recourse on rip off contractor sent out by letting agent?
Discussion
Hopefully I can keep a long & boring story short....
My tenants reported an issue with a leaking washing machine while I was away on holiday, the letting agent got in contact and asked if I was happy to approve one of their contractors being sent out - at this point I agreed making the stupid assumption it was an appliance engineer being sent and not one of my preferred contractors because I hadn't supplied details of any appliance engineers (they have the details of the plumbers, electricians and handymen to use at the address).... Before anyone was booked in to go to the property I made it clear to the agent if the problem was any more than a loose hose the contractor was to contact me directly, in effect I thought I was approving one hours work.
The agent sent a plumber, who turned up 6 days after the leak was reported and the resulting bill is for 3 hours + materials and includes replacing a sink waste, replacing water pipes going to the tap under the sink, removing dead legs on pipe work (that I know didn't exist as a legionella assessor had his head in there looking for that type of thing only a couple of months ago!)..... Basically they felt they had an open tab and went to town, despite my instructions otherwise.
The unfortunate part is the agents paid the bill before they sent me a copy of it.... I don't think they even looked at the bill, but just passed it over to their accounts department.
The poor girl at the letting agent has probably had a rubbish day dealing with me while shes been going back and forward to the boss of the plumbing company but shes not getting much past 'they were there 3 hours and to basically bugger off because the bill has been paid'' with a refusal to provide a signed job sheet and a refusal to break down the material bill.... I'm holding off speaking to the plumbing company myself as I want to gather all the facts first....
I know at best it's a couple of hours labor being disputed but I really grudge being robbed so am happy to put more effort into it than it is worth.... I'm sure I'm not the first person this has happened to so any advice on any potential steps for recourse would be appreciated....
The only thing I can think of is to leave an honest review of the plumber everywhere relevant and maybe forward all the details and evidence on to somewhere like trading standards?
My tenants reported an issue with a leaking washing machine while I was away on holiday, the letting agent got in contact and asked if I was happy to approve one of their contractors being sent out - at this point I agreed making the stupid assumption it was an appliance engineer being sent and not one of my preferred contractors because I hadn't supplied details of any appliance engineers (they have the details of the plumbers, electricians and handymen to use at the address).... Before anyone was booked in to go to the property I made it clear to the agent if the problem was any more than a loose hose the contractor was to contact me directly, in effect I thought I was approving one hours work.
The agent sent a plumber, who turned up 6 days after the leak was reported and the resulting bill is for 3 hours + materials and includes replacing a sink waste, replacing water pipes going to the tap under the sink, removing dead legs on pipe work (that I know didn't exist as a legionella assessor had his head in there looking for that type of thing only a couple of months ago!)..... Basically they felt they had an open tab and went to town, despite my instructions otherwise.
The unfortunate part is the agents paid the bill before they sent me a copy of it.... I don't think they even looked at the bill, but just passed it over to their accounts department.
The poor girl at the letting agent has probably had a rubbish day dealing with me while shes been going back and forward to the boss of the plumbing company but shes not getting much past 'they were there 3 hours and to basically bugger off because the bill has been paid'' with a refusal to provide a signed job sheet and a refusal to break down the material bill.... I'm holding off speaking to the plumbing company myself as I want to gather all the facts first....
I know at best it's a couple of hours labor being disputed but I really grudge being robbed so am happy to put more effort into it than it is worth.... I'm sure I'm not the first person this has happened to so any advice on any potential steps for recourse would be appreciated....
The only thing I can think of is to leave an honest review of the plumber everywhere relevant and maybe forward all the details and evidence on to somewhere like trading standards?
Wooda80 said:
Surely your beef ( if any ) is with the letting agent for paying the bill without your authorisation. I feel more sympathy for your tenant who was without a washing machine for a week.
Maybe it does fall on the agent - this is what I don't understand.... I do know at a minimum they are meant to use the contractors I gave them unless there is no availability, guaranteed one of lot I usually use would have been out the same day if they were called..... Agreed re sympathy to the tenant... I'm furious it took a week to get someone out to them when it was authorised the day it was reported, especially as it left the tenant in the position of having a machine they may have to use but would flood the room if did.... Trust me, I do everything possible to look after them, which is hopefully part of the reason they didn't just think f
k it we need to wash our clothes.... but thats a separate issue.rgf100 said:
I’d either swallow it but lay down very clear rules for the agent in future, or indicate that you regard the agents handling as unreasonable and want reimbursed £XXX or its the small claims court.
£XXX? Sounds like an order of magnitude out. Even if the plumber is a £40 an hour merchant, that's £80 at stake here, surely?skwdenyer said:
£XXX? Sounds like an order of magnitude out. Even if the plumber is a £40 an hour merchant, that's £80 at stake here, surely?
