Ripped off by contractor

Denisoftus

I need some help here.

Sometime ago I ordered a piece of "bespoke" furniture (expensive) from a contractor, and near the time of delivery (after waiting for 3 months, and hoping the furniture will finally be here soon) received an email saying that he cannot provide with the furniture on time and ever, but as some parts have already been manufactured offered to take parts (completely useless to us). I can't fully express our confusion, disbelieve and shock, such a rip-off, I never expected to happen in Ireland: in US, we would have sued that person for much much more that he own.

Anyway, he refunded only tiny amount of deposit and waved goodbye, as we didn't accept the offer of collecting some parts and unfinished MDF panels (who would?)

Long story short, after contacting the "consumer agency" lodged the case with the small claims.

Now today I received a counter-claim with a reason that the contractor had reasonable doubt he gets paid on completion. This response is a shock alone, can businesses actually do this, withhold most of the deposit without fulfilling the contract, its a complete rip-off and scam, I have never experienced that in my life. His assumption or "reasonable doubt" is a complete rubbish, we had enough budget to cover 3-4 times more, and I can prove it.

Now I need to respond, but I'm not sure how. Is this even real? This is accepted by courts as a "counter claim"?, I don't want to write obvious? What would fellow-boardie advise in this case?

Thanks.

L1011

They'll accept a counter claim, but it doesn't mean it'll have any weight given to it. Press on with the small claims.

cruizer101

I don't think this counterclaim has been 'accepted' as such by the court. It is one of the options open to a business when a claim is made against them and the courts clerk have just forwarded this information on to you not judeged whether it is valid or not. It will be dealt with by the court.

Here is a few links about small claims court procedure.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/courts_system/small_claims_court.html

http://www.consumerhelp.ie/small-claims

http://thecai.ie/your-rights/small-claims-procedure/

Have they outlined to you what the next stage is when they sent you this counter claim?

my3cents

I wouldn't worry too much a judge isn't stupid, you have proof of the contractors reasons for non completion of the contract so how do you think it will look to the court if he is now changing his story.

He had three months to let you know he was worried about getting paid and could have asked for stage payments and in any case why did he do part of the job and then not finish it if he was worried about payment?

You can't chose what bits of a contract you do and then expect to get paid for part of the job.

Denisoftus

Thanks everyone for replies, can't agree more with you, the deposited was around 60% so I don't understand how could he come up with that silly excuse - its not logical, if I was able to pay 60% easily why would I have problems with paying the balance? This is just an excuse and really a bad one.

Anyway, in the letter, officer is asking to provide the reasons and confirm that I wish to proceed further, which, of course I do, but what sort of reasons should I provide? Its obvious that "doubts", "assumptions" cannot be a legal reason for breaking the contract and withholding the deposit, should I disclose that funds were available at the time (which I don't want at this stage) or just say it simple that I do not agree with counter-claim?

Also, my solicitor is on stand by and ready to jump in, I just don't want to do it at this stage as it will cost me, and with small claims I won't be able to recover any of legal costs, so I will only use him after all others options are exhausted, this isn't a stage I need to start taking solicitor advices, right?

Thanks.

intheclouds

Provide the reasons for what?

my3cents

It may help if you realise that the SCC is an arbitration service and all the preliminary stuff is just to see if you and the contractor can come to an agreement. You can't, so let a judge decide, you know all you have to loose is the fee which isn't much.

ohnonotgmail

Denisoftus wrote: »

Thanks everyone for replies, can't agree more with you, the deposited was around 60% so I don't understand how could he come up with that silly excuse - its not logical, if I was able to pay 60% easily why would I have problems with paying the balance? This is just an excuse and really a bad one.

Anyway, in the letter, officer is asking to provide the reasons and confirm that I wish to proceed further, which, of course I do, but what sort of reasons should I provide? Its obvious that "doubts", "assumptions" cannot be a legal reason for breaking the contract and withholding the deposit, should I disclose that funds were available at the time (which I don't want at this stage) or just say it simple that I do not agree with counter-claim?

Also, my solicitor is on stand by and ready to jump in, I just don't want to do it at this stage as it will cost me, and with small claims I won't be able to recover any of legal costs, so I will only use him after all others options are exhausted, this isn't a stage I need to start taking solicitor advices, right?

