The client instructed a landscaping company to carry out works to their residential garden. The contractor was sourced through an online trade recommendation platform and the client proceeded with the works based on the contractor’s advertised reputation and reviews.
The client paid the contractor approximately £38,000 in advance by bank transfer for the proposed landscaping works. However, after receiving payment, the contractor failed to complete the agreed works. The only work undertaken consisted of limited excavation and partial disruption to the garden.
The client’s position is that the contractor failed to perform the contractual obligations and did not complete the works within the agreed timeframe. The client attempted to contact the contractor to seek repayment, however the contractor refused to refund the money and allegedly stated that, if the client continued pursuing the matter, he would declare bankruptcy to prevent recovery of any sums owed.
The client is seeking recovery of the monies paid, accepting that a deduction of approximately £1,000 may be appropriate to reflect the limited works undertaken. The client therefore seeks recovery of approximately £37,000.
The client also seeks compensation for additional losses and damage caused as a result of the contractor’s actions, including:
Costs incurred in instructing another contractor to complete urgent works required to meet a Council deadline (£5,600).
Damage caused to the client’s fencing, including approximately 30 fence panels, posts and concrete bases (£8,000).
Costs associated with removal of additional waste and rubbish left on the property (£3,000 per skip load, with potentially multiple skip collections required).
The client further alleges that the contractor’s employees entered the property without permission whilst the client was away from home, creating concerns regarding trespass, security and damage to the property.
The client has reported the matter to various organisations, including Action Fraud, Trading Standards, Checkatrade and the relevant financial complaint bodies.
The client reported the matter to Action Fraud on 28 March under reference NFRC 220305098346. The client is awaiting further updates regarding the fraud investigation.
The client also contacted Checkatrade, where the contractor had been advertised. Checkatrade was notified of the alleged misconduct and the client left a negative review regarding the contractor. The client is awaiting Checkatrade’s response regarding its complaint process and whether any assistance can be provided under its guarantee scheme.
The client has also contacted their bank regarding recovery of the funds. The bank advised that reimbursement could not be provided as payment was made by bank transfer rather than card or PayPal. The client was advised to make a formal complaint to the bank and thereafter refer the matter to the Financial Ombudsman if the complaint was unsuccessful.
The main issue is whether the contractor breached the agreement by failing to complete the agreed landscaping works after receiving advance payment.
A further issue is whether the client is entitled to recover the £38,000 payment, less any reasonable deduction for works actually completed, together with additional damages for losses caused by the contractor’s actions.
Counsel considered whether the contractor’s conduct may amount to fraudulent behaviour, particularly given the alleged failure to complete works after receiving payment and the comments regarding bankruptcy to avoid repayment.
The extent of the contractor’s liability for damage caused to the client’s property was also considered, including damage to fencing, waste left on the property and additional costs incurred in appointing another contractor.
A further issue concerns the liability of Checkatrade. The client alleges that Checkatrade may have misrepresented the reliability of the contractor by advertising the business through its platform and providing assurances regarding verified traders. The client is considering whether any claim may be brought against Checkatrade if it fails to assist.
The applicability of Checkatrade’s guarantee scheme was considered. The guarantee provides limited protection and may only cover certain losses arising from poor workmanship or damage caused during works, subject to the terms and conditions.
The client’s ability to recover funds from the bank was also considered. As the payment was made by bank transfer, the bank’s obligations and potential liability will depend on the circumstances surrounding the payment, the fraud complaint and the outcome of the formal complaint process.
Counsel advised that the client may have a potential claim against the landscaping company for breach of contract and recovery of monies paid due to the failure to complete the agreed works.
Counsel advised that evidence should be gathered and preserved, including:
The contract or agreement with the contractor.
Invoices and payment records confirming the £38,000 transfer.
Messages and correspondence between the client and contractor.
Photographs and videos showing the condition of the garden before and after the works.
Evidence of additional costs incurred, including invoices from replacement contractors, fencing repairs and waste removal.
Evidence relating to the contractor’s alleged threats regarding bankruptcy.
Counsel advised that a Letter Before Action should be sent to the contractor seeking repayment of the outstanding balance and compensation for consequential losses. The letter should set out the breach of contract, losses suffered and provide a deadline for payment before proceedings are issued.
Counsel advised that the client’s position may be supported under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, particularly regarding the requirement for services to be carried out with reasonable care and skill and within a reasonable timeframe.
Counsel advised that Checkatrade should be contacted formally as part of the dispute resolution process. The client should request details of its investigation, the basis upon which the trader was advertised and whether any compensation or assistance is available under its guarantee scheme.
Counsel advised that, if Checkatrade fails to provide an adequate response, further consideration can be given to whether there are grounds for pursuing a claim based on misleading representations or failure to provide accurate information regarding the trader.
Counsel further advised that a formal complaint should be made to the bank regarding the refusal to reimburse the transferred funds. If the bank maintains its position, the client may escalate the complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service for consideration.
The following steps were recommended:
Obtain all relevant evidence from the client, including payment records, correspondence and photographs.
Chase Action Fraud for an update regarding the reported fraud investigation.
Notify Trading Standards that legal representatives are instructed and request copies of any relevant information.
Write formally to Checkatrade requesting investigation and a proposed resolution.
Issue a Letter Before Action against the landscaping company seeking repayment and damages.
Submit a formal complaint to the bank and, if unresolved, refer the matter to the Financial Ombudsman.
Overall, Counsel advised that the client appears to have arguable claims arising from breach of contract, failure to provide services with reasonable care and skill, and recovery of losses caused by the contractor’s failure to complete the works. The immediate priority is obtaining evidence and pursuing recovery from the contractor whilst continuing complaints with Checkatrade and the bank.
Call us – Mon-Fri 8:30am – 6:30pm
+44 (0) 20 3034 0077
By submitting this form, I accept this website’s Privacy Policy