Work not carried out as agreed

Gomango

In September of this year I agreed for works to be carried out on my property with a roofing company.

We agreed a figure for works to be carried out on the roof of a 4 story terraced Georgian property through a detailed email.

One of the works to be carried out was the supply and fit of a new valley.

The company carried out the other works which were visible from the ground floor. I paid the company and received a receipt stating works were carried out.

Because of the difficulty in accessing the roof i was unable to inspect works until last week to carry out another job on the roof, it was evident the valley was not fitted. I have photographs showing the work was not carried out.

I have engaged with the company over the phone, they claim the work was done and refuse to give a refund.

I believe i have a strong case with emails, receipt and photographs, but i am still unsure of what steps to take to escalate matters.

Would appreciate if someone could give me a steer on my options.
Or any direction on how best to approach this to give myself as good a chance as possible to win the case should it get to court.

Metric Tensor

Unfortunately if it gets to court you have already lost because of the time, effort and cost involved vs the cost of replacing a valley. (And this is assuming you win and get costs awarded in your favour and assuming the company has appropriate insurance cover to pay out.)

I'd do everything you can to escalate it "informally" before resorting to an legal recourse. Obviously keep copies of everything.

I don't know what you have done to date but my first step would be contacting the managing director of the company by phone explaining the situation and then following up with a detailed email including attachments of the agreed scope of works, agreed price and confirmations you were given that the work had been completed in line with the scope.

If no useful response from that I'd say the next step is the same thing in a registered letter.

If still no luck then you may have to go to a solicitor but bear in mind once you do your valley will remain unchanged for at least 2-3 years unless you pay up to replace it yourself.

Calahonda52

if I recall correctly, digital photos are not accepted in court as they can be altered so you may have to go celluloid.

Whats you estimate of getting the valley done?

You might give this a shot
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/courts_system/small_claims_court.html

The key part is to ensure you have the company's exact name and exact registered office, and nominate the district court nearest you

It is worth a shot at 25 euro IMO, which is not reclaimable.

ps check the claim limit, I thought it had gone up from 2k...maybe wrong

Gomango

Thanks for the helpful replies lads,

The value of work charged that was not carried out is 1800.

So just under the treshold I have sent an email giving him a chance to respond.

That's an interesting point regarding the celluloid can anyone confirm this? I presume it would also need a time stamp.

I contacted the national guild, not expecting much, they asked me to send a report, they will investigate and withdraw his membership if proven.

I suspect I might need to get an engineer up to inspect works and sign off that works were not carried out.

Calahonda52

I think for the SMC normal digitals will work but not for serious work.

The issue is how do you prove that the digitals image has not been altered.

In any event, this case is more unusual as I am normally trying to prove before and after in boundary work cases so I know in advance.

In you case, it's all as is.

Guild, IMO, a waste of time, spend the time getting your ducks in a row for the SMC
Keep well.

AndrewJRenko

Calahonda52 wrote: »

I think for the SMC  normal digitals will work but not for serious work.

The issue is how do you prove that the digitals image has not been altered.

How do you prove that a celluloid image has not been digitised, altered, then reprinted?
I thought that for a serious court case, you would need a professional engineer's report with photos taken by the engineer, so the Court can rely on the professional integrity of the engineer.
Probably too late for the OP, but there is certainly a lesson here for all about sign-off of significant works. If you don't have the professional expertise to sign-off or you don't have access, you need to find someone who has.

Calahonda52

The celluloid original is normally secured as backup evidence: as for court relying on professional ethics...utopia ++

AndrewJRenko

Calahonda52 wrote: »

The celluloid original is normally secured as backup evidence:

How do you secure a photographic image? What if the celluloid original is tampered with before it is secored?

Calahonda52 wrote: »

as for court relying on professional ethics...utopia ++

I don't think there are many Chartered Engineers who would stand up in Court and lie with a tampered photograph. Has this ever happened?

If the other side thinks this is a serious risk, they can always engage their own engineer at their own expense and take another set of photos if they want. They'll end up paying the expense on their legal bills at the end of the day.