Anything illegal about 'outing' a cowboy builder on the net?

[nervous123]

Hi, not sure if this is the best sub-forum for a post like this, but anyway.

About a year ago we employed a contractor to renovate our newly acquired but dilapidated house, and build a rear extension. To cut a long story short, he promised a 'boutique service', charged accordingly, and did a pretty bad job (and that's me being my most politest). Some examples:

The heating engineer he used for the boiler was Gas Safe registered (although subsequently left the Register?!) but didnt do a safe job;

The cylinder has been described on one of my other posts ( //www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=247526&highlight= ) as 'very shoddy' and 'damn dangerous'

The extension roof (also described in another post //www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=247318&highlight= ) requires rectification work in the region of £2.5k;

He promised to use a Fensa-registered glazing firm but didn't;

He fitted an RSJ claiming to use Engineer's Calcs but never provided them
and tried to give me the Spec for his own house instead (!) also see here ( //www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=247321&highlight= )

He didn't use Building Control for the RSJ or for removing my chimneys claiming he didnt know you needed BC for chimneys

And left a snagging list of about 15 items unfinished for the last 5 months.

To make matters worse, after 6 weeks of negotiation, he finally agreed to pay for rectification work I had done to the cylinder and boiler to render them safe and operative, but delayed and mucked me around another month, insisting I had to take the payment as full and final settlement of all plumbing issues in my house (some still outstanding)!!!

Anyway, I recently built myself a little (free) website, detailing some facts and photos of his handiwork, and kindly directed said esteemed gentlemen towards it. Suddenly he's claiming he had the envelope ready to pay but now he's taking legal advice because I have set us back by putting it 'all over the net'...

Just wondered if anyone had ever encountered a similar situation and could advise if there are any legal considerations to be aware of. Personally, I have come across lots of blogs and suchlike, where various nefarious building cock-ups and worse have been recorded in all their lurid detail. Even this site has a sub-forum (this one) dedicated to all these issues!?

Any advice most welcome.

 

[Mickymoody]

What you say is normally daytime TV material..as lots of bad builders out there..

But what I ask in these scenarios, is WHY choose that builder? You had options, you could see their previous work, but chose not to?

Maybe the builder was good, and the client was an idiot? Have you considered that? Asking for changes, alterations, additions? When a price was suggested, then you added to it with additions? Then complained? After a price was set?

 

[electronicsuk]

I'm certainly no legal expert, but if you can prove what you've written on your web site to be true, I find it hard to believe that you could be forced to take it down. It's not libellous if it's fact. On the other hand, it may be better for you in the long run to agree to take it down in exchange for the money you feel you're owed, unless you value your convictions more than your money.

I expect the legal action mentioned is nothing but more smoke and mirrors to waste your time, and he has no intention of trying to take the matter any further.

 

[nervous123]

What you say is normally daytime TV material..as lots of bad builders out there..

But what I ask in these scenarios, is WHY choose that builder? You had options, you could see their previous work, but chose not to?

Maybe the builder was good, and the client was an idiot? Have you considered that? Asking for changes, alterations, additions? When a price was suggested, then you added to it with additions? Then complained? After a price was set?

I was in a rush, he gave me several references of which I spoke to one who gave a glowing report (turned out later to be his brother in law). I have now, after making some inquiries, discovered that he has a very bad reputation among all the local builders, not just competetive rivalry (as they all have to each other) but honestly viewed as a bad builder. Not to mention that someone has also told me of similar issues.

I can't understand why you would argue that he is good and I am the idiot, when countless other users of this forum have been shocked by the standard of his work. I have provided examples of poor workmanship... how or why should that reflect on me?

Not to mention the fact that he has consistently lied to me and made vain promises (eg Fensa reg).

Not to mention the fact that it has been him who constantly hassled and harried me with every decision I made, and it was him who found lots of new jobs to charge more money for along the way. EG. charging me £8000 to rewire the house, then once the electrician was ready to install the lights, insisting I had to pay an additional £69 per light fitting. I had no choice but to agree then (as it was halfway through the job) but had he told me from the start I may not have taken him.

I dont want to accuse you, but are you just a builder siding with one of your fellow workmen for the sake of it?

 

[Monkeh]

I dont want to accuse you, but are you just a builder siding with one of your fellow workmen for the sake of it?

Micky couldn't build a wall if you attached strings to his hands and built it for him.

 

[RedHerring2]

I dont want to accuse you, but are you just a builder siding with one of your fellow workmen for the sake of it?

Micky couldn't build a wall if you attached strings to his hands and built it for him.

Are you suggesting that Micky hasn't got the brains of a donkey?

I beg to disagree with you, I feel I must rush to his defence.
Oh yes, he has!

 

[Mickymoody]

I dont want to accuse you, but are you just a builder siding with one of your fellow workmen for the sake of it?

Micky couldn't build a wall if you attached strings to his hands and built it for him.

That's possibly true, I apologise, it does come across as harsh.

You see so many bad builder programmes on TV thesedays, and always wonder...why did you employ this person, and the reasons you give are classic, in a rush, didn't properly check etc etc..

I've been in the same boat with a boiler 'specialist', as everyone I rang was busy, and I needed the boiler fixing immediately, so the only 'engineer', that could attend immediately, could do so, because nobody would employ him, because he was rubbish.

He came, replaced a 200mA fuse with a 13A fuse, without removing the boiler casing, insisted on being paid cash in hand, no receipt. Boiler worked until he was out of the garden gate, then flash bang, boom!