I hadn't included figures as I don't see it as overly important, we're talking a couple of hundred quid.... Not exactly life changing money and not the main reason for wanting to kick up st.Edited by Black_S3 on Thursday 13th December 02:34
Contractor is entitled to be paid as they were either (a) contracted directly by the letting company or (b) contracted by you, where the letting company was acting as your agent. If (b), the contractor is probably entitled to assume that the lettering company had the authority to enter into and bind you into a contract on your behalf.
You may have a claim against the letting agency if they have exceeded their authority in entering into that contract - particularly if you did in fact give express instructions as to what they could agree to without further instructions
You may have a claim against the letting agency if they have exceeded their authority in entering into that contract - particularly if you did in fact give express instructions as to what they could agree to without further instructions
Black_S3 said:
skwdenyer said:
£XXX? Sounds like an order of magnitude out. Even if the plumber is a £40 an hour merchant, that's £80 at stake here, surely?
I hadn't included figures as I don't see it as overly important, we're talking a couple of hundred quid.... Not exactly life changing money and not the main reason for wanting to kick up st.Edited by Black_S3 on Thursday 13th December 02:34
skwdenyer said:
Sorry, I wasn't meaning to do-down the issue, just putting some context around it. However, I thought you said the issue was 3 hours' work vs 1 hour. If Delta T is 2 hours and the difference is bills is "a couple of hundred quid" then your plumber is charging over £100 per hour... I was wondering if hourly rate was therefore also a part of the issue to be "discussed" with the agent here...
Correct hourly rate is 85+vat so £102. This isn't an unusual or unfair hourly rate round here....Ok so the story gets better... The owner of the company who had been insisting yesterday his guy was in the property for over 2.5 hours and that the vans were tracked so he could provide the proof from the tracker.
Just humoring it I took him up on seeing the tracker details, and to my amazement he provided a genuine unedited copy showing the van ignition was off at the address for 2 hours 7 minutes..... Now bearing in mind the start point & end point is entry and exit of the property they've admitted to being in the house for less than 2 hours but has come out with the line '' at this point the bill is not being reduced''. What the owner of the company doesn't realise yet it that my view at this point is no longer about the bill being reduced but about reporting them to trading standards and potentially to the police for fraud.... Yes, I admit it's hardly the crime of the century but I don't think people should be allowed to behave like this unchallenged.
Here's what they provided (I have edited it to remove addresses and unfortunately to remove the company name/avoid naming and shaming):
I'm off out there to check what's been done this afternoon but still await a breakdown of the materials used.
What do you lot think are the next steps?
Just humoring it I took him up on seeing the tracker details, and to my amazement he provided a genuine unedited copy showing the van ignition was off at the address for 2 hours 7 minutes..... Now bearing in mind the start point & end point is entry and exit of the property they've admitted to being in the house for less than 2 hours but has come out with the line '' at this point the bill is not being reduced''. What the owner of the company doesn't realise yet it that my view at this point is no longer about the bill being reduced but about reporting them to trading standards and potentially to the police for fraud.... Yes, I admit it's hardly the crime of the century but I don't think people should be allowed to behave like this unchallenged.
Here's what they provided (I have edited it to remove addresses and unfortunately to remove the company name/avoid naming and shaming):
I'm off out there to check what's been done this afternoon but still await a breakdown of the materials used.
What do you lot think are the next steps?
PAULJ5555 said:
Yep about 20% is the norm.
https://www.gov.scot/publications/letting-agent-code-practice/pages/5/96. On request, you must disclose to landlords, in writing, whether you receive any commission, fee, rebate or other payment or benefit and any financial or other interest you receive from a contractor/third party you appoint.
Not in my case, I asked this before signing with the agent & have already asked the question again regarding the company involved.
tinnitusjosh said:
Contractor is entitled to be paid as they were either (a) contracted directly by the letting company or (b) contracted by you, where the letting company was acting as your agent. If (b), the contractor is probably entitled to assume that the lettering company had the authority to enter into and bind you into a contract on your behalf.
You may have a claim against the letting agency if they have exceeded their authority in entering into that contract - particularly if you did in fact give express instructions as to what they could agree to without further instructions
Maybe my thinking is wrong as my gripe really isn't much towards the letting agent, sure things could have been handled slightly better & a few mistakes have been made but I believe the agents to be honest and genuine....You may have a claim against the letting agency if they have exceeded their authority in entering into that contract - particularly if you did in fact give express instructions as to what they could agree to without further instructions
Edited by Black_S3 on Thursday 13th December 12:51
Black_S3 said:
Ok so the story gets better... The owner of the company who had been insisting yesterday his guy was in the property for over 2.5 hours and that the vans were tracked so he could provide the proof from the tracker.
