When to escalate to small claims court?
Discussion
I'm currently in dispute with another party regarding some work that was carried out in my flat.
The good news is that the other party has been responsive to my communication. The bad news is that this issue has been ongoing since the start of November and the main reason for it as far as I can see is that the other party cannot provide me with the required details and drawings to prove that the work they say was carried out was actually completed.
I know for a fact it wasn't so I'm requesting these details to make them realise that if it were to go to court they'd have no chance of winning - as they don't have the proof/detail (thus, also building my case against them).
How long do I have to put up with them missing my deadlines and dragging this out before I should take it to court (taking into account that they are still responding to my correspondance)?
The good news is that the other party has been responsive to my communication. The bad news is that this issue has been ongoing since the start of November and the main reason for it as far as I can see is that the other party cannot provide me with the required details and drawings to prove that the work they say was carried out was actually completed.
I know for a fact it wasn't so I'm requesting these details to make them realise that if it were to go to court they'd have no chance of winning - as they don't have the proof/detail (thus, also building my case against them).
How long do I have to put up with them missing my deadlines and dragging this out before I should take it to court (taking into account that they are still responding to my correspondance)?
Two weeks is normally seen as reasonable for a promised undertaking if not actually being rectified.
Depends how long the corrective measures take. If for example it was a car with a fault that was agreed to be fixed and was paid for but not fixed two weeks would be plenty.
As long as your actions look reasonable to the court they'll be on your side.
Depends how long the corrective measures take. If for example it was a car with a fault that was agreed to be fixed and was paid for but not fixed two weeks would be plenty.
As long as your actions look reasonable to the court they'll be on your side.
Dont follow... is it as easy as the here is a pic of the plastering, you didnt do it... case closed?
they cant provide pics or details the work was carried out and you cant see it... Im not sure why this is even going near small claims court with out a bit more meat on the background?
they cant provide pics or details the work was carried out and you cant see it... Im not sure why this is even going near small claims court with out a bit more meat on the background?
Du1point8 said:
Dont follow... is it as easy as the here is a pic of the plastering, you didnt do it... case closed?
they cant provide pics or details the work was carried out and you cant see it... Im not sure why this is even going near small claims court with out a bit more meat on the background?
This.they cant provide pics or details the work was carried out and you cant see it... Im not sure why this is even going near small claims court with out a bit more meat on the background?
Have you sent your builder a Letter Before Action ?
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/going-t...
If not, you'll need to do that, and allow 28 days for a written response before escalating your issue to the small claims court
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/going-t...
If not, you'll need to do that, and allow 28 days for a written response before escalating your issue to the small claims court
Du1point8 said:
Dont follow... is it as easy as the here is a pic of the plastering, you didnt do it... case closed?
they cant provide pics or details the work was carried out and you cant see it... Im not sure why this is even going near small claims court with out a bit more meat on the background?
It's not quite a simple as that unfortunately as it is to do with a blocked waste stack which is the landlord's responsibility, not the leaseholder's (me). they cant provide pics or details the work was carried out and you cant see it... Im not sure why this is even going near small claims court with out a bit more meat on the background?
I told them the issue was in the stack, they sent someone round who was supposed to diagnose the blockage. Their idea of a diagnosis was taking a massive plunger to my sink and then claiming it was my waste pipe, not the stack. I had to pay an independent plumber to do the diagnosis who confirmed it was the stack and I have this in writing. Eventually the landlord sent a proper plumber round and unblocked the stack.
The landlord claims it was my plumber who blocked the stack which is BS. Even if the landlord did do a proper diagnosis of my waste pipe, I see that as being a breach of contract between the leaseholder and the landlord because the landlord is not responsible for anything other than communal plumbing and should not have touched any of my fixtures or fittings.
If they had a procedure or systems in place to avoid this situation they would have told me to get an independent plumber to diagnose it FIRST and then if it was definitely the stack, they could have followed up on it. This would have avoided any blame on where the blockage came from.
If nothing else, it's a breach of contract as a result of lack of procedure in dealing with leaseholder issues such as this.
I want the money back that I had to pay out for an independent plumber!
