Funds Insider - Opening the door to funds

Welcome to the Citywire Funds Insider Forums, where members share investment ideas and discuss everything to do with their money.

You'll need to log in or set up an account to start new discussions or reply to existing ones. See you inside!

Notification

Icon
Error
A Stressful Activity
+ Reply to discussion
Options
bearcub
Posted: 15 January 2025 18:11:27(UTC)
#194

Joined: 07/05/2023(UTC)
Posts: 190

Thanks: 462 times
Was thanked: 280 time(s) in 118 post(s)
I've worked in construction for 30 years, and I'd suggest it's worth checking whether your builder was a member of the FMB (Federation of Master Builders) or CIOB (Chartered Institute of Building) – they might be able to advise.

The suggestion of seeking legal advice through your home insurance is also a good one, but just to flag that any court claim should be backed up with good paperwork, eg. accurate valuations from a quantity surveyor who's independent of the contractor, and payment certificates from a chartered architect. The benefit of employing qualified professionals is that it raises the dispute above the level of client vs. contractor.

General point to anyone having work done – it's worth making sure there are comprehensive progress photos which can be cross-referenced to valuations/ invoices, so that experts can deduce whether the work claimed for has actually been completed on site.
Back to top Quote
4 users thanked bearcub for this post.
Sheerman on 15/01/2025(UTC), Sara G on 15/01/2025(UTC), SF100 on 15/01/2025(UTC), Raj K on 15/01/2025(UTC)
Rookie Investor
Posted: 15 January 2025 18:21:42(UTC)
#195

Joined: 09/12/2020(UTC)
Posts: 2,087

Thanks: 1343 times
Was thanked: 3639 time(s) in 1417 post(s)
It sounds like Sara's case is more about outright fraud as opposed to contractors simply not performing. The latter might be hard or impossible to pursue in terms of claim as likely the contractor would have used a ltd company, plus the burden of proof is with the consumer.

But with fraud I guess it can be perused through avenues like trading standards and he claim is directly with the offender as opposed to a ltd company. But as Sara has found out, it is going to be still challenging if it requires more effort or dependent on court systems etc.

If there is a ban for 5 years, surely that is a conviction of fraud already in place? Would that not mean that is should be quite straightforward to pursue the financial compensation given the offender is sitting on a 7 figure amount? Surely this can be dealt with in court within the next year or so? At the very least freeze assets so they can not be given away or hidden anywhere (BTC lol)?

And 5 year ban??! Why not a ban until the point he has repaid every penny to everyone he has defrauded?
Back to top Quote
 |  Edit by user
3 users thanked Rookie Investor for this post.
Sara G on 15/01/2025(UTC), SF100 on 15/01/2025(UTC), Raj K on 15/01/2025(UTC)
Sara G
Posted: 15 January 2025 18:35:28(UTC)
#196

Joined: 07/05/2015(UTC)
Posts: 4,042

Thanks: 13081 times
Was thanked: 16855 time(s) in 3511 post(s)
Rookie Investor;331183 wrote:
It sounds like Sara's case is more about outright fraud as opposed to contractors simply not performing. The latter might be hard or impossible to pursue in terms of claim as likely the contractor would have used a ltd company, plus the burden of proof is with the consumer.

But with fraud I guess it can be perused through avenues like trading standards and he claim is directly with the offender as opposed to a ltd company. But as Sara has found out, it is going to be still challenging if it requires more effort or dependent on court systems etc.

If there is a ban for 5 years, surely that is a conviction of fraud already in place? Would that not mean that is should be quite straightforward to pursue the financial compensation given the offender is sitting on a 7 figure amount? Surely this can be dealt with in court within the next year or so? At the very least freeze assets so they can not be given away or hidden anywhere (BTC lol)?

And 5 year ban??! Why not a ban until the point he has repaid every penny to everyone he has defrauded?


Thanks Rookie, and bearcub. Yes, I think it is effectively fraud or they wouldn't have suggested that a custodial sentence was a possibility. He hasn't actually been banned - they have accepted his undertaking that he won't be a director of a firm in that period. They say it isn't within their gift to strike him off as a director - that can only happen as part of the insolvency proceedings.

Sadly we weren't given the option of joining the queue to go through the courts - it is for Trading Standards to decide whether they wish to pursue it, and they clearly can't be bothered, even though there is evidence (lots of it) to support a case. It's ironic that you can get banged up for so many seemingly trivial things these days, but (what I consider to be) more serious stuff isn't a priority.

I will find out what I can about how / whether the formal undertaking will be monitored. I just don't want to waste my time getting into an arrangement where he is supposed to pay £10 per month (or whatever) and have to keep chasing it myself, and be dependent on his willingness to keep up payments. It would take too much energy - I'd almost rather write it all off, as I pretty much had done already.
Back to top Quote
2 users thanked Sara G for this post.
Jay P on 15/01/2025(UTC), SF100 on 15/01/2025(UTC)
19 Pages«Previous page171819
+ Reply to discussion

Markets

Other markets