Tiler laid tiles - they all broke. What now?

Lothaar v2

Looking for advice (not legal advice, just general advice) and people's experiences here. Apologies if this isn't the best forum... seemed most suitable!

In December, I got a guy in to knock down the utility room wall in my kitchen, thus expanding the kitchen. He put tiles down where the wall used to be, using leftover tiles we had from when we originally tiled the floor.

Every single tile he laid cracked. Basically, he blobbed a bit of cement in the middle of the tile and squashed it down, rather than spreading it right to the corners. After a few weeks, the corners started to crack when we stood on them. Now we've got broken tiles with sharp edges (two young kids and it's pretty dangerous) and the kitchen looks crappy.

Unfortunately for us, the exact tile we have in our kitchen has been discontinued - searched everywhere and we can't find anymore tiles. They used all of our spares.

We've spent six months going back and forth with the guy as he tried to find the tiles (he regularly disappears for weeks and fails to appear when he says he'll call over). At this stage it's clear we'll never get them.

The other important thing is that we're about to get a new kitchen in. We would prefer to keep our tiles, as we like them, but we can't have cracked tiles everywhere.

We paid the guy about €400 for the tiling work (part of a bigger job) and we've been quoted €1,600 to retile the whole kitchen, which is the only option unless we want a random section of different tiles in one area.

So... does anyone know what our options are here? I'd like the guy to pay reparations, as the cost to us is far more than what we paid him to the job. He should cover, or at least contribute to, the cost of retiling.

Is small claims court the way to go? And, if so, will it be problematic if we retile the floor now, essentially removing the 'evidence'? I'm also worried that he or a judge will say 'Sure, you were planning to replace the tiles anyway.' That's not true! We don't have a choice now that they're cracked.

Any ideas or experience with a similar situation?

slimjimmc

Well he should repay what you paid him for his tiling and the loss of your tiles. I wouldn't worry about retiling causing problems with the SCC, no judge is going to come out to look at your floor so just take loads of photos and/or video evidence and perhaps keep a few samples just in case.

mdebets

You should go to the SCC asap.
There are however two things to consider.

1) you need to give the guy a chance to repair his work (lay down new tiles) unless you have a very good reason why you can't wait until the case in the SCC has been heard. So don't start with the retiling just now, but wait for the SCC case to be heard.
2) you have to minimise the damage to the original tradesman. Do you really need the whole kitchen to be retiled? Can't you live with just a part being done (e.g the strip of the former wall being done in a different colour) or does the patterns don't allow this?

Carpenter

How many tiles do you need I have seen tilers removing tile,s that were under units / fridge/washing machines to try make up an area that needs re tiling .

slimjimmc

mdebets wrote: »

You should go to the SCC asap.
There are however two things to consider.

1) you need to give the guy a chance to repair his work (lay down new tiles) unless you have a very good reason why you can't wait until the case in the SCC has been heard. So don't start with the retiling just now, but wait for the SCC case to be heard.

The OP has being giving him a chance for the last 6 months which is now gone beyond reasonable. The guy can't find the tiles (no longer available) and is not contactable for periods. He clearly cannot provide what he was contracted to provide namely a properly tiled floor matching the rest of the floor.

mdebets wrote: »

2) you have to minimise the damage to the original tradesman. Do you really need the whole kitchen to be retiled? Can't you live with just a part being done (e.g the strip of the former wall being done in a different colour) or does the patterns don't allow this?

They don't have to minimise the damage to the tradesman, but neither can they impose an unreasonable or disproportionate expense. However afaik the law does allow for the OP to seek consequential loss.

The OP should not have to accept an inferior finish because of someone else's cock up. The OP is entitled to get what s/he wanted and paid for, not something that they should have to 'live with'. That said I agree the OP should start considering if other options as acceptable, such as lift and replace some tiles with a pattern/different colour and using those to fill the damaged area if the design suits.
It could be messy I grant you.

Lothaar v2

Yeah - we've given it six months already. It's now an unreasonable amount of time, IMO. There have been unsightly broken tiles with dangerous sharp edges in our kitchen since December.

There's probably 12 tiles in total. We're really not happy with the idea of retiling one section of the kitchen floor, as it won't look good.