Thanks.

You paid a deposit for a piece of bespoke furniture. The contractor has not delivered what was ordered. the contractor has not returned your deposit in full. what other reasons do you think you need?

Denisoftus

intheclouds wrote: »

Provide the reasons for what?

The exact wording: May I have a response to this (counter-claim) indicating if you wish to proceed and giving your reason for doing so.

The counter-claim states that the contractor had doubts for us to pay final payment.

Denisoftus

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

You paid a deposit for a piece of bespoke furniture. The contractor has not delivered what was ordered. the contractor has not returned your deposit in full. what other reasons do you think you need?

Exactly, but that was already provided in full in the claim.

ohnonotgmail

Denisoftus wrote: »

The exact wording: May I have a response to this (counter-claim) indicating if you wish to proceed and giving your reason for doing so.

The counter-claim states that the contractor had doubts for us to pay final payment.

Denisoftus wrote: »

Exactly, but that was already provided in full in the claim.

Reiterate the initial claim and add that there is no basis to the contractors counter-claim as you had already paid a 60% deposit and had given no indication that you would not pay the balance.

Graham

Denisoftus wrote: »

The exact wording: May I have a response to this (counter-claim) indicating if you wish to proceed and giving your reason for doing so.

The counter-claim states that the contractor had doubts for us to pay final payment.

Your reason would appear to be:

The other party has no reasons to doubt your ability to pay and in fact their counter-claim only arose when you started legal proceedings to recover the original 60% deposit paid for products/services that they advised they are unable/unwilling to deliver.

Sleeper12

Regarding the counter claim. Forward a copy of the email where contractor gave the reason for cancelling the project. I believe he started that he would not be able to deliver "ever".
Don't let the counter claim put you off.

Denisoftus

Graham wrote: »

in fact their counter-claim only arose when you started legal proceedings to recover the original 60% deposit paid for products/services

Not exactly true, he mentioned this in emails when I tried to recover the deposit, but I got the point, thanks!

Appreciated your help guys.

Denisoftus

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Regarding the counter claim. Forward a copy of the email where contractor gave the reason for cancelling the project. I believe he started that he would not be able to deliver "ever".
Don't let the counter claim put you off.

It makes a perfect sense, I'll include the copy of emails, thanks!

Denisoftus

I thought you might want to hear an outcome, after almost a year of waiting, the small claims court hearing happened, even he ignored all our communication before he appeared in the court.

The hearing itself was a bit of experience. Judge, by only reading 2-3 lines of the case description was surprised and agreed to contractor wrongdoing, gave us time to agree the resolution between ourselves, before going any further. Well I must say, he insisted on doing right thing (seriously?) but agreed to pay all back (as Judge made it clear he will not win), only he doesn't have money (how typical). I suppose, I had no choice but accept the return of the deposit in instalments over the 1.5 years

Still I think I was ripped off, system is flawed. I'm out of the money for 1.5 years, no interest will be paid, I spend tons of time preparing the case, no moral compensation for all the worries around it. Friend in US suggested he would get 5-10 times more back for similar case there

Xterminator

Er - you didnt have to lodge you claim in small claims court?

you chose the small claims vour rather than a civil court.

did you not understand you could have pursued him through the civil court and asked for damages/ costs etc?

Sleeper12

Xterminator wrote:

did you not understand you could have pursued him through the civil court and asked for damages/ costs etc?

I agree but as he hasn't the cash to pay back as it is its unlikely he'd pay ops fees or if he did op would wait years

.......

This post has been deleted.

Deagol

Denisoftus wrote: »

Friend in US suggested he would get 5-10 times more back for similar case there

You want your money back or are you trying to make money from the situation? Maybe you should move to the U.S. since you think you would do better there?

Dunno if Judge Judy is an approximate for US small claims court but if it is, you would be getting roughly the same as here from my viewing of it!

dev100

Make a claim thru civil court and let the sheriff chase him for the money.

endacl

dev100 wrote: »

Make a claim thru civil court and let the sheriff chase him for the money.

