builder strikes back

[Softus]

the trouble with this country is that the courts do not back contractors enough when they are struggling to get paid.

Really? I would have said that the trouble with this country is layabouts. Or thieves. Or tax dodgers. Or benefit fraudsters. Or the amount of rain. Or the lying politicians. Or the capitalist nature of our society. Or road congestion. Or a whole raft of other things.

Do you have any examples of cases where "courts" have failed to "back contractors enough"?

but try not paying a utility bill or council tax you will end up in a magistrates court.

Clearly that's where you belong if you break statutory or common law.

we have to go the county court root to obtain monies owed.

Clearly that's where to go for a remedy to breach of contract.

obtaining goods without paying for them or bouncing a cheque is deception.

No it isn't.

but try to get the police to follow a case up, all you get is, its a civil matter.

That's because it's breach of contract, which is a civil matter.

so I do not care who I upset with this statement but the builder was spot on in my opinion.

He was spot on if you think that acting spitefully and sensationally if the right way to behave.

 

[libby lou lou]

Quote:
obtaining goods without paying for them or bouncing a cheque is deception.

No it isn't.

So, it's theft ? or what ? all the same, mr nitty gritty

 

[Softus]

So, it's theft ? or what ? all the same, mr nitty gritty

Don't tempt me, libby.

 

[libby lou lou]

LOL, go on, a one liner please

 

[Softus]

If you insist:

I've just bought a decaffeinated coffee table.

 

[Balenza]

Considering the client and the circumstances the builder was foolish in the first place for taking the work on without payment up front.

 

[tim west]

perhaps word of mouth should work amongst companies aswell as clients?

 

[wms]

softus your talking out of your r send

yes I have experience and full knowledge how the courts work.

like the lying scum who we obtained judgement on when failing to turn up, to have it overruled when the lying scum protested to the court stating we never received any paperwork.(that is sent out by the courts.)they managed to get the one that told them they had a judgement against them. its just to buy more time so wheres the court backing contractors here then ?

we then had to start the whole thing again. at more cost to the company and yes we did eventually get the money but it was hard work.and a lot of wasted time.

and they all come up with the same carp to pay by installments.

so any body who thinks they are being clever writing pathetic comments in the quote boxes. try having some one owe you a sh;t load of money laughing at you when you threaten them with court action.

unless your one of them then that explains it all.

 

[Softus]

softus your talking out of your r send

Please show me one thing I've written that is incorrect.

yes I have experience and full knowledge how the courts work.

You appear to have had one experience, which doesn't equate to having full knowledge.

<rant rant rant> wheres the court backing contractors here then ?

Are you suggesting that judgement should not be permitted to be set aside when the applicant is a contractor with poor grammatical skills?

we then had to start the whole thing again. at more cost to the company and yes we did eventually get the money but it was hard work.and a lot of wasted time.

In that case you didn't correctly assess the risk and cost before proceeding to court.

 

[tim west]

What happened to the old adage that the customer is always right?

Lights blue touchpaper and walks quietly away.......

 

[JohnD]

a customer is somone who buys stuff off you

"Buying" means you give him the stuff and he gives you the money.

If he doesn't pay all bets are off.

 

[megawatt]

Building is more complex as it comprises the supply of goods AND services.

Most conflicts occur as a result of contested services rather than goods and each case is different.

To attempt to dismantle works provided through service whilst in conflict with the customer is a dangerous thing to do and will not endear you to any court should things get that far.

MW

 

[wms]

What the f has grammar got to do with the fact the client was a (K) nob head who was avoiding paying, and you have made the prejudgement that we have only had the one dealing, people like you are the typical example so yes Ill keep on ranting. ,so you carry on writing with grammatically correct statements, and ill keep reaping the benefits of my incompetence in spelling and grammar and keep working for the 99% of decent people out there,who do pay their bills. who earn me and my staff a boat load of money! or should that be my staff and I .

the other 1% scum of the earth you keep on defending. and if you are in the trade,you are welcome to them then lets see you defend them.

JohnD his statement was spot on.

 

[Softus]

What the f has grammar got to do with the fact the client was a (K) nob head who was avoiding paying

A correctly spelt and dispassionate court application is more effective than ranting.

and you have made the prejudgement that we have only had the one dealing

No (sigh), I said quite clearly that you appear to have had one experience. It still appears that way.

people like you are the typical example

Please tell me which people are like me and of what we are all typical?

so you carry on writing with grammatically correct statements

Thank you. I shall.

...should that be my staff and I

No.

the other 1% scum of the earth you keep on defending.

Please show me where I've defended any scum.

 

[megawatt]

WMS Wrote:

JohnD his statement was spot on.

Only because it validates your position and you seem to get very annoyed with people who don't ... Are you used to getting your own way at home?

Perhaps you could try and see it from the customers perspective and see if there's any middle ground where you could compromise ... You'd get a better outcome if you did.

MW