Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
Hi, Thank you for your question and welcome. My name is ***** ***** I will assist you. I am afraid you won't be able to use estoppel in this circumstance for one key reason. Under the "High Trees House Case" Estoppel is a "Shield and not Spear". This means you can only use estoppel as a defence and not as the basis of a claim. As you have noted you have a claim in contract anyway. Where you previously used estoppel it sounds like you were using it in the claim to prove "detrimental reliance" on the fact that you had been told a colour to use and acted in reliance on this to your detriment. There is equitable estoppel as well but this will only serve to obfuscate any claim because you have a straightforward contractual claim anyway. I am happy to discuss any of this further. Please note I will be on and off line throughout today so please do not be concerned if I do not respond immediately. Kind regards AJ
Thank you i understand this. However, if i go to court, would the customer be 'estopped' from making a claim of
thank you i understand this . However, if it goes to court and the client makes a counter claim ( however weak) for stress and anxiety are they prevented from doing this. Its splitting hairs, i know but would estoppell come into play then.
i suspect the clients wife is a solicitor or he has someone in his family that is because he seems pretty confident that he doesnt have to pay. But from my experince is it quite clear cut that we have undertaken the contract and even if we had been asked and refused to do this additional works the discount which he is awarding himself is not proportiionate with the work carried out
I have a emailed quote. also in my chasing emails i spell out what is owed. There have been servarl
I have an emailed quote which was a fixed price to undertake the move. The offer was verbally accepted and we undertook the work. When i asked fro payment i have specified what was owed and what was paid. In none of the retrun emails has he stated he doesnt owe this amount, just that they have had to do the work.
thats what i thought. It seems to be a clear case of an 'implied contract'. he has had a month to dispute that the price quoted in writing was different to what he has agreed, which he has not, so i will just go through the process or trying to recover via the courts now. thanks for your clarifcation.