I'm struggling a little. A couple of things.
1) The waste pipe and stack are connected, and without starting to take things apart it's tricky to access the stack - going at the accessible end with a plunger seems like a logical first step which presumably you allowed as you gave them access to your property.
2) Is it possible that the blockage was in your waste pipe and subsequently migrated down the pipe into the stack? That's the logical way for it to go if it was partially unblocked.
3) What damages did you suffer? You need to be able to quantify that - and the price of the plumber call out might not be allowable if the judge doesn't agree that it was necessary to avoid further damage (overflow etc.).
4) Can you claim on your home insurance?
1) The waste pipe and stack are connected, and without starting to take things apart it's tricky to access the stack - going at the accessible end with a plunger seems like a logical first step which presumably you allowed as you gave them access to your property.
2) Is it possible that the blockage was in your waste pipe and subsequently migrated down the pipe into the stack? That's the logical way for it to go if it was partially unblocked.
3) What damages did you suffer? You need to be able to quantify that - and the price of the plumber call out might not be allowable if the judge doesn't agree that it was necessary to avoid further damage (overflow etc.).
4) Can you claim on your home insurance?
CC07 PEU said:
Du1point8 said:
Dont follow... is it as easy as the here is a pic of the plastering, you didnt do it... case closed?
they cant provide pics or details the work was carried out and you cant see it... Im not sure why this is even going near small claims court with out a bit more meat on the background?
It's not quite a simple as that unfortunately as it is to do with a blocked waste stack which is the landlord's responsibility, not the leaseholder's (me). they cant provide pics or details the work was carried out and you cant see it... Im not sure why this is even going near small claims court with out a bit more meat on the background?
I told them the issue was in the stack, they sent someone round who was supposed to diagnose the blockage. Their idea of a diagnosis was taking a massive plunger to my sink and then claiming it was my waste pipe, not the stack. I had to pay an independent plumber to do the diagnosis who confirmed it was the stack and I have this in writing. Eventually the landlord sent a proper plumber round and unblocked the stack.
The landlord claims it was my plumber who blocked the stack which is BS. Even if the landlord did do a proper diagnosis of my waste pipe, I see that as being a breach of contract between the leaseholder and the landlord because the landlord is not responsible for anything other than communal plumbing and should not have touched any of my fixtures or fittings.
If they had a procedure or systems in place to avoid this situation they would have told me to get an independent plumber to diagnose it FIRST and then if it was definitely the stack, they could have followed up on it. This would have avoided any blame on where the blockage came from.
If nothing else, it's a breach of contract as a result of lack of procedure in dealing with leaseholder issues such as this.
I want the money back that I had to pay out for an independent plumber!
FH seems to have admitted it was outside of the property already by sending the plumber round to unblock the stack, depending on their findings and written analysis, it could very well be your fault for the blockage, if the blockage was fat/oils/etc, it will be yourself or the previous owner tipping crap into the sink instead of the bin and the cold weather makes the fat solidify quicker creating your blockage.
I think you are clutching at straws with the breach of contract as the FH will blame the first plumber and you will get nowhere, but the findings of their second on could cause you issues.
Just because waste leaves your property, it doesnt mean you are not responsible for it, you are responsible until it hits the official waterways pipes and any costs incurred by FH will be passed to the leaseholders.
davepoth said:
I'm struggling a little. A couple of things.
1) The waste pipe and stack are connected, and without starting to take things apart it's tricky to access the stack - going at the accessible end with a plunger seems like a logical first step which presumably you allowed as you gave them access to your property.
2) Is it possible that the blockage was in your waste pipe and subsequently migrated down the pipe into the stack? That's the logical way for it to go if it was partially unblocked.
3) What damages did you suffer? You need to be able to quantify that - and the price of the plumber call out might not be allowable if the judge doesn't agree that it was necessary to avoid further damage (overflow etc.).
4) Can you claim on your home insurance?
1. Fine but I had already tried that and going at it with a plunger does not constitute a proper diagnosis.1) The waste pipe and stack are connected, and without starting to take things apart it's tricky to access the stack - going at the accessible end with a plunger seems like a logical first step which presumably you allowed as you gave them access to your property.
