Defence

[bentls00]

Do you think the below is acceptable as a defence or should I provide further information ] 1.I received the claim from Northampton County Court on 28th April 2016.

2.	The Defendant denies that she is liable to the Claimant either as alleged in the Particulars of Claim or at all. Save where otherwise admitted, each and every allegation in the Particulars of Claim is denied.

3.	This claim for building works agreement regulated under the Supply of Goods and Service Act 1982.

4.	Paragraph 1 is denied. The Claimant did not quote for a wet room in drawing number 13/MH/001.

5. Paragraph 2 is denied.

.

6. Paragraph 3 is denied a Schedule of Work was not received (Appendix 7. Paragraph 4 is correct 8. Paragraph 5 is denied. The defendant vacated the property in March due to the property being uninhabitable. The bulk of work had not been completed. 9. Paragraph 6 is denied. The works had not been completed and agreed as various corresepondence indicates. (Appendix 10. Paragraph 7 is denied. The defendants made a payment of £3716.40 detailing the figure and costs deducted. (Appendix 11. Paragraph 8 is denied, no interest is payable, defendant has repeatedly requested receipts to support charges but has to date not received them.

[R0b]

Re: Defence

swap 2. with 3. but as a point to note, are you a consumer in this and is the claimant a business?

point 5 is a bare denial and is not accepted, although depending on what 5. says on the particulars of claim it may be accepted but generally you need to explain why you deny it.

points 9 and 10, if the appendix is evidence you wish to use no need to include evidence in your defence as this goes in your witness statement.

other than it seems reasonably fine, although just bear in mind the defence is what a judge is going to see first so the more information you put in there that helps your claim, the better chance you could have. This could also put off the claim if it is seen you have strong enough evidence. A defence with minimal information could be seen as a weak defence and may prompt the claimant to carry on with their claim.

Since you have not supplied any background to your situation it is difficult to say whether or not your defence is solid.

[bentls00]

Re: Defence

thank for you response, it is appreciated

I am the consumer and the claimant is a business.
I have a lot of documentation as evidence and was unsure whether to include in the defence. I didn't want it to be a case of going straight to judgement without looking at the documentation.
How do I put into the defence letters have been written notifying the builder that works need to be rectified or completed within a reasonable timescale or another contractor will be employed at their cost (at least 2 of these letters were written but never responded)
The builder has also charged for items not agreed and not agreed in writing, receipts have not been forthcoming and no guarantee at all supplied. I am finding it hard to word the defence

thanks

[Ripped-Off]

Re: Defence

How do I put into the defence letters have been written notifying the builder that works need to be rectified or completed within a reasonable timescale or another contractor will be employed at their cost (at least 2 of these letters were written but never responded

Is there a defects clause in your contract? If so, all you need to do is refer to a breach of that clause. If not, refer to section 14(1) of the Supply of Goods & Services Act 1982, where there is an implied obligation to make good defects within a reasonable time. If your builder has not done so, you have a right to correct them yourself and recover the cost from the builder, providing you have given the correct contractual notice or reasonable notice where a written contract does not exist.

In any event, if you want to be able to recover remedial costs from the other party you need to raise a counter-claim or set-off, and pay the appropriate fee. If not you will be precluded from doing so. Also, bear in mind the case of Pearce & High v Baxter [1999] as well as Woodlands Oak Ltd v Conwell [2011]; cases about notice to builder to correct defects.

The builder has also charged for items not agreed and not agreed in writing, receipts have not been forthcoming and no guarantee at all supplied. I am finding it hard to word the defence

Whether they are agreed in writing or not is a question of fact and we are not privy to the facts. However, if you have a written contract, that should provide the mechanism for instructing and performing extra work unless it could reasonably be implied that the work should have been included in the price - Williams v Fitzmaurice [1858]. If not, then a fair price is presumed payable by virtue of s15 of Supply of Goods & Services Act 1982. Perhaps you could say something like "the Claimant is put to strict proof in relation to/in respect of each and every item......."

[bentls00]

Re: Defence

Is there a defects clause in your contract? If so, all you need to do is refer to a breach of that clause. If not, refer to section 14(1) of the Supply of Goods & Services Act 1982, where there is an implied obligation to make good defects within a reasonable time. If your builder has not done so, you have a right to correct them yourself and recover the cost from the builder, providing you have given the correct contractual notice or reasonable notice where a written contract does not exist.

In any event, if you want to be able to recover remedial costs from the other party you need to raise a counter-claim or set-off, and pay the appropriate fee. If not you will be precluded from doing so. Also, bear in mind the case of Pearce & High v Baxter [1999] as well as Woodlands Oak Ltd v Conwell [2011]; cases about notice to builder to correct defects.



Whether they are agreed in writing or not is a question of fact and we are not privy to the facts. However, if you have a written contract, that should provide the mechanism for instructing and performing extra work unless it could reasonably be implied that the work should have been included in the price - Williams v Fitzmaurice [1858]. If not, then a fair price is presumed payable by virtue of s15 of Supply of Goods & Services Act 1982. Perhaps you could say something like "the Claimant is put to strict proof in relation to/in respect of each and every item......."

thanks - there is no contract just a quote with an amount for PC sums within the quote, an example of additional costs charge was levelling the floor after demolition of a wall. We wrote to disagree with the charge prior to the work being undertaken but the work was undertaken and charged to us.

[charitynjw]

Re: Defence

When is the cause of action (date)?

Would this be SoGSA or Consumer Rights Act?

[bentls00]

Re: Defence

When is the cause of action (date)? - sorry I don't know what cause of action is

Would this be SoGSA or Consumer Rights Act?

- Sale of Goods Act work commenced before Oct 15

[charitynjw]

Re: Defence

- Supply of Goods & Services Act work commenced before Oct 15

IFYPY

[bentls00]

Re: Defence

sorry Sale of Goods Act work commenced jan 15

[Ripped-Off]

Re: Defence

of additional costs charge was levelling the floor after demolition of a wall. We wrote to disagree with the charge prior to the work being undertaken but the work was undertaken and charged to us.

Can't quite grasp why the work would be required, but it could be something that you would have had to instruct as other work would be affected without it. The opposing argument is the condition of the floor has never changed and, therefore, should or ought to have been included in the price; perhaps Williams v Fitzmaurice [1858] will help with that argument.

[bentls00]

Re: Defence

Can't quite grasp why the work would be required, but it could be something that you would have had to instruct as other work would be affected without it. The opposing argument is the condition of the floor has never changed and, therefore, should or ought to have been included in the price; perhaps Williams v Fitzmaurice [1858] will help with that argument.

the wall that was demolished is now part of a hallway, the floor was left uneven and required levelling to make good.

[Ripped-Off]

Re: Defence

Had a feeling that might be it, but wasn't certain. They would have to convince me that there was no way they could ever have foreseen the requirement for a levelling compound when they took the old wall down.