Hi I need advice on the best procedures that will be required to take both the Principle Supplier (a high street shop) and subsequently their chosen (tame) Sub Contractor to a Small Claims Court for reparations. I have been diligent in my dealings with these two separate companies. Repeated telephone calls and e-mails have had no effect and I feel I am being given, "the run around" I have explained that I am covered under the Sale of Goods Act as the product designed and installed is not fit for purpose. One blames the other. Is it possible to meet with somebody and and be advised Nicholas XXXXX
XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (NSH)
I am an experienced and expert practitioner in Project manager with numerous years on all types of structures and high specification projects. (CV on request.)
The Principle supplier is Ripples (bathroom supplier) Bath now back in Bristol.
Sub contractor / Installer. Glass Fit Co. (London)
Glass supplier. Company who Glass fit use for the selected product (steam glass in this instance)
Shower Cubicle Leaks
I had a leak due to frost damage and subsequently claimed for a new shower screen, which is a combined steam cubicle and shower.
The best product for the replacement was advised by the Sales Manager at Ripples. I was guided to a product with in the show room and advised that this would be the best fit and most suitable for both shower and steam.
I subsequently agreed and paid a deposit to Ripples for £650.00 GBP this deposit would set the ball rolling and secure his Glass supplier so as it would be placed on order.
Ripples stated, that they would now inform their own Sub Contractor (NSH me) had no other choice to select an alternative Sub contract /Installer.
Glass Fit co. (the tame sub contract installer) made contact with NSH and made request that a cheque be issued to his company for £250.00
This being the amount required for his company to visit Bristol so as to carry out a full installation survey so as to order and finalize the glass and screen requirements. NSH complied the cheque was sent.
A subsequent technical / design installation drawing was issued by Glass Fit Co. and it was incumbent on NSH to "sign off" as proof that this was the requirement so that Glass Fit Co. would warranty their newly installed finished product.
1st Installation day visit.
Glass Fit subs made a first visit to install the glazed units but soon realised that Glass Fit Co. had in correctly measured the glass units, they were too short in height. The dimensions taken by Glass Fit Co were wrongly measured. Glass Fit Co accepted the issue and stated they would re measure and rectify the problem with in 2 weeks. (NSH and family left with no means of bathing / showering. (Inconvenience for 3 adults living in the house.
2nd. Installation visit. Re-work
Glass Fit Co. returned after the 2 week period and fitted the new shower unit.
It seemed okay and NSH inspected it and accepted the finished product on a visual inspection only basis.
NSH was advised not to use or shower with in the newly installed cubicle until a period of 24 hours had elapsed due to the newness of the freshly applied mastic. (This is known as "curing" period) NSH complied with this instruction.
The shower was used eventually and had a leak, a "small dribble of water coming out at the base of the shower door and hinged glazed panel?
NSH subsequently, took a video of the leak and sent to Ripples and Glass Fit Co. Noting the defective leaky installation as a snag which would need urgent rectification.
Glass Fit Co acknowledged NSH video e-mail and stated they would send down the same installation "subbies" again to repair and rectify the leak on behalf of Glass Fit Co.
Glass Fit Co. Remedial works visit.
The same two (2) individuals mad a return visit with in 3 days and stated that they had come to rectify the problem of the leaking seals.
They stated the would install new door seals or gaskets which would rectify ans eliminate the leak!
This all went reasonably well. The 2 subbies cleaned up and left.
The new seals / gaskets held up for approximately 2 days and subsequently failed producing a smaller dribble of water which ran on too the bath room floor.
Note..[ At the first water leak after installation, this escaping water dribbled out on to the bathroom percolated down through te bathroom floor substrate and entered the lower kitchen ceiling and walls.m This kitchen was newly refurbished and decorated fully.
Our decorations to the kitchen ceiling and walls have been despoiled and ruination has taken place. This I reported to Glass Fit Co. and Ripples at the time.
I stated to Glass Fit Co. that he was responsible for the decoration ruination and that his company would be held responsible for reparations.
Glass Fit Co. replied, "he would not be be carrying out any making good or re decorations caused through his workmanship issues!"
NSH, stated, that I have rights under the Sale of Goods Act and further more That the product installed was not fit for purpose
Also that a Sub contractor has not got a leg to stand on if the Quality is below par or sub standard. No reply to this statement from Glass Fit Co.
I kept Ripples in the loop on this matter.
Ripples stated, they no longer had any interest in the claim as it was Poor Workmanship and this was between NSH and Glass Fit Co? ]
I have numerous e-mails requesting revisits form all and that if they bring to my home a specialist gasket / seal manufacturer then I was sure a suitable out come can be resolved and over come the on going defect which has great stress and upset to my family.
Please reply to XXXXX@XXXXXX.XXX or XXXXX@XXXXXX.XXX (my wife's e-mail address address.
Hi Alex,Please use my personal e-mail address. Not this computer as it a corporate computer(not private)