Tweet
I had what I thought was a reputable company doing some building work whom I found on a few well known online trademen search who are advertised on tv. Nevertheless they were obviously vetted for them to be on those sites. So they did the work , had a contract, half way through they left site. They were late by so many months and were only half way through. Damaged a lot of my outside property costing average £25k. And upon a RIC survey report the building has been condemned.*
Luckily paid *by credit card , and now facing cc only going to refund me the cost of the building and partial works that need rectifying.*
my concern is that my original contract was £29k . To now demolish down to below foundation level, redo , AND rectify all the damage which includes 130 square metre of paving, levelling my garden again and returfing, replacing broken fences and gravel boards and disposing all the waste from the demolition and the extra work now involved I have been quoted over £100k to have this done with a like to like as to what I had done before, so no betterment. The cc have said no only refund of what was paid and payment to demolish and the payment they offered to demolish is not full amount. The rectifying is not full amount to all the quotes I had provided. Surely the reason why I started this contract was to have a building built not for it to be demolished and it’s not just easy to demolish it . I just want a building for what I was contracted for and it was very clear on my contract everything. Why are the cc not abiding by the section 75 rules about joint liability and severally liability since the builders breached about 10 different clauses on contract. Cc admitted joint liability hence why they offered settlement it’s just the figures will still put me at loss. The figures will not cover the rectification neither a new building again. However it should be noted that it shouldn’t be to put me back to the what I would had been had I not carried out the work it should be that to put me back to position as though the contract had been met , what famous English common law puts me back to if my contract was met? And do I have a case here ? My witness report also says I would be at severe loss. And I really would be at severe loss . All builders charge their own rate, so if a builder is charging more to rebuild this but like for like that’s not my fault and I will be at loss surely?? Help please ? We had suffered so much for not being able to use the garden , the front garden is a health and safety concern it’s been a year since this disaster has happened . And kids can’t even go in the garden without getting hurt. I’ve not been able to work properly as outbuilding was suppose to be for my office!*
Luckily paid *by credit card , and now facing cc only going to refund me the cost of the building and partial works that need rectifying.*
my concern is that my original contract was £29k . To now demolish down to below foundation level, redo , AND rectify all the damage which includes 130 square metre of paving, levelling my garden again and returfing, replacing broken fences and gravel boards and disposing all the waste from the demolition and the extra work now involved I have been quoted over £100k to have this done with a like to like as to what I had done before, so no betterment. The cc have said no only refund of what was paid and payment to demolish and the payment they offered to demolish is not full amount. The rectifying is not full amount to all the quotes I had provided. Surely the reason why I started this contract was to have a building built not for it to be demolished and it’s not just easy to demolish it . I just want a building for what I was contracted for and it was very clear on my contract everything. Why are the cc not abiding by the section 75 rules about joint liability and severally liability since the builders breached about 10 different clauses on contract. Cc admitted joint liability hence why they offered settlement it’s just the figures will still put me at loss. The figures will not cover the rectification neither a new building again. However it should be noted that it shouldn’t be to put me back to the what I would had been had I not carried out the work it should be that to put me back to position as though the contract had been met , what famous English common law puts me back to if my contract was met? And do I have a case here ? My witness report also says I would be at severe loss. And I really would be at severe loss . All builders charge their own rate, so if a builder is charging more to rebuild this but like for like that’s not my fault and I will be at loss surely?? Help please ? We had suffered so much for not being able to use the garden , the front garden is a health and safety concern it’s been a year since this disaster has happened . And kids can’t even go in the garden without getting hurt. I’ve not been able to work properly as outbuilding was suppose to be for my office!*
