Right royally ripped-off or just out of touch? Post Reply

[outnumbered]

I wanted to post to ask general opinions about a plumbing invoice we've received.

When our boiler broke down a couple of weeks ago, the independent plumber we usually use couldn't come come for another 10 days, so he gave me the number of someone he knew.

It was a small firm who I checked out online and who seem to be very reputable. They're based just outside town but do work in SE and SW London, and they have two tiers of prices for local and London-based work. The office staff were helpful and friendly, the plumber who came the next day seemed good and efficient and knew within 10 minutes that we needed a new fan. He reassured me it wouldn't be too bad as it wasn't a big job.

The quote for the work (and the invoice for that first visit - one hour) arrived soon after and they said it would be two hours labour plus the part. I did query this as he had said it wasn't a big job, so I was surprised by the two hours but she said it was right, so I booked them in for the next day.

The same plumber arrived and proceeded to fit it in 10 minutes. At this point I said how great it was that he'd fitted it so quickly and presumably the invoice would reflect that as they'd quoted for 2 hours labour? He said no, it wouldn't be altered. It had taken him a while to find the part and then lots of driving time to get to me both the day before and on this second visit. I said surely they built travel time into their hourly cost (hence the higher charge for London)..It was left that he'd speak to the office.

So I received the invoice and they'd knocked 30 mins off, so the charge was for the part plus 1.5hours. We've emailed our thoughts on this to the company, saying that we're entirely happy to pay for the first hour's visit to identify the problem and then a full hour on the second visit (their website states that there is a minimum charge of 1 hour per visit), but that we dispute the additional time charged when they were only here for 10 minutes.

Amazingly - I think - they've come back saying no, they will not lower the charge any further, that once a quote is accepted that is fixed and non-negotiable and that this is industry standard.

Is that right? Are we just really out of touch because of usually using an independent plumber? Or do I have reason to be feeling like we're being ripped off? Of course, we're now only debating 30 mins labour plus vat, so I'm sure many will think, just pay it, but I feel like sticking to my guns on this one! The plumber was in my house for the sum total of 20 minutes and we're being charged for 2.5 hours.

[Wheresmyschool?]

how annoying!

I think the quote part is really interesting and although I'm not a lawyer these are my thoughts:

1. if it had taken them longer to fit than expected, would they have done the extra hours FOC? I doubt it?

2. is there a T&C on the back on any paperwork to say if it's a quote or estimate?

Looking at CAB

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/nireland/ ... imates.htm

they seem to say a quote is binding and an estimate it flexible but one could argue you were buying "his time" and so the "time" element wasn't delivered.

Anyway to summarise:

1. If it's a quote probably have to stick with it, if an estimate you can probably negotiate

2. "Reasonable" travel time would normally be built into the quote unless they clearly separate the cost in their T&C's. If they have a higher rate for London then that would probably mean that "reasonable" travel to London is already taken into account and so they'd have to show that they'd travelled much further/took more time than "reasonable"

3. I'd Google the firms name and see if anyone else has complained? It might be sharp practice!

4. Lastly, you could offer to pay a fair amount in full and final settlement but be prepared for them to a) try to sue you or b) never use them again!

hope that helps!

[outnumbered]

Thanks so much for your post.

Great idea to look on the CAB and interesting to read about estimates versus quotes. It's taken the wind out of my sails slightly, as it seems they may be within their rights (it was a quote, not an estimate), so we might just have to 'suck it up' this time! But what bad business practice to quote 2 hours on a job that they surely knew was only going to take a matter of minutes.

As you say, we'll certainly never be using them again. Their website is annoyingly full of the 'customer being paramount' and 'they always put themselves in the customer's shoes'...not sure that's the case here. I'm sure most customers would query what was originally a 3 hour labour charge versus 20 minutes under our roof. Perhaps I should look on the bright side and be grateful they've knocked it down to 2.5!

[TillyandMoo]

That doesn't sound right to me otherwise any business could provide a quote for far longer than they know the work will really take. It's one thing giving a quote for 5 hours work and it actually takes 4 hours but to quote 2 hours and it takes 10 minutes is ludicrous and there is no way I'd pay for that!

[Gingerbread]

This doesn't sound right. Why not speak to the plumber who recommended them and ask him to have a word- he may have some leverage.

[Dan@bacpah]

Hi I run battersea & Clapham plumbing and heating, you are well in your rights to pay for a hour for each visit, to be charged 2 hours for a 10minute job is not right, normally in this situation the original call out would be chargeable at a hourly rate, roughly £65 ph then the repair would normally be done on a price rather than hourly rate, then everyone knows what the price will be no matter how long it will take.
I have worked for big companies before bacpah and there policies will involve higher rates and charges to cover larger costs like office staff and advertising.
Any queries feel free to private message us and will be happy to help or advise
Thanks

[Raspberry-Sorbet]

I had a similar experience a few weeks ago but with a difference that my boiler couldn't be repaired so I had to buy a new one but similarly, it took ten minutes to conclude this.
The engineer said he wanted his supervisor to come round to double check some answers to questions I had asked (to do with re-siting a new boiler due to some building work that will be happening soon). I agreed to the supervisor's visit and I was fully prepared to pay an hour's call out charge even though it only took ten minutes to tell me my boiler needed to be replaced because that engineer probably wouldn't have been able to be diverted to another job immediately and I understand that a minimum call out charge is reasonable for a business to be able to cover their costs.

However what I was not so pleased with was a large amount of chatting between the supervisor and engineer and cigarette breaks. It meant the whole appointment was prolonged and the engineer was at my property for 2.5 hours but not really doing anything. (the new boiler was to be fitted at a different appointment) When I received a bill for 2.5 hours, I phoned the office, explained the above and also pointed out that it is illegal to smoke at a place of work and a vehicle is a place of work. This carries a £2500 fine. I said that I was not happy to pay the whole 2.5 hours as I would also be paying for cigarette breaks which were not relevant to my boiler service and also illegal. I wasn't asking for the whole bill to be waived but they did. Thought I would share that in case your engineer was taking cigarette breaks!

I completely agree that a business couldn't survive if they were only charging for the exact few minutes they were at a job. The call out charge covers much more than just the engineer but I think it's a shame that a bit of flexibility hasn't been applied to your scenario as they are less likely to keep you as a customer.