2) Is it possible that the blockage was in your waste pipe and subsequently migrated down the pipe into the stack? That's the logical way for it to go if it was partially unblocked.
3) What damages did you suffer? You need to be able to quantify that - and the price of the plumber call out might not be allowable if the judge doesn't agree that it was necessary to avoid further damage (overflow etc.).
4) Can you claim on your home insurance?
2. Not in a million years! The point is that I knew from the start that it was not my waste as it's very easy to check if it was my waste or not. I'm not going to describe the setup. I'll let the freeholder do that for me since they claim that is what they did.
3. Damage to my wallet and unable to use my kitchen sink for a week while the freeholder messed me about.
4. Absolutely no way will I be doing this as it wasn't my fault. I'm not trying to bulls
t myself here. The sum of money involved isn't even that much but I'm not being ripped off by a lying freeholder.Du1point8 said:
FH seems to have admitted it was outside of the property already by sending the plumber round to unblock the stack, depending on their findings and written analysis, it could very well be your fault for the blockage, if the blockage was fat/oils/etc, it will be yourself or the previous owner tipping crap into the sink instead of the bin and the cold weather makes the fat solidify quicker creating your blockage.
I think you are clutching at straws with the breach of contract as the FH will blame the first plumber and you will get nowhere, but the findings of their second on could cause you issues.
It doesn't matter what the blockage is. If it's in the stack it's not my responsibility and the stack has a vent to the outside via the roof. There's nothing to say the blockage couldn't have entered via the roof and accumulated over many years.I think you are clutching at straws with the breach of contract as the FH will blame the first plumber and you will get nowhere, but the findings of their second on could cause you issues.
The FH can blame the first plumber if they want but I have written confirmation from the independent plumber that the blockage was in the stack. How much more evidence do I need?
The written report claims that the blockage was moved by my plumber to the stack. How can this be true if a) they didn't diagnose CORRECTLY that the blockage was in my waste in the first place and b) the written confirmation from my plumber says it was in the stack all along.
Let me get this straight. You are the leaseholder of a property. There is/was a blockage in the drainage stack.
1) Is the stack within your property, or, is it in a communal area?
2) If the former why are you saying it is not your responsibility?
3) You say the blockage was not of your making, how can you prove this?
1) Is the stack within your property, or, is it in a communal area?
2) If the former why are you saying it is not your responsibility?
3) You say the blockage was not of your making, how can you prove this?
Du1point8 said:
The fh will pass all costs onto the leaseholders so it's irrelevant he said/she said...
To be honest... I don't think leasehold ownership is for you and you need to step back and think about the bigger picture or sell up and buy a freehold property.
^^^^^totally agree. I am a leaseholder, director of a self management of a block of leasehold flats. During a recent visit to the same, i found an exterior drain blocked,where further investigations revealed that a plastering contractor acting for a leaseholder, had decided to deposit surplus plaster in the flat’s toilet waste outlet.To be honest... I don't think leasehold ownership is for you and you need to step back and think about the bigger picture or sell up and buy a freehold property.
If a leaseholder goes it alone, employing their own contractor, then that leaseholder should pick up the bill.
KevinCamaroSS said:
Let me get this straight. You are the leaseholder of a property. There is/was a blockage in the drainage stack.
1) Is the stack within your property, or, is it in a communal area?
2) If the former why are you saying it is not your responsibility?
3) You say the blockage was not of your making, how can you prove this?
1. It's a communal stack.1) Is the stack within your property, or, is it in a communal area?
2) If the former why are you saying it is not your responsibility?
3) You say the blockage was not of your making, how can you prove this?
2. N/a
3. It doesn't matter who caused the blockage in the stack as it won't be possible to prove what caused it as there could be any number of reasons from a heavily corroded pipe to debris entering via the roof vent.
