Business issue
Discussion
papa3 said:
Copy of the letter with details removed?
Did you provide an invoice with T's and C's?
How much does she want from you?
Letter below. The clipping of cables to walls - it was done then removed when she had painters in. Did you provide an invoice with T's and C's?
How much does she want from you?
The clipping of cables to columns- i mentioned, verbally , at the time that the columns ideally needed replacing but she had no money so we agreed to put on outside.
No I didnt put any T&C on invoice.
She has not requested an amount - I dare say it will end up being the amount the local company charge to put anything right from the burglary.
The last line of the letter is the dig at me and the personal situation. Previous to this I was very good friends - met up at Christmas / birthdays etc. She is the sort of woman who once something annoys takes it very personally. Id always thought I wouldnt want to get on the wrong side of her!
There is no mention below of secret camera, but a staff member did email me about it last week bizarrely saying she couldn't get it to work. Im now thinking are they trying to get an angle on it's faulty but haven't mentioned it due to it probably illegal?
Also the letter states Potential Intruders - so did they actually get broken in to or has she just been on the roof and ripped the system apart to spite me?
Letter as below
As Headteacher acting for the Governors for XXX School, I am contacting you regarding the camera system installed August 2015.
Due to the inadequacies in installing it, it allowed potential intruders to rip out wires and defy what it is meant to do - catch them on camera.
We have had to contact insurers and arrange quotes for repairs. It is apparent from the reports back from all of them that the installation was not correct, and the following has been identified
A report has been made from a local CCTV firm. It is as follows:
I found that the plastic weatherproof electrical box had been vandalized. This would have contained a low voltage power supply is now missing.
Camera inside the entrance – cable has is loose and not properly cable clipped to ceiling.
Wires at the back of the DVR are loose and heavy these should be clipped to wall
I noticed the video cables were fed on the outside of the column to the cameras and not ran internally which could compromise the system and does not meet British Standards.
As a Headteacher it is my responsibility for safety at the school and its pupils and accountable to my Governers for what I spend. I have paid a considerable sum of money from a reduced budget for a system which was not installed to a correct level.
I will be awaiting your response back to what compensation you will be offering in view of the above failings.
I think your actions in lots of areas need accessing.
wjwren said:
I don’t have insurance and I don’t normally do this type of work. The school is state run. The job was done by me and I did turn a profit. This wouldn’t of been an issue had we not had this falling out. She is trying to claim compensation to put right the damage of broken wiring and the fact the wires according to her should of been in metal conduit. When I installed the system I did explain to her verbally that ideally the metal towers the cameras were on should be replaced with the wiring going inside them but she said money was tight so not to do it. But I guess she isn’t claiming off the alarm company for the fact the alarm went off or the double glazing company for the window breaking when a brick went through it.
Did the school inspect the work on completion?Did they install the mandatory CCTV notices?
Your contract is not with the head teacher but with the Governing body or (if an academy) the academy trust that rums the school. It would be very unusual for a state school to contract without a degree of formality, including a tender process in many cases, and a written agreement in most. Are you suggesting that this was all done on the basis of a chat with the head teacher?
It appears that the claim is not for losses from the break in (that would be a duff claim), but for the cost of making good a system that was installed in a below standard way (that is potentially a good claim). I gather that you did a cut price job and cut corners. Unless you can point to specific agreement as to the way you did the job then you have a problem, as the school had the implied contractual right to have the job done to a reasonable standard, judged by the standards of the industry.
Breadvan72 said:
Your contract is not with the head teacher but with the Governing body or (if an academy) the academy trust that rums the school. It would be very unusual for a state school to contract without a degree of formality, including a tender process in many cases, and a written agreement in most. Are you suggesting that this was all done on the basis of a chat with the head teacher?
Yes all this was done via face to face chat. I told her the price she said ok go ahead. It is now an academy but wasn't couple of years ago.
wjwren said:
Yes all this was done via face to face chat. I told her the price she said ok go ahead. It is now an academy but wasn't couple of years ago.
Most irregular, but that probably won't preclude a claim against you for doing a substandard job. Negotiate a settlement. Maybe offer to make good the damage to the system and set it up with proper standards of cabling and so on. That may be cheapest.EDIT: Or take a stand on a he said she said contest about whether you advised internal cabling and the head rejected it.
