Bureau of technical supervision

One room apartment story

История одного ремонтаPreamble:
Decided by one person, let’s call it “Customer”, to make repairs in his apartment. Asked around friends, looked through the newspaper and his choice settled on the man advised friends. Will call it a “Contractor”.
And because the people themselves are gullible, and considering the recommendations, the Client gave the contractor the advance payment in the amount of ten thousand dollars against receipt, but without a detailed contract describing all the work. It is important to clarify that the list of works specified and has been agreed in detail with the Contractor, but on paper these words and certainly no design project was prepared.
As a result, received a poor repair, and the Customer cannot live in the apartment. At first tried to handle it in my own way. Because the contract was only in words, but the Contractor refused to correct the violations (as documented), which also violate all norms for the implementation of those works, which were complaints. I had to look for a Contractor to clarify the details, but have not found the compromise. The case went to trial with experts and witnesses. The customer demands his money back, as the repair was carried out efficiently and with materials of excellent quality.

The plot:
Engineer of technical supervision in 13 year amounted to an act with reference to building a regulatory framework which no work was adopted. This plaster, flooring, tiles, plumbing, curvature of the walls, the freezing balcony, water filters were installed so that their maintenance requires Dismounting the tiles. The toilet had to be with the system installation, and made freestanding with the tank. The radiator installed in a different location and is now installed near to the location of the refrigerator.
Screed had to be with insulation and waterproofing, and eventually got low quality without the desired properties and different thickness of the screed.
The total amount of the contract reaches a tidy sum, and now the customer demands their money back for poor quality work.

The main part:
The court was made by the engineer of technical supervision, as a technical expert.
But here’s the thing, the Contractor took the money and without cost estimates of the project and did the work as I could, and now he says that was not a design project. And refers to the fact that the contract he signed he is not listed as a Contractor and as a consultant. The lack of a budget explains the lack of the amount of the contract, there are no quotations for the work. But the money was taken, and receipts there, so here it is for the court to decide the legal status of the contractor and his responsibility.
But if you imagine that there were some consultations, then the money was taken. The main argument that was not the design of the project. In his remarks, the technical supervision engineer referred to the fact that many of the works were not executed by the client.
The contractor claims that it was all in words, but the counterargument is that the fact that the contractor took money without design and without project estimates.
The contractor was on the recommendations as the adequate artist, not the first day, engaged in the business. But it turned out as it is.

Moral:
It is important to draw up a contract with specialists in construction business and lawyers.
Estimates should be itemized for the entire project, not precise estimates and it will be refined, but it will be painted the stages of works, materials, work costs main and not main.