Just humoring it I took him up on seeing the tracker details, and to my amazement he provided a genuine unedited copy showing the van ignition was off at the address for 2 hours 7 minutes..... Now bearing in mind the start point & end point is entry and exit of the property they've admitted to being in the house for less than 2 hours but has come out with the line '' at this point the bill is not being reduced''. What the owner of the company doesn't realise yet it that my view at this point is no longer about the bill being reduced but about reporting them to trading standards and potentially to the police for fraud.... Yes, I admit it's hardly the crime of the century but I don't think people should be allowed to behave like this unchallenged.
Here's what they provided (I have edited it to remove addresses and unfortunately to remove the company name/avoid naming and shaming):
I'm off out there to check what's been done this afternoon but still await a breakdown of the materials used.
What do you lot think are the next steps?
Hmm, crime is a strong word. If the basis of charging is whole-hour time units, then 2hr7min = 3 hrs to the nearest (rounded-up) hour. Fair? No. Reasonable? That's a commercial issue.Just humoring it I took him up on seeing the tracker details, and to my amazement he provided a genuine unedited copy showing the van ignition was off at the address for 2 hours 7 minutes..... Now bearing in mind the start point & end point is entry and exit of the property they've admitted to being in the house for less than 2 hours but has come out with the line '' at this point the bill is not being reduced''. What the owner of the company doesn't realise yet it that my view at this point is no longer about the bill being reduced but about reporting them to trading standards and potentially to the police for fraud.... Yes, I admit it's hardly the crime of the century but I don't think people should be allowed to behave like this unchallenged.
Here's what they provided (I have edited it to remove addresses and unfortunately to remove the company name/avoid naming and shaming):
I'm off out there to check what's been done this afternoon but still await a breakdown of the materials used.
What do you lot think are the next steps?
I would pay the letting agent then write a letter before action to the supplier setting out the basis of your grievance and inviting them to settle.
skwdenyer said:
Hmm, crime is a strong word. If the basis of charging is whole-hour time units, then 2hr7min = 3 hrs to the nearest (rounded-up) hour. Fair? No. Reasonable? That's a commercial issue.
The issue is 2 hours 7 mins is the time the van was off. For all we know he could have still sat pleasuring himself for half an hour.... But sticking strictly to by what is fact it's fair to say he doesn't get from his van, to the property, ring the door bell etc or leave the property and turn his van on in 0 minutes.Bear in mind there's been unnecessary and unauthorized work done to even bump the time up as high as two hours.... I think when the whole picture is painted it does cross the line into dishonest behavior for financial gain.....
Black_S3 said:
skwdenyer said:
Hmm, crime is a strong word. If the basis of charging is whole-hour time units, then 2hr7min = 3 hrs to the nearest (rounded-up) hour. Fair? No. Reasonable? That's a commercial issue.
The issue is 2 hours 7 mins is the time the van was off. For all we know he could have still sat pleasuring himself for half an hour.... But sticking strictly to by what is fact it's fair to say he doesn't get from his van, to the property, ring the door bell etc or leave the property and turn his van on in 0 minutes.Bear in mind there's been unnecessary and unauthorized work done to even bump the time up as high as two hours.... I think when the whole picture is painted it does cross the line into dishonest behavior for financial gain.....
To me, this is a commercial dispute, not a crime. People do s
t all the time. That doesn't make it criminal. This is almost the definition of "a civil matter" as the Police might call it.Is that right? Is that as it should be? Sadly not. But it is what it is.
If it were me (and it is no, it is you, and I absolutely don't want to tell you what to do) then I would:
- tell the letting agent that they need to resolve this or lose your business
- if that fails, pay the agent (don't need 2 cases going...) and send a simple (unemotional) LBA to the plumbers
- if necessary, launch a small claim
But that's just me. And meanwhile find a panel of trades you can trust for the future.
Every time I get my house inspected the letting agent tries to find *TINY* issues so they can send one of their mates to fix it for a crazy cost an then bill the landlord.
The latest one was that there was a single weed growing from the top of the wall in the back yard. They send a tree surgeon to remove it. I actually refused to let him do it, climbed up and did it myself in front of him. Total piss take.
It's probably how they are intending to make their money once (if?) the letting fees are outlawed.
The latest one was that there was a single weed growing from the top of the wall in the back yard. They send a tree surgeon to remove it. I actually refused to let him do it, climbed up and did it myself in front of him. Total piss take.
It's probably how they are intending to make their money once (if?) the letting fees are outlawed.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff