We hired a contractor to build a screen-in-porch. We signed a contract for $4600 for the materials pkg and $3150 for his labor. It turned out that he ordered $1000 too much in materials. We are the ones that pd the $4600 to the lumber company. Yet, he returned the materials and thinks the money should be his. Says he really should have charged more in labor and so now he is happy. I AM NOT! We pd for all the wood - he should leave it with us or give us the return money. Am I wrong?

Contractor quoted a materials price that was $1000 more than needed. We wrote ck for materials but he says the money is his. He quoted us a total bid price but in two parts. We intend to pay his labor quote but believe the $1000 in returned materials is ours. Am I right

He quoted you with a price and the quoted price wasn't accurate, therefore he should have re-negotiated the quote instead of scamming the unused material for cash and not abiding by his quote. So his excuse for keeping the money is "I should have charge you more for Labor" What an idiot! If he quoted you for $4600 material & $3150 for labor, any unused material belong to you, because you bought it.

One of the reasons I don't quote labor separate from materials is just this.

The last 3 season porch I made,I said 50/50,material/labor.All receipts were shown to the customer,including gas.

There was no problem with doing this by either side.

Trusting a contractor is going to be difficult for you for a while,that's too bad, we don't all act like this guy.

He is wrong in his actions,he should have left the material there,had you return it(which might have cost you a return/restocking fee,but not the entire material costs) PLUS,if he had quoted the job low(as in this market,we need to keep costs as low as we can or we don't get the job!)renegotiated the labor with you.He signed,you signed,it's legal.

Do you have any legal grounds to get this money back?I can't tell you,I am not a lawyer, but if you ask this on the legal boards here on AMHD,there are some who can guide you to an answer.

Am I wrong?Hello screen:

No. Sue him in small claims court. It's quick, cheap and easy.

excon

Who is right and who should receive any refunds or credits depends upon the language of the contract.

Without seeing that contract, no one here can offer any sensible answer.

We are only hearing one side of the story.

If the contract had a quoted rate of $4600 for materials and $3150 for labor, the total contract obligation by the owner is $7750 regardless of how much the actual materials cost, and any 'refunds' are legally due to the contractor, not the owner, even if the contractor mistakenly over-estimated the materials cost.

The original poster needs to contact his attorney and have his attorney sort it out, then sue the contractor if necessary, but from here, it does not look like the owner has a case and still owes the contractor $1000.

Without seeing that contract, no one here can offer any sensible answer.

The original poster needs to contact his attorney and have his attorney sort it out, then sue the contractor if necessaryHello manhattan:

In fact, it's YOUR answer that lacks sense, whereas MY answer is eminently sensible.

I DO agree with you, though. He DOES need a lawyer to "sort it out". I simply suggested that he see the judge/lawyer, who's only going to cost the filing fee (around $50) to sort it out, whereas his own personal attorney will charge him much more than that, and probably more than the $1,000 in dispute. Plus, if he spends money on his lawyer, only to find out that he DOES have a case, he's going to have to spend money on the filing fee anyway.

The OP should cut to the chase. He doesn't need to lay out the extra $$'s.

excon

I will agree, you paid for the material, so all the good and materials supplied are yours. ( unless the contract states he gets any excess material)

But I guess how did he return it, without a receipt, if you paid for it, then you got the receipt?

And how do you know you paid for it, didyou write a check to the lumber company, where you at the lumber company buying it.

Quess I am asking are you sure he did not pay off a past bill with the money you gave him and the bill is still due for your material.

But yes, sue him, it is easy, and it is cheap, you will have to prove he returned the items and need to know what items were left over

Hello manhattan:

In fact, it's YOUR answer that lacks sense, whereas MY answer is eminently sensible.

I DO agree with you, though. He DOES need a lawyer to "sort it out". I simply suggested that he see the judge/lawyer, who's only going to cost the filing fee (around $50) to sort it out, whereas his own personal attorney will charge him much more than that, and probably more than the $1,000 in dispute. Plus, if he spends money on his lawyer, only to find out that he DOES have a case, he's going to have to spend money on the filing fee anyway.

The OP should cut to the chase. He doesn't need to lay out the extra $$'s.

excon

Again, if a builder and owner agree to a project that costs $7600, and the builder estimates that he will use $4600 in materials but in the end only uses $3600 in materials...

The owner is still obligated to pay $7600... not $6600... because that is the price the contract stipulated. Period.

In such a case the builder is under no obligation whatsoever to return $1000 to the customer and the $1000 is considered his profit.

The original poster's explanation of the facts in this thread is confusing at best, and again, without seeing the actual contract... no one can answer.

Best the original poster talks to his attorney.

Best the original poster talks to his attorney.Hello again, manhattan:

You missed my point a second time. I didn't give him a LEGAL answer. I gave him a PRACTICAL answer, and it's a better solution than yours.

excon

I will agree, you paid for the material, so all the good and materials supplied are yours. ( unless the contract states he gets any excess material)

But I guess how did he return it, without a reciept, if you paid for it, then you got the reciept ??

And how do you know you paid for it, didyou write a check to the lumber company, where you at the lumber company buying it.

Quess I am asking are you sure he did not pay off a past bill with the money you gave him and the bill is still due for your material.

But yes, sue him, it is easy, and it is cheap, you will have to prove he returned the items and need to know what items were left over

Thanks for your help. We DID write the $4600 ck to the lumber company but NO, we have NO idea WHAT we bought since he refuses to give us any invoices. We may have bought him a new table saw or etc.

He is hung up on the fact that we signed a contract for $7800.00! I agree that IF we had signed a contract for $7800 and it had not been written in $4600 materials and $3150 in labor - he could have spent $2000 on materials and been EXPECTED to keep the rest (if the job was satisfactory. He is a small guy w/o work and instead of being so thankful that he made $3150 in less than ten days (he and helper, wife) he saw a chance to "pad" things.

I actually counted the bucket of nails that cost $90. Only 850 of the 2000 were used and yet HE took the bucket. Sure the same was true with staples and other supplies. He hauled off almost a roll of roofing paper and we don't know what else because we have NO INVOICE of what we bought.

I called ACE where we sent the ck for supplies but they, of course, are on his side. My goodness - they know they aren't going to make much on us in the future (we even live 35 miles away) but they have a good chance of selling to a contractor that lives in their small town. ALSO, he bragged about letting THEM figure what supplies were needed and then continued to fuss when it was wrong so ACE is protecting their man in that area too.

Thankfully we played along until he had EVERYTHING loaded and I said, now do you want to talk about the final check. He also had on their $200 for something he never told me he was charging me extra for. So, he does NOT have our money. He says we owe him $1700. W/o really having the facts and invoices on the lumber and materials situation we figure we owe him about $750. No final check has been written.

Do you think he could win in court?

One of the reasons I don't quote labor separate from materials is just this.

The last 3 season porch I made,I said 50/50,material/labor.All receipts were shown to the customer,including gas.

There was no problem with doing this by either side.

Trusting a contractor is going to be difficult for you for a while,that's too bad,,we don't all act like this guy.

He is wrong in his actions,he should have left the material there,had you return it(which might have cost you a return/restocking fee,but not the entire material costs) PLUS,if he had quoted the job low(as in this market,we need to keep costs as low as we can or we don't get the job!)renegotiated the labor with you.He signed,you signed,it's legal.

Do you have any legal grounds to get this money back?I can't tell you,I am not a lawyer,,but if you ask this on the legal boards here on AMHD,there are some who can guide you to an answer.

Thank you so much for your help and would you please read my further answer "somewhere" in here?

Who is right and who should receive any refunds or credits depends upon the language of the contract.

Without seeing that contract, no one here can offer any sensible answer.

We are only hearing one side of the story.

If the contract had a quoted rate of $4600 for materials and $3150 for labor, the total contract obligation by the owner is $7750 regardless of how much the actual materials cost, and any 'refunds' are legally due to the contractor, not the owner, even if the contractor mistakenly over-estimated the materials cost.

The original poster needs to contact his attorney and have his attorney sort it out, then sue the contractor if necessary, but from here, it does not look like the owner has a case and still owes the contractor $1000.
Thank you for helping us even though we don't like your answer. I can understand that if we had agreed and signed a contract to have the job done at $7800 - then if he only spent $2000 on materials - good for him and he gets the extra.

But since the contract separates HIS LABOR figure and our materials figure and says nothing about more or less - then it seems that he is getting what he agreed to $3150 and the materials are none of his business. Do you still think it wouldn't hold up in court? I made pictures of what was returned - called the company we wrote the check to and got pricing , etc.

Again, if a builder and owner agree to a project that costs $7600, and the builder estimates that he will use $4600 in materials but in the end only uses $3600 in materials...

The owner is still obligated to pay $7600...not $6600...because that is the price the contract stipulated. Period.

In such a case the builder is under no obligation whatsoever to return $1000 to the customer and the $1000 is considered his profit.

The original poster's explanation of the facts in this thread is confusing at best, and again, without seeing the actual contract...no one can answer.

Best the original poster talks to his attorney.

