A plumber sends me a bill for $3000 for a few hours work. The quote for the whole job was $7000. I paid $700 deposit. My storm water drain, under a council lawn verge, between neighbour and my house, needed to be repaired. On starting work they discovered that just under the grass is a Telstra pit (depth 2cm under) . So they could not proceed with the job. They had not obtained council approval to extend the work around this structure so had to stop. To proceed plumber says would now cost $14,000 as have to extend work across driveway. Instead they did some minor exploratory work for a hour or so. There is a visible pit every 10 m. on this street, and at this location of their work the pit is basically infront of every house. Just walking a short distance along the footpath and the pits can be seen infront of every house. Ours had a thin grass covering so was not visible.
I feel that the plumber should have done basic due diligence and just checked that there was no pit at the worksite. His contract says that it is the customer's job to know the site of cables. The contract does not say where this relates to. Your house only, or outside your house to? This work is not on my property, but on Council's, and he had extensive discussions with Council and I think should have inquired from them if he wanted to know. I therefore believe I should not pay $4000 for the work done as it was not what I understood would be done.
My question relates to the grounds of contract. If the job was to repair a pipe and they never in fact could have done this due to a Telstra pit blocking it, then is the quote and contract not applicable? Basically, the job was never possible in the first place, and he should have known and the information the plumber gave us in terms of the quote was misleading. The issue that the $3000 is an extraordinary amount for this small work done, is a separate matter.
I feel that the plumber should have done basic due diligence and just checked that there was no pit at the worksite. His contract says that it is the customer's job to know the site of cables. The contract does not say where this relates to. Your house only, or outside your house to? This work is not on my property, but on Council's, and he had extensive discussions with Council and I think should have inquired from them if he wanted to know. I therefore believe I should not pay $4000 for the work done as it was not what I understood would be done.
My question relates to the grounds of contract. If the job was to repair a pipe and they never in fact could have done this due to a Telstra pit blocking it, then is the quote and contract not applicable? Basically, the job was never possible in the first place, and he should have known and the information the plumber gave us in terms of the quote was misleading. The issue that the $3000 is an extraordinary amount for this small work done, is a separate matter.
