Not paying for garden work

[gardendramas5]

I’m pretty sure I’m not being unreasonable but I just want to see what other people think.

I purchased my house December last year. It was empty for at least 2 years (ex rental)

The previous owners kept the front and back garden tidy whilst it was on the market, no idea if it was them that did the work or if they paid someone. Both gardens are quite large. I started doing all of this myself when I took ownership.

Anyway, I’ve been away for the last week with family and came home on Wednesday to freshly cut grass, weeds pulled etc. I asked my neighbours if they had seen anyone but they were at work. It turns out that the previous owners hired a company to do the work and hadn’t notified them that they’d sold the house last year. I only found this out yesterday as the gardener turned up with the invoice. I explained I wasn’t aware of this arrangement and that he would have to invoice the previous owners for the work (I was polite and apologised for the inconvenience but made it clear I hadn’t asked for this work to be done and wasn’t prepared to pay for it either)

He knocked on again this morning and explained that he’d spoken to them yesterday and that they agreed to pay half (because it was their error) but that I should pay the rest because I’m the one benefiting from the work. I told him no sorry I’m not paying and he needs to take it up with them.

I do feel bad for the gardener, but it’s their fault. I didn't ask for this. They were awkward during the conveyancing process too so this doesn’t surprise me. AIBU?

OP was only away for a week and had kept up with the garden herself. I bet there was barely anything to do anyway because OP was doing it all.

OP didn't benefit from it. Old owners just need to accept their mistake and pay in full.

No, I wouldn’t pay him. I think the gardener knows you’ve bought the house and is chancing his arm, offering you a discount and hoping you’ll keep him on.

Why has he only turned up for the first time in May??

I live in a tourist area where a lot of people use these types of services to keep their holiday rentals tidy. I can think of at least 5 good friends who use the services of a gardener/handyman (different businesses), and they’ve definitely had work done on their gardens for weeks now.

Do folk think the contract goes with the house or something?! Why are so many people convinced that the OP needs to pay (morally if not legally)? If someone came into your garden and cleaned your windows and washed your car then knocked the door and demanded £50 are you all giving it to them?!

It’s odd that the gardener has only just turned up if the previous owners left last year. We have a flat which we rent out and pay someone to cut our grass. They always ask at the start of the year if we want them to continue and also ask for payment in advance.
I wouldn’t pay if I was the OP, it’s not their responsibility.

I've designed a website for you. I know you don't want or need it, but it's a fully functioning website and I still have to be paid. £1000 please. That's about a fifth of what I ought to charge you, so you're lucky.

Oh the righteous Mumsnetters bringing all the legal contractual obligations 🤮
OP of course you don’t legally have to pay but is this the right thing to do? Clearly the previous owners are dicks, don’t be one! Help out the poor gardener. You benefited from his work, spend it reading a book for couple of hours.
you clearly can afford the gardener if you had one and have a massive back and front garden. If paying him means no food for you next week then obviously don’t pay but if you can easily afford it but not doing it just because you can that makes you a dick. Only you know what’s the right thing to do

I thnk it's safe to assume that 90% of those proclaiming loudly that they would pay wouldn't pay if it happened to them. To be honest, I'd trust them far less to pay for something that they had actually asked for. I'd sooner trust people who, instead of desperately trying to find some imagined moral high ground to climb on and look down from when they don't have to actually match their actions to their words, state the obvious and say that they don't pay for things they haven't asked for and don't want.

OP isn't a dick for not paying for a service she didn't ask for or need. the ''poor gardener'' shouldn't have just done the work without checking after a 5 month break and the ''poor gardener'' would've noticed that the condition of the garden was better than usual because OP says she had kept up with it and she was only away for a week.

I bet this ''poor gardener'' didn't do half as much work as he normally would but even then, no one but the previous owners owe him money.

The fact that the OP has at some point employed a gardener to do something doesn't mean they can "obviously afford" to pay someone an unknown amount of money to do something easy. We all employ professionals sometimes to do the jobs we can't do; that has nothing to do with anything.

And besides that, the gardener simply has to pursue the right people, the previous owners, for his money. Why should the OP pay their debt? They could afford to have a gardener come to a house standing empty for a couple of years.

And, again, for the 345th time in this thread, there's no benefit to having someone come in and do basic tidying work on a garden you are already keeping tidy yourself.

All the right points. It’s just me that would feel very sorry for the gardener having to go between the people and probably losing out. That’s why I said only the OP know if they could easily afford it but not doing it because they can get away with it. It’s not about what’s technically right but what’s morally right. It’s like giving to charity - you’re not obliged to do it but people that can and want to do it. Here at least the OP got something for it

Even if that mistake ends up costing you hundreds of pounds, and it all came about because a so-called professional didn't even bother to email their client to check that all was good for them to come and work again after 6 months or more had passed since their last visit?