What I can prove, however, is that there was no process followed by the freeholder in determining where the blockage was. The freeholder did not follow any process and as a result is now lying to me about what they did to diagnose the blockage in the first place. I can prove that they breached my leaseholder contract by not telling me what they were going to do and then carrying out work within my property that was not authorised. I have the proof that the blockage was diagnosed as being in the stack by an independent plumber. I also have the proof in a written report from the freeholder that when they did eventually send round a qualified plumber, the blockage was removed from the stack, not my own waste pipe.
CC07 PEU said:
KevinCamaroSS said:
Let me get this straight. You are the leaseholder of a property. There is/was a blockage in the drainage stack.
1) Is the stack within your property, or, is it in a communal area?
2) If the former why are you saying it is not your responsibility?
3) You say the blockage was not of your making, how can you prove this?
1. It's a communal stack.1) Is the stack within your property, or, is it in a communal area?
2) If the former why are you saying it is not your responsibility?
3) You say the blockage was not of your making, how can you prove this?
2. N/a
3. It doesn't matter who caused the blockage in the stack as it won't be possible to prove what caused it as there could be any number of reasons from a heavily corroded pipe to debris entering via the roof vent.
What I can prove, however, is that there was no process followed by the freeholder in determining where the blockage was. The freeholder did not follow any process and as a result is now lying to me about what they did to diagnose the blockage in the first place. I can prove that they breached my leaseholder contract by not telling me what they were going to do and then carrying out work within my property that was not authorised. I have the proof that the blockage was diagnosed as being in the stack by an independent plumber. I also have the proof in a written report from the freeholder that when they did eventually send round a qualified plumber, the blockage was removed from the stack, not my own waste pipe.
2) ok... what ever.
3) N/A see 1) you as the leaseholder will pay for it (split x ways by other leaseholders).
You can prove they breached the contract by not tell you what they were going to do? Please check your leasehold as many state, if the cost is under £XXX the freeholder doesnt have to state/tell you anything as it causes issues for all people, if the FH has to get permission for work under £300 it can often mean leaseholders are stuck whilst FH is waiting for all other people to agree to cover the cost, so its a moot point.
Again listen to what I say...
Its irrelevant what you are stating about the blockage... the freeholder doesnt pay for blockages outside of your property... you do...
If blockage is in the stack, the FH will work out who's property is doing it and bill them, unless its split and then if 3 properties then the bill is split 3 ways.
THE FH PAYS NOTHING OVERALL, YOU AS THE LEASEHOLDER WILL ULTIMATELY PAY THE BILL IN SERVICE CHARGES OR FEES.
Do you understand or just not get it.
Du1point8 said:
Again listen to what I say...
Its irrelevant what you are stating about the blockage... the freeholder doesnt pay for blockages outside of your property... you do...
If blockage is in the stack, the FH will work out who's property is doing it and bill them, unless its split and then if 3 properties then the bill is split 3 ways.
THE FH PAYS NOTHING OVERALL, YOU AS THE LEASEHOLDER WILL ULTIMATELY PAY THE BILL IN SERVICE CHARGES OR FEES.
Do you understand or just not get it.
Nonsense. The repairs liability is that of the freeholder and there's no reference in the leaseholder's handbook regarding billing my property or spliting it three ways at all. That has never happened and never will. Only if leaseholder behaviour has led to "unnecessary repairs" would a leaseholder be billed. This is taken from the leaseholder's handbook:Its irrelevant what you are stating about the blockage... the freeholder doesnt pay for blockages outside of your property... you do...
If blockage is in the stack, the FH will work out who's property is doing it and bill them, unless its split and then if 3 properties then the bill is split 3 ways.
THE FH PAYS NOTHING OVERALL, YOU AS THE LEASEHOLDER WILL ULTIMATELY PAY THE BILL IN SERVICE CHARGES OR FEES.
Do you understand or just not get it.
"Repairs liability
If you or your family or visitors do not behave in a responsible manner, and your-or-their-actions lead to unnecessary repairs to the common parts or structure of the buiding, we may charge you to recover those costs."
I have not been billed for the unblocking of the stack and I won't at any point either as it was not a result of irresponsible behaviour.
CC07 PEU said:
Du1point8 said:
Again listen to what I say...