There's one other thing that thickens the plot a bit: I don't have a receipt.

On the day the tiler finished up, I checked out the floor (seemed fine, cement was drying) and paid him in cash. While we were talking he picked up the receipt and said 'I just need to mumble-mumble' and stuck it in his pocket. It struck me as odd, but I didn't stop him. I had a weird feeling after he left and it was only when I replayed the incident in my head that I realised he just nicked my receipt. Really, really stupid of me to let that happen.

I have loads of emails from him providing quotes in advance of the job, and discussing his efforts to find the tiles after the job. Don't know if that would hold up in SCC.

mdebets

slimjimmc wrote: »

The OP has being giving him a chance for the last 6 months which is now gone beyond reasonable. The guy can't find the tiles (no longer available) and is not contactable for periods. He clearly cannot provide what he was contracted to provide namely a properly tiled floor matching the rest of the floor.

While this is true, the tradesman could still argue that the 6 month delay was due to the OP wanting the exact same tiles as he had before and it took him (the tradesman) all this time, to check with all possible suppliers for these specific tiles.

slimjimmc wrote: »

They don't have to minimise the damage to the tradesman, but neither can they impose an unreasonable or disproportionate expense. However afaik the law does allow for the OP to seek consequential loss.

The OP should not have to accept an inferior finish because of someone else's cock up. The OP is entitled to get what s/he wanted and paid for, not something that they should have to 'live with'. That said I agree the OP should start considering if other options as acceptable, such as lift and replace some tiles with a pattern/different colour and using those to fill the damaged area if the design suits.
It could be messy I grant you.

While I agree with you in principle, there are one more things to consider.

How old is the original tiling (as the OP said that they are getting a new kitchen in and they originally tiled the floor, I would presume more than 10 or even 15 years). If the the original tiling really is that old and considering that the new kitchen most likely would have included some retiling around the the new appliances, I would see a fully new tiling of the kitchen as overly expensive too the tradesman (if you compare it to other consumer cases, you wouldn't expect to get a brand new TV from the retailer if your's broke down after 5 years of use).

slimjimmc

Ah now mdebts, it doesn't take 6 months to check suppliers.

I wasn't calling for the tiler to replace the whole floor (disproportionate), I said he should repay what the OP paid him so I think we're in agreement there. Nevertheless the OP is still allowed to pursue him for consequential loss, that would his choice and it would be up to a court to decide if that is justified or not.

Lothaar v2

Thanks a million for all the replies

The floor is 10 years old. We bought the house new in 2004. The tiles are (were) in perfect condition and we had no plans to replace them. The kitchen retailer said we wouldn't need to retile for a new kitchen - most people just put cheapy tiles under the kitchen units and leave the existing floor.

Lothaar v2

UPDATE:

Turns out this guy was sub-contracted to do some plumbing by the builder that's working on our extension, which is due to be finished this week. While he was in my gaff, I had a chat with him about paying reparations for the tiling and we agreed on a fee of €500. I feel that's fair, as it's a refund on the work he did plus a small amount towards the cost of retiling the whole floor (we're still over €1,000 out of pocket). To make things easier on him, I suggested he knock €500 off his invoice to my builder, who in turn will charge us €500 less. We shook on it.

That night, he rang the builder and said he wanted to deal with us directly (didn't contact us at all). Then the builder paid him an instalment of his fee.

Yesterday I talked to him again. He said he was hoping to reduce the amount he owes us but I held firm at €500 and pushed again to do it by invoicing less for the work he's doing on our extension, basically allowing him to pay us 'in kind' and it means the money's already in our bank account. He agreed and we shook hands again.

Later, my builder told me that he only owes the tiler/plumber about €200. The tiler/plumber had already gone at this stage, and has finished all his work on the house, so he won't be back. I can get that €200 but I'll have to chase your man to get the balance directly.

At this stage, I was fuming. The guy had shaken hands and then changed his mind without telling us.

I went online and researched his company. Turns out it ceased trading earlier this year. Then I realised that the van he was driving had a different, although very similar, name on it... like he changed company name and only had to swap one or two letters in his logo.

