Issues with Builder

[Neilmoir]

Hi,

I'll try to keep this short and to the point in the hope that someone with greater knowledge in this area may clarify something for me.

In May I agreed with a builder (a limited company) for them to construct an extension at my property. I provided them with architectural drawings and a detailed schedule if works, from which they provided a breakdown of costs for each element. I subsiquently agreed and they sent me some "general building terms" to sign and send back, which I did.

Having constructed over half of the extension they were paid half of the contacted cost. The next and final payment would be upon competition of the works.

Several weeks later having constructed the majority of the remainder they have stopped work. There are multiple things outstanding and some of which they have not completed as per that detailed within the schedule of works.

Fast forward a number of weeks of me trying to get them to compete the works so that I can pay the final payment and move on and it's like pulling teeth. Considering they are still owed 35k I don't understand why they are dragging their heels. Never the less I wish to move forward and started to formulate a notice to the company directors of intended contact termination should said works not be completed within the next 2 weeks (seriously most of these things can be done in 2 days!). My alternate suggestion being that should they not be able to do this I employ the services of another contractor to complete the works and pay them out of the remaining sum before finally paying them the balance.

Following a telephone conversation with a company director I suggeste this. His response was that I could not do that because of the terms of the contract I had signed. He also said that he had no one he could send to complete the works and that at the moment there was nothing he could do. This is now costing me money with a half built extension sitting there.

This is where it gets interesting. I started to draft a letter indicating the points of terms to which the builder had breached thus rendering the contract void, with the option of either fixing and finishing the works or having another contractor complete them paid from the remaining contract sum. Following 2 pages of detail I noticed that the terms I signed had no address on, nor did it have the correct company name as per that shown on Companies House. I'll use a fictitious name here but say the company called themselves Bills Builders Ltd. but on Companies House this does not exist. The company that is registered for them is Bills Builders Services Ltd. The address listed on companies House is also not the same address as that which was on the interim invoice payment and does not exist on the terms.

The exam question: Given I have signed terms with the incorrect company name indicated with no address or other contact information shown, does this render those terms as part of the contract void anyway and am I therefore wasting my time detailing why the terms within have been breached?

Thanks in advance.

[jaguarsuk]

Hi,

I'll try to keep this short and to the point in the hope that someone with greater knowledge in this area may clarify something for me.

In May I agreed with a builder (a limited company) for them to construct an extension at my property. I provided them with architectural drawings and a detailed schedule if works, from which they provided a breakdown of costs for each element. I subsiquently agreed and they sent me some "general building terms" to sign and send back, which I did.

Having constructed over half of the extension they were paid half of the contacted cost. The next and final payment would be upon competition of the works.

Several weeks later having constructed the majority of the remainder they have stopped work. There are multiple things outstanding and some of which they have not completed as per that detailed within the schedule of works.

Fast forward a number of weeks of me trying to get them to compete the works so that I can pay the final payment and move on and it's like pulling teeth. Considering they are still owed 35k I don't understand why they are dragging their heels. Never the less I wish to move forward and started to formulate a notice to the company directors of intended contact termination should said works not be completed within the next 2 weeks (seriously most of these things can be done in 2 days!). My alternate suggestion being that should they not be able to do this I employ the services of another contractor to complete the works and pay them out of the remaining sum before finally paying them the balance.

Following a telephone conversation with a company director I suggeste this. His response was that I could not do that because of the terms of the contract I had signed. He also said that he had no one he could send to complete the works and that at the moment there was nothing he could do. This is now costing me money with a half built extension sitting there.

This is where it gets interesting. I started to draft a letter indicating the points of terms to which the builder had breached thus rendering the contract void, with the option of either fixing and finishing the works or having another contractor complete them paid from the remaining contract sum. Following 2 pages of detail I noticed that the terms I signed had no address on, nor did it have the correct company name as per that shown on Companies House. I'll use a fictitious name here but say the company called themselves Bills Builders Ltd. but on Companies House this does not exist. The company that is registered for them is Bills Builders Services Ltd. The address listed on companies House is also not the same address as that which was on the interim invoice payment and does not exist on the terms.