Next time, document the deal.
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 24th October 15:07
Wjwren should going to said:
Dear Stewer of sylvilagus,
As you will recall, when I originally quoted this work I recommended to you that the metal towers upon which the cameras are mounted should be replaced, so that the cabling could be run internally and made tamper proof. You declined this option on the basis of cost.
I'm a little unsure of your motive for writing, I clearly can not be held responsible for the inevitable outcome of your decision, when it was taken contrary to the advice I gave you. If you are asking me to quote for the new work involved in fitting new towers with integral tamper proofed wiring, I regret to inform you that I will be declining to quote on this occasion.
Hope the bunny is delish, are you doing a nice red wine reduction to go with? Some of those dauphinoise spuds perhaps? Yummy!
Yours salivatingly,
Mr. Wjwren
P.S. Please say "Hi" to your daughter for me. I hear she's single again, I don't 'spose...
On the other hand it might be a better idea to ignore me.As you will recall, when I originally quoted this work I recommended to you that the metal towers upon which the cameras are mounted should be replaced, so that the cabling could be run internally and made tamper proof. You declined this option on the basis of cost.
I'm a little unsure of your motive for writing, I clearly can not be held responsible for the inevitable outcome of your decision, when it was taken contrary to the advice I gave you. If you are asking me to quote for the new work involved in fitting new towers with integral tamper proofed wiring, I regret to inform you that I will be declining to quote on this occasion.
Hope the bunny is delish, are you doing a nice red wine reduction to go with? Some of those dauphinoise spuds perhaps? Yummy!
Yours salivatingly,
Mr. Wjwren
P.S. Please say "Hi" to your daughter for me. I hear she's single again, I don't 'spose...
Breadvan72 said:
Most irregular, but that probably won't preclude a claim against you for doing a substandard job. Negotiate a settlement. Maybe offer to make good the damage to the system and set it up with proper standards of cabling and so on. That may be cheapest.
EDIT: Or take a stand on a he said she said contest about whether you advised internal cabling and the head rejected it.
Next time, document the deal.
I know she wont want me to come back after the personal issues but shouldnt I be able to offer to put anything she finds at fault right before she engages in paying someone else to fix it. Im thinking down the small claims route and that you should allow the person to put a fault right.EDIT: Or take a stand on a he said she said contest about whether you advised internal cabling and the head rejected it.
Next time, document the deal.
Edited by Breadvan72 on Tuesday 24th October 15:07
Make an offer that is expressed to be without prejudice save as to costs to rectify the problems. Personal issues should be put aside - the contract is with the school. Copy any letter you send to the Chair of Governors and if need be ask the Chair to deal with the matter, citing possible personal issues as a reason for the head not to conduct the negotiation.
Be polite, factual, non emotional.
Be polite, factual, non emotional.
OP, ignore that well intended but bad advice. Courts do not like people ignoring letters. It matters not that the letter was sent by the head teacher.
Correspondence should be engaged with sensibly, not ignored or met with rude responses. Write every email or letter with a view to it being read by a Judge. Have every conversation with a view to it being narrated in Court. Hopefully you won't go anywhere near a Court, but prepare on the basis that you might end up in one.
Correspondence should be engaged with sensibly, not ignored or met with rude responses. Write every email or letter with a view to it being read by a Judge. Have every conversation with a view to it being narrated in Court. Hopefully you won't go anywhere near a Court, but prepare on the basis that you might end up in one.
The letter from the Head Teacher sounds very flaky.
a) if she had approval for installation from Governors, then why are the Governors nor pursuing this? I imagine she had no such approval, hence is by passing them
If you do reply, send it to the chair of Governors (copy also to one of the Parent Governors who may not know the CCTV existed nor its terms of operation). Say you acknowledge receipt, and that is all. How long ago was the installation?
a) if she had approval for installation from Governors, then why are the Governors nor pursuing this? I imagine she had no such approval, hence is by passing them
If you do reply, send it to the chair of Governors (copy also to one of the Parent Governors who may not know the CCTV existed nor its terms of operation). Say you acknowledge receipt, and that is all. How long ago was the installation?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff