Is it true you have to allow a builder the opportunity to come back before you take any legal action?

[Movinghouseatlast]

I have had an extension built and the builder has messed up pretty badly.

We may need to sue him for breach of contract ( he hasn't supplied and fitted 2 quite major things in the contract we signed. We have held money back from him because we need to pay someone else to do them. He also agreed that we could get someone else in to correct the shoddy workmanship

He is now saying that the he wants to come back and do the work, having agreed in writing that he didn't want to carry on as he wasn't able to complete the task. He was already 6 weeks over the deadline when he left and it took the new builder another week to finish ( but without the two major missing things)

We don't want him back as the standard of the other work is so bad. This for example is a window frame he put in.

[DappledOliveGroves]

It depends entirely on the form of contract that you used. Often a standard form contract will give the contractor the right to remedy the defect. What was the contract?

[ProfessorSlocombe]

Maybe ask in Legal ?

The general presumption in court cases is that the contractor be allowed an opportunity to rectify any agreed defects before progressing a case.

Unfortunately this means that you are painted into a corner where having fucked the job up once, you are expected to allow Bodgit and Boys a chance to really fuck it up before you can go further. It's a longstanding flaw (in my opinion) of contract law.

This is why caveat emptor is as true today as 2,000 years ago.

[Movinghouseatlast]

The contract was just a list of what would be done and payment terms and conditions.

[Smallgoon]

you are expected to allow Bodgit and Boys a chance to really fuck it up before you can go further. It's a longstanding flaw (in my opinion) of contract law.

What a bloody farce! What if relations became quite strained and you didn't feel comfortable having them return?

[DappledOliveGroves]

If it's not a JCT or any other standard form and there's nothing in the contract regarding a defect rectification period or other provision allowing the contractor to return to put the defects right, then in theory you could appoint someone else to fix the problems and then sue the original builder for the cost of putting right. But it depends on whether you want to go through a legal process and there's no guarantee you'll get your money back. What's the value of the works? Do you have legal expenses cover under any of your household policies?

[ProfessorSlocombe]

@Smallgoon

you are expected to allow Bodgit and Boys a chance to really fuck it up before you can go further. It's a longstanding flaw (in my opinion) of contract law.

What a bloody farce! What if relations became quite strained and you didn't feel comfortable having them return?

The law doesn't care.

Sadly, the law - for better or for worse - starts off assuming the best of everyone. So the default position is to assume Bodgit and Boys made a small mistake, and aren't serial fuckup and run artists.

[Movinghouseatlast]

Cost of works is £17,200. We have withheld £3000 of this, which he agreed to, as he hadn't finished the job when he left.

But he had installed a boiler for the shower which is only 15 litre! We are too far from our combi boiler to utilise that- it is more of an annexe than an extension.

Every single thing is terribly shoddy- the sealant in the shower is so thick it should be on a cake! He put the shower on the wrong way round so all the seals were on the outside, the floor is lifting already- the list goes on.

[Movinghouseatlast]

We don't have legal expenses cover, no.

[marieg10]

What is the cost of rectification?

You say he has a,ready agreed for you to bring someone in. That's slightly different as he has declined to rectify it..appreciate he has changed his mind weeks later