Tweet
I am currently defending a case that Anglian Home Improvements have issued against one of their customers.
It involves the mis-selling for a conservatory to a retired couple. Due to the lack of time spent with the couple by the salesman/installation team at Anglian Home Improvements, it was only noticed that the wrong conservatory was ordered (flat roof lean-to, not Victorian roof) when the old conservatory was being taken down, at which point all works were stopped and an attempt was made with Anglain Home Improvements to come to an amicable arrangement to install the correct conservatory. However, Anglain Home Improvements would only commence work for the correct conservatory if the customer paid 80% of the cost of the old conservatory, as per contract e.g. around £7,727.00, on top of the £1,300 already paid - as they stated that they had incurred costs, by making the product. Obviously we felt this to be unacceptable and tried to negotiate a reduced amount, however, Anglian Home Improvments refused and for this reason we sought out another contractor who has now completed the works as per the customers request.
Anglian Home Improvements however were not satisfied with the 10% deposit paid by the customer and are now seeking a reduced cost of £3.5K, an amount which has never been requested before, through Norwich County Court claiming breech of contract. The customer has now had the notice of this from the courts and are intending to serve an acknowledgement ASAP and the defence below has been put together, which included having the case transfered to a court closer to the defendant
If anyone here has any suggestions how we should proceed with this I would be very grateful to hear them, this is the first time we have every done this so its all very new. I have put below the defence that we have put together - could anyone help me add more to this ??
PS list of problems other customers are having with Anglaim Home Improvements??
http://www.blagger.com/db4/company_id/248/companyname/Anglian-Windows.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Norwich County Court
Claim number
Defence
1. The defendant denies all allegations and claims made in the claimants Particulars of Claim and put the claimant to strict proof thereof.
2. The defendant claims that the product was mis-sold by the claimant, and relied on the defendant’s age and naivety to deliberately miss-sell their product.
3. The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the written agreement referred to. The defendant requests : -
a) A copy of the purported written agreement that the claimant cites in the Particulars of Claim, and which appears to form the basis upon which these proceedings have been brought, has not been served attached to the claim form.
4. Consequently, I deny all allegations on the particulars of claim and do not know what case I have to meet.
5. The courts attention is drawn to the fact that at no stage were the defendants told that they were being sold a Lean-to or any flat roof construction.
6. On the date of signing the agreement, the defendants were told verbally that they were being sold a Victorian Conservatory, as per the request at the initial consultation, and at no stage were they told that this had been changed or altered.
7. The defendant wishes to draw attention to the court that the claimant did not spend adequate time in explaining what was being sold, or provide sufficient detailed plans. As a result it was only noticed by the defendant that the wrong conservatory was being issued when the old conservatory was being dismantled. At this point the claimant stopped and an attempted to co-operate FULLY with Anglain Home Improvements to come to an amicable arrangement to install the correct conservatory.
8. On the 27 October 2008, the claimant wrote, in the attached e-mail, that the cost they were requesting from the defendant was £7,727.00 (80% of the contact value) and subsequently stated that they would not reduce this amount in any amicable agreement. However, now the claimant has reduced this amount without any reasoning. The defendant is confused how such figures can be conjured up and then changed without any justification.
9. The defendant wishes the court to know that the claimant would only commence work for the correct conservatory if the amount stated in item 8 was paid in full. The defendant believes that the failure of the claimant to negotiate a reduced amount, to be unreasonable and resulting in an alternative contractor being sought.
10. The defendant believes the claimant’s refusal to come to an amicable agreement in the discussions at the end of October has directly lead to the escalation of this matter.
11. The Defendant has made a payment of 10% at the initial instigation of the contract and believes this is fair and reasonable for the amount of work/services that the claimant has provided. The defendant believes that if there has been any subsequent losses, that has not been proved by the claimant, it is down to their misselling and greed as detailed in items 7 & 8.
12. I respectfully ask the court to make arrangements for this case to be transferred to the Cardiff County Court defined under CPR 30.2.
Statement of Truth
I believe the above statement to be true and factual
Signed .....................