The materials fee was NOT an estimate - we wrote out a ck to the lumber company for $4600 the night we signed the contract and gave it to the contractor. He is such a poor mgr. that he could not buy the materials himself. Therefore we took a risk and, as I said, have yet to see an invoice of what we bought. He refuses to let us see it.

AND, we paid and trusted him to only buy what we needed and he used. Even if he were "technically" allowed - integrity would say you be glad that the customer was able to save money?

Thank you so much for your help and would you please read my further answer "somewhere" in here??

This has always been a difficult area for the contracting trades,especially for the little guys(of which I am anymore)

IF the contract is legal(which a court might have to decide)=$$

IF you can show that he took items which you paid for in court=$$

You will need legal representation(unless you are prolific in the use of litigation,you wouldn't do this alone)=$$

It is assumed that we(the contractor) will not use ALL materials(felt paper,nails,staples,etc)which,in court,will be a given.

There is no way to use 2 square of felt when the roof only needs 1.5 square of paper,there will be left over materials like nails,staples,etc, you can reasonably assume that there will be a call for 2000 nails,but to use them all? No,we have to have them available for possible use,otherwise we will be back to the store for the 200 nails we need to finish,costing us time($$)

I am trying to make this understandable and as clear as possible for you.. I am going to ask another contractor to add to this thread, he has a good perspective and good advice,

This has always been a difficult area for the contracting trades,especially for the little guys(of which I am anymore)

IF the contract is legal(which a court might have to decide)=$$

IF you can show that he took items which you paid for in court=$$

You will need legal representation(unless you are prolific in the use of litigation,you wouldn't do this alone)=$$

It is assumed that we(the contractor) will not use ALL materials(felt paper,nails,staples,etc)which,in court,will be a given.

There is no way to use 2 square of felt when the roof only needs 1.5 square of paper,there will be left over materials like nails,staples,etc,,you can reasonably assume that there will be a call for 2000 nails,but to use them all? No,we have to have them available for possible use,otherwise we will be back to the store for the 200 nails we need to finish,costing us time($$)

I am trying to make this understandable and as clear as possible for you..I am going to ask another contractor to add to this thread,,he has a good perspective and good advice,,

I understand that he cannot help how much of some materials, like roofing felt, and that some will be leftover. We do many projects around here and my husband has a 40 x 60 shop. WE will eventually use that stuff and the contractor knew that. To repair some of his work - we will probably have to go buy more of the exact nails and they are not cheap.

We wish we had used our "usual" contractor but this guy was begging for the job. At a previous house we had our "usual" build a screen porch He had us just buy the materials as he needed them or he would buy them and bring us the receipt for reimbursement. I'm sure that you always get stiffed some things and that is understandable.

I just feel that the fact that the contract says: Lumber pkg... $4600 and then labor $3150 for a total of $7800 gives us a break. He had to do this because he did not have the money or the credit with the lumber company to just keep his own open acct with them. If he had and just hamed a total price of $7800 then obviously he can do as he chooses.

We are christians and do not want to cheap him at all. In fact, had he not been so quick to show us he was not out for our best interests - and would cut corners where he could - we probably would have ignored the extra exchange or pd him a hefty bonus.

Also - my husband says there are grievances on our side if he was to take us to court: The roof slope is not to standard, the porch is not square, he did not it tight at all - inch gaps around all doors and even more when it connects to the house. Installed indoor outlet covers on our full length front porch. We will have to change those to outdoor covers. This was an extra $200 to put in 5 outlets - since they were buying the materials for that - they got flimsy 22cent indoor covers.

Thank you for helping us. We are waiting to hear from him again.

Sorry,

But from what I am reading, Screen Porch signed a contract to pay $4600 for materials and that, as they say, is that.

Doesn't matter if the materials cost less. Doesn't matter if he was a poor manager.

ScreenPorch is only complaining because she found out the material costs were less that $4600. What if the contractor came to her and told her the materials actually cost MORE? Would ScreenPorch be arguing that she shouldn't have to pay him because the contract said $4600 for materials?

I think so.

From here it appears that Screen Porch owes the man the full $4600 regardless of how much the materials actually cost... and he is under no obligation to provide Screen Porch with any receipts. Technically, the receipts are his since HE supplied the materials... not Screen Porch.

Screen Porch's receipt for $4600 by way of the canceled check is all the receipt he/she is required to get.

All due respect, I don't believe ScreenPorch has much of a case here... But she needs to get real legal advice from a local attorney, not advice on the internet.

Just remember the attorney's advice will likley cost more than what ScreenPorch already thinks she may have lost, and ScreenPorch could very likely pay the attorney a lot of money on top of paying the contractor... just to find that the contractor was right all along.

Personally, and for the relatively small amount of money involved, I'd pay the contractor and move on... Otherwise ScreenPorch could find the contractor having a lien placed upon her house and the house being sold out from under her to satisfy the lien.

Who is right and who should receive any refunds or credits depends upon the language of the contract.

Without seeing that contract, no one here can offer any sensible answer.

We are only hearing one side of the story.

If the contract had a quoted rate of $4600 for materials and $3150 for labor, the total contract obligation by the owner is $7750 regardless of how much the actual materials cost, and any 'refunds' are legally due to the contractor, not the owner, even if the contractor mistakenly over-estimated the materials cost.

The original poster needs to contact his attorney and have his attorney sort it out, then sue the contractor if necessary, but from here, it does not look like the owner has a case and still owes the contractor $1000.

Things have changed. The contractor is angry (as you feel he should be and you may be right) but since he wants to nit pick - we are fighting back. With the money ($4600)) he bought the CHEAPEST screen doors he could, installed indoor electrical outlet covers on our front porch (5 of them) rather than outdoor covers which would only have cost about $15 more. AND my husband found that he did not put the 26 gage metal roofing on that the contract stipulated!! Does that give us legal grounds in your opinion?

Thank you for helping - again, we never want to cheat anyone but this guy cut corners everywhere he could and caused us to become suspicious. There are several other sus standard - or not up to specs in contract that he did not do.

Does that give us legal grounds in your opinion?Hello again, screen:

Even though you IGNORED me when you answered everybody else, I'm still willing to help.

The only thing manhattan and I agree on, is that you need legal advice from someone OTHER than a stranger on the internet. What you're looking for is a DEFINITIVE answer on the law BEFORE you act. We're BOTH telling you, however, that you're not going to find it here.

So, I'm back to my original solution. It's cheaper to visit the judge/lawyer who is actually the one who'll eventually have to render his opinion if you DO decide to sue. I'm just trying to steer you to the BEST solution for the least cost.

I know you don't want to cheat anybody... But, there are many disputes by honest people thinking they're right. The court won't get mad at you if you're wrong. The problem here, is the contract and how it was written.

That's a plus for you, though. If the dispute winds up being about the WORDING of the contract, the judge will rule against the one who WROTE the contract. In this instance, it looks like him.

In terms of your new claims, I'll bet the contract doesn't call for you to approve the purchases he made before he made them. You can't go back and make provisions in your contract there weren't there in the first place. So, no - your new claims aren't going to fly.

excon

Things have changed. The contractor is angry (as you feel he should be and you may be right) but since he wants to nit pick - we are fighting back. With the money ($4600)) he bought the CHEAPEST screen doors he could, installed indoor electrical outlet covers on our front porch (5 of them) rather than outdoor covers which would only have cost about $15 more. AND my husband found that he did not put the 26 gage metal roofing on that the contract stipulated!!! Does that give us legal grounds in your opinion?

Thank you for helping - again, we never want to cheat anyone but this guy cut corners everywhere he could and caused us to become suspicious. There are several other sus standard - or not up to specs in contract that he did not do.

You may have legitimate complaints with the work done by the builder and some complaints may in fact violate your contract.

(The missing weather proof covers on the outdoor electrical receptacles are a code violation, but easily corrected)

But again, no one here has read your contract and no one here has heard both sides of this story.

Call your attorney to have him assess the contract and your legal rights under it, then proceed from there.

No one here is telling you not to fight for your rights.

What we are telling you is that no one here can tell you what your rights are without knowing the language of the contract and the laws of your state or province.

Based on the scant information you have provided, it still appears you will owe the balance on the materials less any legitimate claims against the workmanship or violations in the agreement defining what materials would be used.

At best, you may get some credit for the roof (the price difference between a 26 gauge vs whatever gauge metal roof he installed) but not much else.

So talk to your attorney.

Magistrates or small claims Judges cannot give you legal advice, nor can anyone else here.

I DO agree with you, though. He DOES need a lawyer to "sort it out". I simply suggested that he see the judge/lawyer, who's only going to cost the filing fee (around $50) to sort it out,
Magistrates or small claims Judges cannot give you legal advice, nor can anyone else here.Good Morning again, porch:

Although I was sloppy in my word usage, I would hope you didn't think I was advising you to stroll into the courthouse and knock on the judges door for advice...