The exam question: Given I have signed terms with the incorrect company name indicated with no address or other contact information shown, does this render those terms as part of the contract void anyway and am I therefore wasting my time detailing why the terms within have been breached?

Thanks in advance.

Okay, so the name could simply be a trading name of the Limited Company and the lack of an address doesn't constitute the contract void.

More importantly you do not have to sign a contract to enter into it and your conduct can demonstrate you entered into the terms of business. In your specific instance you paid 50% of the sum for the works, which would be by conduct acceptance of the terms of business with Bills Builders Services Ltd.

It all depends on the terms you have signed of course, but demonstrating their breaches of contract and seeking remedy I believe should be your course of action. If they do not remedy, then you could terminate the contract in writing as you have stated and employ another contractor to complete the work.

I'd imagine they might file a claim if you did seeking what you have deducted from the £35K to pay the new contractor, so don't be surprised if a claim form drops on your door mat.

Others might have better advice than I though, so wait to see what R0b or des8 have to say on the matter.

[Neilmoir]

Thanks. There are clause that could be argued given that they have stated such things like they would strive to have operatives working on site 5days per week 8 hours per day, which they are clearly not. Also the works to complete are either that which has been explicitly defined in the schedule of works that they have not yet done or as a result of lack of care and skill. For example, installing the the wrong undersized steel column, contrary to what the drawings and engineers calculations state, which is holding the whole house up! This was picked up by building control thank God. In addition to a hole in the middle of the concrete slab with torn DPC in contravention of building control standards.

I just thought I could save myself a whole host of time if there terms were invalid rather than explain why they are breaching them. And by the way, a number of the terms they note do not confirm to the latest Consumer Rights Act 2015 or The Consumer Contracts 2013. Such as giving 7 days to cancel and not the now required 14 etc.

I'm not looking for anything above and beyond what I have asked for, simply for them to come on site and finish the works so I can move on, or allow me to have someone else finish paid for our of the funds they have not yet earned and I still hold.

Thanks.

[jaguarsuk]

Thanks. There are clause that could be argued given that they have stated such things like they would strive to have operatives working on site 5days per week 8 hours per day, which they are clearly not. Also the works to complete are either that which has been explicitly defined in the schedule of works that they have not yet done or as a result of lack of care and skill. For example, installing the the wrong undersized steel column, contrary to what the drawings and engineers calculations state, which is holding the whole house up! This was picked up by building control thank God. In addition to a hole in the middle of the concrete slab with torn DPC in contravention of building control standards.

I just thought I could save myself a whole host of time if there terms were invalid rather than explain why they are breaching them. And by the way, a number of the terms they note do not confirm to the latest Consumer Rights Act 2015 or The Consumer Contracts 2013. Such as giving 7 days to cancel and not the now required 14 etc.

I'm not looking for anything above and beyond what I have asked for, simply for them to come on site and finish the works so I can move on, or allow me to have someone else finish paid for our of the funds they have not yet earned and I still hold.

Thanks.

The problem with the time being worked is the word "strive," there's a lot of wriggle room with that word.

I think if they have made errors like that you can definitively say there's a lack of care and skill.

I understand wanting the easy out, but I think you might have to go the long route.

Is there a severability clause in the terms?

[Neilmoir]

No, there is no serverbility clause.

There is also no indication of how or where to refer complaints so I can only send to the address which is listed on Companies House, which I know they no longer trade at.

[jaguarsuk]

No, there is no serverbility clause.

There is also no indication of how or where to refer complaints so I can only send to the address which is listed on Companies House, which I know they no longer trade at.

Good stuff, then you could argue the contract is void due to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 on the grounds that the 7 day clause does not meet the legal obligations of the CRA 2015.

Severability clauses to explain are basically get outs for if 1 clause is deemed unfair or not enforceable that it doesn't have any the effect of making the whole contract unenforceable. Had it had one then they could have argued back that remainder of the contract was still valid and the days to cancel were not fatal to the contract due to you paying.

[des8]

Only commenting that if this is a ltd company trading as under another name they are required to display this information in all places where the business is carried out and on all documentation, invoices etc.

Any chance of naming the company so we can research it for you?