But he has a resolution. And if the money isn't there to be paid, he'll only be throwing more after it.

Bad idea.

ohnonotgmail

dev100 wrote: »

Make a claim thru civil court and let the sheriff chase him for the money.

if the guy has no money what good will the sheriff do?

Xterminator

sheriff can seize goods; like tools and computers etc in lieu of payment.

Denisoftus

Xterminator wrote: »

Er - you didnt have to lodge you claim in small claims court?

you chose the small claims vour rather than a civil court.

did you not understand you could have pursued him through the civil court and asked for damages/ costs etc?

That I didn't know. I suppose the civil court would involve a solicitor involvement therefore extra fees.

Denisoftus

Deagol wrote: »

You want your money back or are you trying to make money from the situation? Maybe you should move to the U.S. since you think you would do better there?

Dunno if Judge Judy is an approximate for US small claims court but if it is, you would be getting roughly the same as here from my viewing of it!

Most I wanted is the furniture we ordered, second, of course, when 1st not possible, money back.

But, put it this way, 8 months down the road, we still have no furniture (I couldn't re-order somewhere else as I didn't know an outcome, I hoped he could still deliver, it was foolish, I know), the money has gone, 2K, won't have it back for 18 months (if I go to the bank to take a loan, I'll be charged 10-15% for it), so much time wasted, and its not only about the money, its all the anxiety, stress, we had to go through.

So, I'm not trying to make money of this situation, and I hate and disrespect when people suing for this reason, but what I'm trying to say the he was absolutely sure he will not loose anything in this situation and even benefit of it (free load for 18 moths, not bad, ha) therefore it was not a problem for him to screw us as he sees fit, that is why my comparison to US, out of fear, he wouldn't do it to us or anyone else, if he would know he can get sued for a lot of money.

The point is, if we had a precedent here of business been sued for a lot of money for breaching a contract, not delivering, keeping the deposit, etc, they would think twice before ripping people like that.

Imagine, you are after buying a luxury car, went to a dealer and paid the deposit, when collecting a car later you offered only doors and wheels with no engine, seats, etc, for the most part of the deposit, and been advised to get to the other garage to finish the car, but dealer will keep the most of the deposit as he delivers the doors, how would you feel?

Denisoftus

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

3K

Denisoftus

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

if the guy has no money what good will the sheriff do?

I'm 100% sure he has money, its bespoke furniture making company, he knows that I will have no way of proving it, therefore offered the best possible resolution for him.

Anyway I'm going to let it go, I should be grateful that I'm getting something back, even longterm, I know of the people who paid deposit to some builders and got nothing, nothing at all. Lesson learned and I'm now only dealing with big, reputable companies, no more messing around to save a few bucks.

Sleeper12

Denisoftus wrote:

Anyway I'm going to let it go, I should be grateful that I'm getting something back, even longterm, I know of the people who paid deposit to some builders and got nothing, nothing at all. Lesson learned and I'm now only dealing with big, reputable companies, no more messing around to save a few bucks.

It's a shame someone like this gets all the independent tradesmen a bad name. Can't blame you for not trusting anymore.

Denisoftus

Sleeper12 wrote: »

It's a shame someone like this gets all the independent tradesmen a bad name. Can't blame you for not trusting anymore.

Its not a bad name or something, its my own risk assessment, from now on. I was so naive before, giving deposits here and there without thinking. I know, and I hope, this is not normal practice and I have many other good examples, great guys to deal with, it is just I don't know if I can trust people any more. What is a chance to get ripped again? This guy looked/sounded nice at the start, and he had a few recommendations from people I know.

the_pen_turner

Denisoftus wrote: »

Its not a bad name or something, its my own risk assessment, from now on. I was so naive before, giving deposits here and there without thinking. I know, and I hope, this is not normal practice and I have many other good examples, great guys to deal with, it is just I don't know if I can trust people any more. What is a chance to get ripped again? This guy looked/sounded nice at the start, and he had a few recommendations from people I know.

the problem is that most tradesmen are moving towards the deposit system to combat bad customers. if you ask any tradesman they will tell you that they themselves or their boss etc has been done out of money by bad customers.

there are a lot more bad customers out there than bad trademan