Lots could have happened in 6 months: the house could have been sold; the owner could have gone broke and no longer be able to afford the work; the owner could have decided to swap the grass for Astroturf; the owner could even have died.

It sounds to me like the gardener is either dim/unprofessional and/or works on a basis of making a big assumption that nothing could have changed in half a year and then demanding payment - rather than checking and risking being told he isn't needed this time/again and not earning anything from it.

Charities are (or should be) for people who are struggling and need help and are worse off than ourselves.

There's no reason at all to suppose that the gardener is worse off than the OP, even if we assume the OP is well off. Why feel sorry for the gardener for not getting this sum of money (that he can and should get from the people liable) to the point that you feel the OP, who might need it more than he does, should give it to him?

He was cheeky enough to ask OP in the first place. He should've said to the old owners that the agreement was with them and it was also their mistake so they need to pay up.

If they refuse, that is all on them and nothing to do with OP.

Neither of us know for sure. I think there was an arrangement for him to come to the house and he'd done the same before. For all we know the old owners couldn't be reached. Whatever happened, it is was an oversight. I think it would be contrary to say that one didn't benefit from a well manicured garden at half price. I could understand more if the lady is ecomicaly challenged. What's bonkers is the lack of good grace these days.

Absolutely hilarious you’re calling the poster who don’t think op should pay, righteous. Do you know what the word means?!

I hope you’re now changing your locks, OP, how on earth did they get access?

Quite

She already had a "well manicured" garden. She maintains it herself.

You are assuming she wants it in the state he's left it. I presume becuase you want yours as "well manicured" as possible. Well not everyone wants that. I wouldn't. Therefore it's not contrary to say there's no benefit.

Some people like to look spray tanned. It's a service they pay for. they think it looks good. If someone came and spray tanned me while I sleep do I have to pay because I "have a benefit" if I hate that look? What if I just don't care enough about it to pay for it?

It's an unsupportable position.

Who do you think is lacking "good grace"?

Having an accessible garden isn't as unusual as some posters seem to believe. Depending on the layout it can be extremely difficult to secure a garden while still allowing access to the house for postmen and the like. Not every house is a suburban semi.

Yes - in fact, I'm still amazed that he knocked on the door for payment when - in the absence of him bothering to check if anything had changed in 6 months or more - as far as he knew, the owner with whom he had the agreement and who thus pays his bills doesn't live there, so he would presumably email it or send it to the owner's own address as usual (assuming that this hasn't changed either).

I still think he had a very good idea that ownership might have changed, but went ahead anyway and chanced his arm on the assumption that he could guilt the new owners into thinking they still morally had to pay him.

Not unlike the squeegee people who stand at traffic lights and (very half-heartedly) 'wash' people's windscreens when it's on red - and then insist (sometimes aggressively) that they have done the 'work' and so the driver morally 'must' pay whatever they demand.

If someone turned up and well manicured my garden I'd be FURIOUS.....It occurs to me that unless the OP gave him the seller's new details he must have had them and very likely he did as mobile numbers don't change so why did he not just text or call them to say when he was coming?

I live in a large estate built by Taylor Wimpey about 30 years ago. I could access the front and rear of every single garden in the estate without a key. There’s no fences or gates to the front and the rears are open to the drive way. I don’t think that’s remotely unusual. My parents’ estate built in the 70s is the same. I have friends in more modern estates. Also the same.

Yes, gardens are a very personal thing - I don't know why so many people on here are assuming that the gardener unequivocally 'improved' it, when he tended it according to the previous owner's preferences.

Apart from anything else, No Mow May is a commonly adhered-to choice.

Some people like a super manicured garden; some like a wild meadow-style garden; others prefer something else anywhere in-between. None of these are automatically objectively 'better' or 'worse' - any more than there is an agreed 'best' colour for cars.

I remember reading ages ago about a very strange man who would break into houses and then clean them, do the washing up, hoovering, ironing etc. - never stole anything - before letting himself out

Although, on the surface, this might sound comical and rather desirable, it's absolutely not. Even if he'd done everything exactly the way that the homeowner would have done it, it's a huge violation of your personal private space.

I know a garden isn't quite the same as your actual house, but it's still the same principle: somebody unwanted and uninvited invading your private areas - regardless of what they may do when there.

The sellers never lived in this house so the chances are their details hadn't changed.