Date 24 April 2009
It involves the mis-selling for a conservatory to a retired couple. Due to the lack of time spent with the couple by the salesman/installation team at Anglian Home Improvements, it was only noticed that the wrong conservatory was ordered (flat roof lean-to, not Victorian roof) when the old conservatory was being taken down, at which point all works were stopped and an attempt was made with Anglain Home Improvements to come to an amicable arrangement to install the correct conservatory. However, Anglain Home Improvements would only commence work for the correct conservatory if the customer paid 80% of the cost of the old conservatory, as per contract e.g. around £7,727.00, on top of the £1,300 already paid - as they stated that they had incurred costs, by making the product. Obviously we felt this to be unacceptable and tried to negotiate a reduced amount, however, Anglian Home Improvments refused and for this reason we sought out another contractor who has now completed the works as per the customers request.
Anglian Home Improvements however were not satisfied with the 10% deposit paid by the customer and are now seeking a reduced cost of £3.5K, an amount which has never been requested before, through Norwich County Court claiming breech of contract. The customer has now had the notice of this from the courts and are intending to serve an acknowledgement ASAP and the defence below has been put together, which included having the case transfered to a court closer to the defendant
If anyone here has any suggestions how we should proceed with this I would be very grateful to hear them, this is the first time we have every done this so its all very new. I have put below the defence that we have put together - could anyone help me add more to this ??
PS list of problems other customers are having with Anglaim Home Improvements??
http://www.blagger.com/db4/company_id/248/companyname/Anglian-Windows.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Norwich County Court
Claim number
Between Anglian Homes Improvements – Claimant
and
Defendant
Defence
1. The defendant denies all allegations and claims made in the claimants Particulars of Claim and put the claimant to strict proof thereof.
2. The defendant claims that the product was mis-sold by the claimant, and relied on the defendant’s age and naivety to deliberately miss-sell their product.
3. The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the written agreement referred to. The defendant requests : -
a) A copy of the purported written agreement that the claimant cites in the Particulars of Claim, and which appears to form the basis upon which these proceedings have been brought, has not been served attached to the claim form.
4. Consequently, I deny all allegations on the particulars of claim and do not know what case I have to meet.
5. The courts attention is drawn to the fact that at no stage were the defendants told that they were being sold a Lean-to or any flat roof construction.
6. On the date of signing the agreement, the defendants were told verbally that they were being sold a Victorian Conservatory, as per the request at the initial consultation, and at no stage were they told that this had been changed or altered.
7. The defendant wishes to draw attention to the court that the claimant did not spend adequate time in explaining what was being sold, or provide sufficient detailed plans. As a result it was only noticed by the defendant that the wrong conservatory was being issued when the old conservatory was being dismantled. At this point the claimant stopped and an attempted to co-operate FULLY with Anglain Home Improvements to come to an amicable arrangement to install the correct conservatory.
8. On the 27 October 2008, the claimant wrote, in the attached e-mail, that the cost they were requesting from the defendant was £7,727.00 (80% of the contact value) and subsequently stated that they would not reduce this amount in any amicable agreement. However, now the claimant has reduced this amount without any reasoning. The defendant is confused how such figures can be conjured up and then changed without any justification.
9. The defendant wishes the court to know that the claimant would only commence work for the correct conservatory if the amount stated in item 8 was paid in full. The defendant believes that the failure of the claimant to negotiate a reduced amount, to be unreasonable and resulting in an alternative contractor being sought.
10. The defendant believes the claimant’s refusal to come to an amicable agreement in the discussions at the end of October has directly lead to the escalation of this matter.
11. The Defendant has made a payment of 10% at the initial instigation of the contract and believes this is fair and reasonable for the amount of work/services that the claimant has provided. The defendant believes that if there has been any subsequent losses, that has not been proved by the claimant, it is down to their misselling and greed as detailed in items 7 & 8.
12. I respectfully ask the court to make arrangements for this case to be transferred to the Cardiff County Court defined under CPR 30.2.
Statement of Truth
I believe the above statement to be true and factual
Signed .....................
Date 24 April 2009
Comment