Summary:
- He reneged on a deal to pay €500 in kind, leaving me with access to €200
- I'll have to chase him for the remaining €300
- The company that provided the crappy tiling has ceased trading. He's now trading under a different name
- I don't have an invoice from the original tiling job

Do I have a leg to stand on here? I'm angry and I want this guy to contribute to the cost he's created for us... but I'm concerned about paying out more money in solicitor's fees only to discover that I don't have a case! I know you can't give legal advice here... but general advice/experience would be much appreciated.

Sam Mac

Lothaar v2 wrote: »

UPDATE:

Turns out this guy was sub-contracted to do some plumbing by the builder that's working on our extension, which is due to be finished this week. While he was in my gaff, I had a chat with him about paying reparations for the tiling and we agreed on a fee of €500. I feel that's fair, as it's a refund on the work he did plus a small amount towards the cost of retiling the whole floor (we're still over €1,000 out of pocket). To make things easier on him, I suggested he knock €500 off his invoice to my builder, who in turn will charge us €500 less. We shook on it.

That night, he rang the builder and said he wanted to deal with us directly (didn't contact us at all). Then the builder paid him an instalment of his fee.

Yesterday I talked to him again. He said he was hoping to reduce the amount he owes us but I held firm at €500 and pushed again to do it by invoicing less for the work he's doing on our extension, basically allowing him to pay us 'in kind' and it means the money's already in our bank account. He agreed and we shook hands again.

Later, my builder told me that he only owes the tiler/plumber about €200. The tiler/plumber had already gone at this stage, and has finished all his work on the house, so he won't be back. I can get that €200 but I'll have to chase your man to get the balance directly.

At this stage, I was fuming. The guy had shaken hands and then changed his mind without telling us.

I went online and researched his company. Turns out it ceased trading earlier this year. Then I realised that the van he was driving had a different, although very similar, name on it... like he changed company name and only had to swap one or two letters in his logo.

Summary:
- He reneged on a deal to pay €500 in kind, leaving me with access to €200
- I'll have to chase him for the remaining €300
- The company that provided the crappy tiling has ceased trading. He's now trading under a different name
- I don't have an invoice from the original tiling job

Do I have a leg to stand on here? I'm angry and I want this guy to contribute to the cost he's created for us... but I'm concerned about paying out more money in solicitor's fees only to discover that I don't have a case! I know you can't give legal advice here... but general advice/experience would be much appreciated.

He sounds like a real piece of work. Chase it up with him if you can find him. Best of luck OP.

slimjimmc

Hang on. This tiler is also a plumber, and your builder had him doing the plumbing on your house! It's possible he's a good plumber and a bad tiler but I'd be checking his plumbing work too just in case.

Lothaar v2

Well... I didn't want to complicate things by explaining this, but the tiler actually had another guy with him doing the original work. It was the other guy who screwed up our tiles, but he was sub-contracted by the tiler we hired. So our issue is with the tiler. Our builders told us he's a good plumber and that he did the builder's house (that's how they met) and he was happy with the work.

Lothaar v2

Hi all,
Can anyone tell me if I can claim against this guy, considering the following:

1. I don't have a receipt. (I do have a lot of emails from before and after his work, including a few with him discussing his attempts to find matching tiles and one in which he apologises.)

2. His company has ceased trading. He now has a different company with a very similar name.

I'm sick of my crappy kitchen floor at this stage and I just want to replace the tiles. But I'm afraid to do so in case it removes the 'evidence'. We're getting a new kitchen in, but it's on hold until we sort this all out, as we want to retile at the same time to minimise the disruption.

Thanks!

former legend

Lothaar v2 wrote: »

2. His company has ceased trading. He now has a different company with a very similar name.

He didn't give you a receipt, or you lost it?

If he didn't give you a receipt, who is to say that "his company" did the work and not him as a sole trader? If it was a cash-in-hand job and not through the books with VAT paid, then his company didn't do it, he did, so he can't avoid liability that way.

I would tell him you're lodging a small claim against him (not his company) and give him one final chance to stump up.

Lothaar v2

He did give me a receipt... but then he took it after I paid him! Really sly. He asked if he could look at it and then mumbled something and changed the subject. Then he didn't give it back and I didn't notice until after he left

It was cash-in-hand. I'm not sure if he paid VAT but he did seem to head down to the pub after every payment instalment, so I'm guessing not.