Demand Letter

[Doggit]

But by pointing out they are overcharging for a simple job (that you don't owe them for) puts them on the back foot.

 

[EFLImpudence]

If there is a genuine charge (unlikely) then it's actually the contractor that did the damage,

Needs some advice please
I had my front garden concreted. whilst my contractor started digging the garden he exposed an old electrical live cable without a pot end.
...
There was no damage! It was exposed connected to nothing

 

[EFLImpudence]

But by pointing out they are overcharging for a simple job (that you don't owe them for) puts them on the back foot.

No. Point out they have wrongly charged.

 

[JohnW2]

You make an interesting point John, but I don't think that asking them to justify the bill, would be an admission of liability to then pay anything.

I have never meant to imply that it would constitute a formal admission of liability. However, one would be dealing with human beings, and there is a fair chance that they might take the view that a person would not spend ('waste') time arguing about the amount if they were convinced that they had no liability at all and were never going to pay anything.

Kind Regards, John

 

[motorbiking]

you can negotiate a settlement using the concept of without prejudice which means any offers of settlement can’t be seen as acceptance of obligation to pay.

stating a charge is disputed also limits enforcement action if it hasn’t been evidenced.

 

[stillp]

Actually, querying any aspect of the spurious bill is pretty pointless unless advised to do so by your legal adviser...

 

[Doggit]

Now contrary to popular opinion on this site, I've always found that talking normally helps solve a problem, so discussing why they've managed to charge so much - even if it's not even a chargeable job - is all part of the necessary discussion of getting things resolved.

This isn't an American court case; its a simple, "can you please explain what's going on, because I disagree with you're interpretation of the situation".

Without discussing the amount, the OP can't then ask for compensation for the unexpected shock on receiving an unwarranted bill.

 

[JohnW2]

you can negotiate a settlement using the concept of without prejudice which means any offers of settlement can’t be seen as acceptance of obligation to pay.

As I said, I have never suggested that (even without "without prejudice") negotiating (or even complaining) about the amount would constitute an admission of liability. However, as I've said, for someone to 'bother' to do that would suggest that they were contemplating the possibility that they were liable and therefore might eventually have to pay something. If they were convinced that they had no liability and determined never to pay anything, then there really would have been no point in that 'bothering'.

If (surely not in the OP's case, unless there is something important we don't know!) it ever did get to the stage of a formal legal 'Money Claim', one has an opportunity at that stage to dispute the entirety of the claimed debt or the amount claimed, or even to offer a reduced settlement despite not disputing the debt or amount. It would then be up to the Court to decide.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Now contrary to popular opinion on this site, I've always found that talking normally helps solve a problem ...

I must be an exception to that 'popular opinion on this site, then, since that's my experience, and what I have been saying all along, BUT ...

... so discussing why they've managed to charge so much - even if it's not even a chargeable job - is all part of the necessary discussion of getting things resolved.

That's where we seem to disagree. I would want the "necessary discussion" to major on the question of why they have submitted a bill at all - in other words, the same discussion I would have had if their bill had only been for, say, £50.

Kind Regards, John

 

[motorbiking]

This seems to be legislation that gives them the right:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/2665/contents/made

Its sound very much like the OP is getting a bill for conducting emergency repair work as a result of "Damage" caused by his contractor. I think there is an argument that he discovered a faulty installation that is nothing to do with him or his house and made them aware of it. I would have thought the info is in the letter?

 

[JohnW2]

Its sound very much like the OP is getting a bill for conducting emergency repair work as a result of "Damage" caused by his contractor.

Indeed. We only have the OP's word for it, but he seems adamant that no damage was done by the contractor - who merely 'discovered'/revealed a problem with the DNO's cable. As you go on to say ...

I think there is an argument that he discovered a faulty installation that is nothing to do with him or his house and made them aware of it.

IF it can be established that the contractor did no damage, I would think that would be a totally compelling argument.

I'm not even sure what the position were that the contractor (or the OP himself) had done damage - to a cable which thge OP knew nothing about, was nothing to do with his electricity supply and might well have been buried in his property without his express permission.

Kind Regards, John

 

[motorbiking]

We don't know if easements, wayleaves, deeds etc exist. irrelevant of this, it is for the electrical supplier to take the matter up with the contractor and proving their case. These are just general concepts though, I know nothing about this area of law.

I wonder if its possible that someone was taking a cheeky feed off the street lamp?

 

[JohnW2]

We don't know if easements, wayleaves, deeds etc exist. ...

Indeed, which is why I merely said that the cable "might well be" buried in the OP's land without express permission.

I wonder if its possible that someone was taking a cheeky feed off the street lamp?

Who knows?! I'm actually a bit confused by what the OP said, since he seemed to be saying that the cable had supplied not a 'street lamp' in the normal sense, but, rather for a 'street lamp' in the garden of the previous pub - but I don't see why that would have had a separate DNO supply (and, even if it did, where would it have been metered?). I therefore suspect that I must have misunderstood the OP.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Sid1968]

From the DNO engineer who turned up he showed me layout drawing on his laptop. The cable was for a old street lamp tapped in from the neighbours supply from the pavement

 

[JohnW2]

From the DNO engineer who turned up he showed me layout drawing on his laptop. The cable was for a old street lamp tapped in from the neighbours supply from the pavement

Thanks for clarifying.

Kind Regards, John