Its irrelevant what you are stating about the blockage... the freeholder doesnt pay for blockages outside of your property... you do...
If blockage is in the stack, the FH will work out who's property is doing it and bill them, unless its split and then if 3 properties then the bill is split 3 ways.
THE FH PAYS NOTHING OVERALL, YOU AS THE LEASEHOLDER WILL ULTIMATELY PAY THE BILL IN SERVICE CHARGES OR FEES.
Do you understand or just not get it.
Nonsense. The repairs liability is that of the freeholder and there's no reference in the leaseholder's handbook regarding billing my property or spliting it three ways at all. That has never happened and never will. Only if leaseholder behaviour has led to "unnecessary repairs" would a leaseholder be billed. This is taken from the leaseholder's handbook:Its irrelevant what you are stating about the blockage... the freeholder doesnt pay for blockages outside of your property... you do...
If blockage is in the stack, the FH will work out who's property is doing it and bill them, unless its split and then if 3 properties then the bill is split 3 ways.
THE FH PAYS NOTHING OVERALL, YOU AS THE LEASEHOLDER WILL ULTIMATELY PAY THE BILL IN SERVICE CHARGES OR FEES.
Do you understand or just not get it.
"Repairs liability
If you or your family or visitors do not behave in a responsible manner, and your-or-their-actions lead to unnecessary repairs to the common parts or structure of the buiding, we may charge you to recover those costs."
I have not been billed for the unblocking of the stack and I won't at any point either as it was not a result of irresponsible behaviour.
Which country is this as its clearly not the UK?
A freeholder maintains the building, the costs of this are usually passed onto those living in it, the leaseholders.
So the roof needs repair, the FH will sort out the repair and maintenance, they will ask the leaseholders to pay for the bill or it will not go ahead.
FH has a responsibility for maintaining the fabric of the building – the roof and the outside walls, they dont pay for it, you do.
Otherwise what is the point of being a freeholder?
If I was a freeholder of a property, by your logic, I pay for the upkeep of your leasehold property with no profit/benefit. So explain why ANYONE would want to own a freehold under your logic as it will only cost them money??
Even in London if you stat you extend a leasehold... a 25 to 100 year lease might be £30k, in the 25 years of getting to that stage will be more than £30k in just external maintenance.
Du1point8 said:
How long have you been a leaseholder?
Which country is this as its clearly not the UK?
A freeholder maintains the building, the costs of this are usually passed onto those living in it, the leaseholders.
So the roof needs repair, the FH will sort out the repair and maintenance, they will ask the leaseholders to pay for the bill or it will not go ahead.
FH has a responsibility for maintaining the fabric of the building – the roof and the outside walls, they dont pay for it, you do.
Otherwise what is the point of being a freeholder?
If I was a freeholder of a property, by your logic, I pay for the upkeep of your leasehold property with no profit/benefit. So explain why ANYONE would want to own a freehold under your logic as it will only cost them money??
Even in London if you stat you extend a leasehold... a 25 to 100 year lease might be £30k, in the 25 years of getting to that stage will be more than £30k in just external maintenance.
Five years in London as a leaseholder.Which country is this as its clearly not the UK?
A freeholder maintains the building, the costs of this are usually passed onto those living in it, the leaseholders.
So the roof needs repair, the FH will sort out the repair and maintenance, they will ask the leaseholders to pay for the bill or it will not go ahead.
FH has a responsibility for maintaining the fabric of the building – the roof and the outside walls, they dont pay for it, you do.
Otherwise what is the point of being a freeholder?
If I was a freeholder of a property, by your logic, I pay for the upkeep of your leasehold property with no profit/benefit. So explain why ANYONE would want to own a freehold under your logic as it will only cost them money??
Even in London if you stat you extend a leasehold... a 25 to 100 year lease might be £30k, in the 25 years of getting to that stage will be more than £30k in just external maintenance.
Not all freeholders are out to make money. There are different types of freeholders and by the looks of it you aren't aware of this. I'm not going to go into detail about who my freeholder is because that's moving away from the point and all I've ended up doing is educating you on something you weren't aware of.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff