Don’t mess with this builder

Dustydazzler · Jun 8, 2021

Furious builder destroys £500k home and fills garden with rubble after payment dispute

DPG · Jun 8, 2021

Be interesting hearing both sides of that I reckon.

LukeD · Jun 8, 2021

There is a LOT more going on there ! And The builder will come off badly in the end .YOu cant wreck or remove stuff like that in law

ChipFanDave · Jun 8, 2021

The owners 200 miles away but has chosen to stay on holiday rather than return to try and sort it out??

Croyde is in Devon not Cornwall!

i=p/u · Jun 8, 2021

No payment what do they expect... this is where architect should have control and pay accordingly but think they charge upto 20% for this service.

Builders take advantage all time . They for one aint loosing out if the cost spirals.

LukeD · Jun 8, 2021

If the builder is a cowboy then hard luck .But all this rubbish in peoples terms about "stuff belongs to us until paid for " is worth zero f's in a court. You cannot remove stuff from a property .Its theft .

i=p/u · Jun 8, 2021

Cant pay we take away. Only fair.

ipf · Jun 9, 2021

What was that one a couple of years back where a scouser drove a digger through a Travelodge causing about half a million quid's worth of damage because of owed wages? There was a film of it. He locked himself in the cab and just went berserk.

Found it but I don't know how to copy it to here.
Type 'Travelodge' in 'search'. It was a post by LeeSK

edit, Most have probably seen it but quite a few haven't, so have a look.

snowhead · Jun 9, 2021

Did £443k worth of damage and got 5years in jail although that's probably 18months in real money.
All over £600 owed.

LukeD · Jun 9, 2021

Many stories flying around that this is a "Planning permission scam" type of thing .The owner hoping the house will need taking down and he can then rebuild .JUST like the expensive house in london that "fell down " 2 years ago .100% scam !

7029 dave · Jun 10, 2021

LukeD said:
If the builder is a cowboy then hard luck .But all this rubbish in peoples terms about "stuff belongs to us until paid for " is worth zero f's in a court. You cannot remove stuff from a property .Its theft .

If goods are not payed for how can that be theft to remove, surely its stealing on the home owner for not paying for the goods.

Dustydazzler · Jun 10, 2021

If the goods can be removed without causing any further damage then I don’t see any issue with a contractor taking back his supplies.

If the goods / materials can’t be removed without causing damages then let the courts deal with and sue the customer

Rockingit · Jun 10, 2021

LukeD said:
If the builder is a cowboy then hard luck .But all this rubbish in peoples terms about "stuff belongs to us until paid for " is worth zero f's in a court. You cannot remove stuff from a property .Its theft .

Sorry chap, but you're wrong there. Under law it's called 'Title of Goods'. It's fundamentally no different to buying a car on HP - it's not yours until you've paid every last penny of the agreement otherwise the HP firm is entirely valid in towing it away. What you'll find in most T&C's is a clause that states title of goods does not exchange until full payment has been made - in other words if a job is £50 materials and £500 labour then if there's £250 been exchanged the customer can't claim they've paid for the materials and consider the labour only worth £200. CRUCIALLY, though, this HAS to be in your trading terms.

What you can't do is cause another offence in enacting retrieval - so trespass, entering, damage etc etc - that's where you'd need a court to appoint baillifs for you. But if for arguments sake it was a pallet of bricks on a drive then absolutely nothing to stop you grabbing it back.

LukeD · Jun 10, 2021

Rockingit said:
Sorry chap, but you're wrong there. Under law it's called 'Title of Goods'. It's fundamentally no different to buying a car on HP - it's not yours until you've paid every last penny of the agreement otherwise the HP firm is entirely valid in towing it away. What you'll find in most T&C's is a clause that states title of goods does not exchange until full payment has been made - in other words if a job is £50 materials and £500 labour then if there's £250 been exchanged the customer can't claim they've paid for the materials and consider the labour only worth £200. CRUCIALLY, though, this HAS to be in your trading terms.

What you can't do is cause another offence in enacting retrieval - so trespass, entering, damage etc etc - that's where you'd need a court to appoint baillifs for you. But if for arguments sake it was a pallet of bricks on a drive then absolutely nothing to stop you grabbing it back.

Not exactly wrong .If the gate is locked you cannot force , you cannot enter a property without consent etc .The police would arrest any trades if they entered a house etc and started to remove items . What happens with a court order is very different .And those that dont like to pay tend to know the law and how to use it

LukeD · Jun 10, 2021

Dustydazzler said:
If the goods can be removed without causing any further damage then I don’t see any issue with a contractor taking back his supplies.

If the goods / materials can’t be removed without causing damages then let the courts deal with and sue the customer

Denial of access etc .He has to enter into/onto private property .Its a messy game .I know someone who got arrested .charged and a criminal record for theft etc due to this many moons ago. Far too many sharks out their .Thats why 3 embassies In london have to pay in full now before any work is carried out at their properties etc .They just got use to thinking they didnt have to pay . At the end of the day . If a guy has done work . the customer is not paying and they are in the customers house .Its going to be a real issue if the trade person wants to start removing stuff or wanting to access the property .In most cases it will never be worth the problems with police etc . Especially if it turn into a fight

i=p/u · Jun 10, 2021

The horn trick from 7am, just torment them.

DPG · Jun 10, 2021

i=p/u said:
The horn trick from 7am, just torment them.

Is that a bedroom technique?

i=p/u · Jun 10, 2021

Can be, it's how ya say it.?

i=p/u · Jun 10, 2021

When I go beep beep baby you owe me money, she runs upstairs.

telectrix · Jun 11, 2021

bad payers need to be criminalised. at present, it's a civil matter, but if a customer has no intention of paying, then it's fraud as he has obtained goods and services by deception. application of handcuffs would soon open the bugger's wallet.

LukeD · Jun 11, 2021

telectrix said:
bad payers need to be criminalised. at present, it's a civil matter, but if a customer has no intention of paying, then it's fraud as he has obtained goods and services by deception. application of handcuffs would soon open the bugger's wallet.

THis then gets into a internet forum type fight .Where lots of people say never ever pay for anything until its all completed .Then others say pay for materials once arrived on site . Then others want a deposit to start work etc and stage payments etc .The whole debate is messy

DPG · Jun 11, 2021

LukeD said:
THis then gets into a internet forum type fight .Where lots of people say never ever pay for anything until its all completed .Then others say pay for materials once arrived on site . Then others want a deposit to start work etc and stage payments etc .The whole debate is messy

Stage payments have got to be the best for big jobs.

Rockingit · Jun 11, 2021

DPG said:
Stage payments have got to be the best for big jobs.

Must have been around ten years now, I came up with a concept which would have ended all of this forever, for all the trades - guaranteed peace of mind for both parties in terms of the client getting a good job and the supplier knowing they'd get paid. A friend who worked high up in banking thought it was amazing and pitched it to some city investors he knew, who also thought it an amazing idea. Sadly, the devil in the detail decided that it would be a financial service product which would mean it would come under the licences and regulations of the FSA and so at which point the trail went dry because nobody was going to fork out roughly £5m in startup costs just for the admin, insurances and licenses alone, before even being able to sell the concept to the market. As they reported back to me, legally and beaurocratically it would be little different to creating a new high street bank - but they all loved the idea. It would also have made a lot of solicitors pointless, which can only be a good thing.

DPG · Jun 11, 2021

Rockingit said:
Must have been around ten years now, I came up with a concept which would have ended all of this forever, for all the trades - guaranteed peace of mind for both parties in terms of the client getting a good job and the supplier knowing they'd get paid. A friend who worked high up in banking thought it was amazing and pitched it to some city investors he knew, who also thought it an amazing idea. Sadly, the devil in the detail decided that it would be a financial service product which would mean it would come under the licences and regulations of the FSA and so at which point the trail went dry because nobody was going to fork out roughly £5m in startup costs just for the admin, insurances and licenses alone, before even being able to sell the concept to the market. As they reported back to me, legally and beaurocratically it would be little different to creating a new high street bank - but they all loved the idea. It would also have made a lot of solicitors pointless, which can only be a good thing.

Sounds interesting