit Civil Court or High Court action (depending on amounts involved) - this would more than likely be put back if there is any criminal proceedings to be heard.

As for the OP best thing he/she can do is report the matter to the Gardai and get to a solicitor and let them do their job, however, it could end out simply not worth the stress and financial hassle of doing so !! - if the builder is a person of little or no means then taking a legal action against them will not be financially or mentally the right move, sometimes its best to simply write it off as a bad experience and learn from the mistake.

we dont know all the facts and thats really for the Gardai/Solicitor and the OP ...if I was to choose a person to do work for me, I ask family/friends and colleagues for recommendations, we dont know if the OP did this or if the OP simply called the nearest person to them or if the "builder" simply appeared at the door and offered a quotation (something which is quite often a feature of the rogue builders programme in the UK)

As regards bringing up the other post made by me ... I don't see the relevance - its a different thread and its my opinion - am I not allowed to have an opinion ?? you were free to dispute the opinion but you decided not to, you were free to report the post but you decided not to, but when I dispute your opinion you feel that you should highlight my opinion and try to use it against me.... like I said .... attack the post, not the poster !!

ResearchWill

Corkbah wrote: »

you are simply trying to split hairs - the statement you made was a general one which in my opinion implies that if there is no contract the builder is a cowboy, The OP never mentioned a "fag packet".

With the original post the person asked "which court would hear the case ?" ...in my opinion the answer is simple .... based on the information available if the OP reported the alleged assault to the Gardai - there would be an investigation and a possible criminal court action.

if the OP is seeking to try return the monies they would have to take a Circuit Civil Court or High Court action (depending on amounts involved) - this would more than likely be put back if there is any criminal proceedings to be heard.

As for the OP best thing he/she can do is report the matter to the Gardai and get to a solicitor and let them do their job, however, it could end out simply not worth the stress and financial hassle of doing so !! - if the builder is a person of little or no means then taking a legal action against them will not be financially or mentally the right move, sometimes its best to simply write it off as a bad experience and learn from the mistake.

we dont know all the facts and thats really for the Gardai/Solicitor and the OP ...if I was to choose a person to do work for me, I ask family/friends and colleagues for recommendations, we dont know if the OP did this or if the OP simply called the nearest person to them or if the "builder" simply appeared at the door and offered a quotation (something which is quite often a feature of the rogue builders programme in the UK)

That is your opinion, I have clearly stated what I said and the context if you don't accept my word for that fine.

In relation to the rest of your post, yes I agree with all you said. Best to get proper advice.