Hi.
I have recently plastered an exterior feature to a three-storey office block. The task was completed following Product Specification after which I was paid in full by the Management Company, with the client made fully aware that the substrate was not of the usual nature, i.e. glazed tiling as opposed to traditional Sand Cement Float background or substrates such as Blue Board etc.
Prior to the commencement, a test patch and samples were provided at my own expense and the client gave me the go ahead to proceed. In addition to these steps, I also made the client aware that the product should not be used in any areas likely to pool water as this was contrary to Product Specifications.
Following rain showers three days after completion of the render I had applied, delamination from the substrate occurred. I was informed of this via email and my response was to immediately contact the client, visit the job site and organise the removal of all the affected areas.
This was completed for no payment in under three days leaving the building essentially as it had been prior to the contract in order that any subsequent works could be continued without delay or disruption. On further inspection, it appears there was an inherent water leak throughout the area I had worked on which in turn was the reason the my work became defective. I was not informed at any time that this defect was present before or during the contract being executed.
I have photo eveidence of clearly showing the building before, during and after the stated works. In addition, I have emails from the client detailing their gratitude and pleasure for the works completed. The clients are now asking for a full reimbursement of the contract monies regardless of my insistence that I have outlaid a substantial amount of money in order to complete the works in the first instance and despite my prompt actions to ensure no further inconvenience be caused from the situation.
I am happy to reimburse some of the monies as an act of goodwill on my part seeing as the contract, although fulfiled to the clients liking, is obviously now irrelevant in terms of solving the original issues of the buildings dated facade. I do not think sole responsability should fall to me, seeing that I was not made aware there was ongoing problems with water penetration within the building prior to my involvement.
In summary, could you please help me on how I should respond to the client's demands under Australian Consumer Law?
I have informed them of my expenses which equate to less than half the original quote and await their response but would clearly like to know from a legal point of view how I stand should they persist or indeed threaten legal action against me.
Thank you in advance for any assistance you may be able to provide.
Sincerely
I have recently plastered an exterior feature to a three-storey office block. The task was completed following Product Specification after which I was paid in full by the Management Company, with the client made fully aware that the substrate was not of the usual nature, i.e. glazed tiling as opposed to traditional Sand Cement Float background or substrates such as Blue Board etc.
Prior to the commencement, a test patch and samples were provided at my own expense and the client gave me the go ahead to proceed. In addition to these steps, I also made the client aware that the product should not be used in any areas likely to pool water as this was contrary to Product Specifications.
Following rain showers three days after completion of the render I had applied, delamination from the substrate occurred. I was informed of this via email and my response was to immediately contact the client, visit the job site and organise the removal of all the affected areas.
This was completed for no payment in under three days leaving the building essentially as it had been prior to the contract in order that any subsequent works could be continued without delay or disruption. On further inspection, it appears there was an inherent water leak throughout the area I had worked on which in turn was the reason the my work became defective. I was not informed at any time that this defect was present before or during the contract being executed.
I have photo eveidence of clearly showing the building before, during and after the stated works. In addition, I have emails from the client detailing their gratitude and pleasure for the works completed. The clients are now asking for a full reimbursement of the contract monies regardless of my insistence that I have outlaid a substantial amount of money in order to complete the works in the first instance and despite my prompt actions to ensure no further inconvenience be caused from the situation.
I am happy to reimburse some of the monies as an act of goodwill on my part seeing as the contract, although fulfiled to the clients liking, is obviously now irrelevant in terms of solving the original issues of the buildings dated facade. I do not think sole responsability should fall to me, seeing that I was not made aware there was ongoing problems with water penetration within the building prior to my involvement.
In summary, could you please help me on how I should respond to the client's demands under Australian Consumer Law?
I have informed them of my expenses which equate to less than half the original quote and await their response but would clearly like to know from a legal point of view how I stand should they persist or indeed threaten legal action against me.
Thank you in advance for any assistance you may be able to provide.
Sincerely