Several engineers later, and much outlay of parts, the cure was a new boiler. THAT new boiler is also broken, many engineers, many parts replaced, various people saying 'it's definately this or that'. One engineer that visited, and made the problem far worse, ie rather than not working, it now switches itself on, AND floods the kitchen, actually helped himself to some of my tools, that were stored in the kitchen..

But I can't check my workmans history, major building work you can. For an engineer to replace a 200mA fuse with a 13A fuse, in a boiler is a criminal offense. It's beyond incompetence.

I repair electronics, and there was a spate of sat boxes blowing fuses in the early '90's, and a neighbour called me round, as her sat box blew, everytime she used her vacuum cleaner..I'll admit, that I replaced the internal fuse from a 100mA fastblow fuse, to a 200mA delay fuse, and it was fixed. The manufacturer later released a mod kit, a couple of resistors, and a 500mA internal fuse. But 200mA to 13A internal fuse? Corgi registered? C'mon! This is a professional.

 

[Sam Gangee]

Legal or not, if there's even a hint of litigation, your ISP will pull the plug on your site. Read their T&Cs.

 

[opps]

Most Uk hosting companies will pull the plug as soon as they get the letter from his solicitor.

If you are serious about maintaining the site you need to use one of the American hosting companies.

You are allowed use the name of the trading firm followed by uncomplimentary words in the title of any domain name that you register

I set up a site for a friend who wanted to name and shame a large UK spread betting company. He pretty much accused them of stealing money from him by changing the T&Cs mid trade

As soon as they discovered it they sent him a cease and desist order via courier. I immediately contacted the hosting company who told me that they had already been contacted by the firm and had told them to EFF OFF. The hosting company were happy that the content was covered by the 1st amendment and that it was an expression of personal opinion. The firm then claimed that as their name was trademarked it was an offence to use it in the domain name, again they were told where to go.

There are some pretty important considerations however- one of them being that you do not make any money from the site- so no advertising at all.

For more advice checkout

http://www.paypalsucks.com/domain-name-disputes.shtml

Other than this forum you may also want to post over at the Money Saving Experts forum and the Consumer Action Group

 

[digdilem]

"The truth is its own defence"

Don't deviate from the facts, don't conjecture or cast any personal opinion and I find it difficult to believe you could be successfully prosecuted. If your isp pulls it, go elsewhere - or use a free site to start with, or host your own site.

 

[opps]

"The truth is its own defence".

I'm not sure that it is that straight forward under English law- I guess that the OP is obliged to prove that they are telling the truth. Whilst I don't doubt that they could do this it might prove rather costly.

"Don't deviate from the facts, don't conjecture or cast any personal opinion and I find it difficult to believe you could be successfully prosecuted. If your isp pulls it, go elsewhere - or use a free site to start with, or host your own site.

There is a danger that breaking the ISP'ss ToC's might lead them to pull your broadband, assuming that they are hosting the site.

In such cases UK hosting firms have a degree of exposure and thus would be unlikely to want to spend their money on defending a site that means nothing to them in financial terms.

The larger American hosting firms, knowing that they are covered by the First, are often more willing to stand up to the first threat of litigation. Knowing that they are beat the lawyers will probably not bother sending a second letter.

http://totalchoicehosting.com/web-hosting-plans.html

The above will charge $55 pa and will cover your back providing that you don't go over the top.

 

[womble69]

If you can prove what you say (the proof had better be good though), you can say what you like.

 

[PhilipClarke]

I've had a website up for two years at least, detailing how a company was/ is "installing" my open source software for £75 and misleading people into believing the software is not freely available. It's a five minute job only being done because they are misrepresenting the software and the task. Some people call this misrepresentation, "marketing".

I've been legally threatened, done absolutely nothing about it except to respond "do the maths", These scenarios aren't a small claims court action (been there) where a tangible invoice or amount exists that isn't being paid, this would be a civil action with a jury and arguing lawyers charging 10,000 for a trial that would last half a day (incredible how those expenses mount up). In reality, the guy either checked with a solicitor and fired off a standard letter, or wrote the letter himself, rarely do these things go to court when one is suing for compensation that would be up for discussion.

• keep to what you can prove, on date XYZ Mr Smith installed a boiler that was unsuitable for purpose and...
  any opinions need to be made clear that they are "yours" "someone's", qualified or not. e.g. "It was the opinion of a qualified builder, that the aforementioned was an ass" or I believe that Mr Smith's taking money for services not rendered borders on the fraudulent.

Under UK law, you may have a personal opinion about anything, whereas slander and libel are the dissemination of information portrayed as "factual" with the intent on inflicting damage to a reputation, defamation of character. In court you are covered by court privilege so can say anything what you want and don't need to precede things by "your opinion" or prove a body of experience.

You can take out adverts in his local newspaper if everything is factual, "you" don't need a lawyer even if it goes to court. It can also be beneficial to go to court because then you can establish facts on the public record which can be reprinted and distributed as you see fit,

It's been my experience that most UK ISP's don't give a damn about website content, they are not responsible for content in Europe unless it is criminal, whereas this is a civil matter. The general argument that goes, is the same for forum, in that the ISP is not responsible for user generated content, having said that, some people get jittery at the mention of lawyers.[/list]

 

[nervous123]

Thanks Philip. Builder did threaten legal action, but I believe he was bluffing. In any case, I'm trying a different tack with him, so the whole website thing may not be necessary anymore,.