How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Alice H Your Own Question
Alice H
Alice H, Solicitor/Partner
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 2850
Experience:  Partner in national law firm
Type Your Law Question Here...
Alice H is online now

We had new fitted carpets in our rental property in Aldershot,

This answer was rated:

We had new fitted carpets in our rental property in Aldershot, which is occupied by a couple with their 5 year old son, in March 2013. SCS supplied the carpets, and arranged for a fitter to fit them who we had to pay direct. In Dec 2013 the tenants brought the deterioration in the carpets to the attention of our agents. I emailed SCS in Jan 2014 and I have now had the carpets inspected by the fitter, the SCS surveyor and an assessor from Renew Insurance lastly on 13 Mar. All stated that the carpets were delaminating and were a faulty batch. I have heard nothing further since the last inspection, and would like advice as to whether I am entitled to have the carpets removed and new ones fitted at SCS expense? My point is that if I have to pay for the removal and fitting, I am badly out of pocket because of faulty goods supplied to me.
David Ellis
My name isXXXXX and I'm happy to help with your question today.

Have you asked SCS for a replacement/refund?
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

That is where I go this week, they have plenty of time to respond following the 3 inspections. I think I am on good ground with 'not fit for purpose' or 'not merchantable quality' for supplying replacement carpets, it is whether I have to bear the cost of removal, disposal and refitting for something that I think is fundamentally their fault.


Your are absolutely right about the issues regarding quality and the terms you have mentioned are implied into contracts by virtue of the Sale of Goods Act 1979.

Based on the information you have provided it appears that you have a good claim against SCS and, of course, your claim is supported by the independent inspections.

In respect of your losses the case of Hadley v Baxendale (1854) deals with damages for breach of contract.

The Court held that '...damages available for breach of contract include those which may fairly and reasonably be considered arising naturally from the breach of contract...'

It follows, therefore, that cost of removal, disposal and refitting has to be borne by SCS as these are costs 'arising naturally from the breach of contract'.

There is no reason for you to be out of pocket as a result of SCS' breach.

I hope this assists.

Alice H and other Law Specialists are ready to help you
Hello David

I am following up our conversation to see how you got on with the issue. If you need any further help then please let me know - remember I am a qualified UK Solicitor and able to help on most aspects of English Law. I am London based and usually able to respond to your query very quickly.

Alex Hughes