What I was advising you to do is file your small claims case. When you have your hearing, the judge will RULE, and you'll KNOW what the law is in your particular case. You won't have PAID for an attorney's OPINION. It is absolutely the cheapest way for you to resolve your case.

excon

The problem with going into court, even small claims court, without legal representation, is best expressed by the old axiom:

"Anyone who represents himself in court has a fool for an attorney."

It will usually cost nothing to consult your attorney as to your rights.

You are also entitled to reasonable attorney's fees should you go to court with your attorney and prevail.

Is it necessary to use an attorney? No.

Can you go to court without an attorney and win? Sometimes.

But your chances to win can be greatly diminished without one... especially since you can bet the contractor in this case is going to be there with his attorney.

'Cheaper' is not always better and 'cheaper' can often cost you more in the long run... especially if you lose in small claims court because of your own ignorance of the law... and then need to spend big bucks to appeal.

Also, it is the plaintiff who has to pay to file in small claims court.

A trip to the attorney's office to have the case and contract assessed costs nothing... and can give a good indication of whether you have a snowball's chance to prevail.

Call your attorney.

It's the cheapest solution of all.

The problem with going into court, even small claims court, without legal representation, is best expressed by the old axiom:

"Anyone who represents himself in court has a fool for an attorney."

It will usually cost nothing to consult your attorney as to your rights. Call your attorney.

It's the cheapest solution of all.Hello again, manhattan:

Couple things.

In MOST of this country's small claim courts, attorney's are NOT allowed. I don't know ANY lawyer's who dispense FREE advice, consequently, visiting one first would NOT the cheapest solution of all.

excon

First, few, if any attorneys will charge for an initial consultation to determine whether they will want to take a case or whether the potential client even has a case. That is the entire purpose of the free initial consultation.

Second, excon either does not live in the US or is entirely confused about a plaintiff or defendant's right to counsel.
While a plaintiff or defendant in a small claims action is not normally required to have an attorney, the plaintiff and defendant is certainly entitled and permitted to be represented by an attorney... even at the small claims or magisterial level.

Most certainly, rules and laws for small claims court vary from state to state and by country. (Another reason why one needs to consult a local attorney to understand one's rights and responsibilities.)

But the right to counsel in a court proceeding is guaranteed by the US Constitution and applies even in small claims matters.

But the right to counsel in a court proceeding is guaranteed by the US Constitution and applies even in small claims matters.Hello again,

You do NOT have the right to counsel in civil court. The Constitution mentions NOTHING on the subject. Manhattan is just flat out wrong, and I'm tired of arguing over petty crap.

Here on the law boards, people are entitled to their opinions, though - even if they are WRONG.

excon

"Here on the law boards, people are entitled to their opinions, though - even if they are WRONG."

And why it remains in ScreenPorch's best interest to consult her own attorney in the matter...

First, few, if any attorneys will charge for an initial consultation to determine whether or not they will want to take a case or whether or not the potential client even has a case. That is the entire purpose of the free initial consultation.

Second, excon either does not live in the US or is entirely confused about a plaintiff or defendant's right to counsel.
While a plaintiff or defendent in a small claims action is not normally required to have an attorney, the plaintiff and defendant is certainly entitled and permitted to be represented by an attorney...even at the small claims or magisterial level.

Most certainly, rules and laws for small claims court vary from state to state and by country. (Another reason why one needs to consult a local attorney to understand one's rights and responsibilites.)

But the right to counsel in a court proceeding is guaranteed by the US Constitution and applies even in small claims matters.



First your answer is wrong and poor,

Most attorneys now do charge for even the first visit, exceptions are often some bankruptcy attorneys, but about 1/3 of them are now charging a small fee for the first visit. So you need to ask before you go for a visit and get sued for a bill thinking it is free. At least in the US, perhaps you are from another country.

Small claims court, nope, sorry, most do not allow attorneys in court, and the rules of evidence and court procedure are more relaxed.

If you wish to sue for that same claim with an attorney you may do so, but not in small claims court, you have to go to the next higher level of civil court in your state.

So please you have a right to an attorney only in criminal cases, not civil, if you are sued and can't afford an attorney in civil court, you are just out of luck.

Again, Fr Chuck is also confusing the point that an attorney in small claims court is not required but is certainly permitted.

In my state, Pennsylvania, attorneys are present with plaintiffs and defendants all the time in small claims courts.

And while someone being sued civilly certainly does not have a right to be represented by a court appointed attorney, they certainly do have a right to counsel and to have an attorney represent them if they wish and can afford one.

Again, both Fr Chuck and excon are speaking from their own limited experiences with small claims practices in their own jurisdictions... and illustrates why it is imperative to get local legal advice (even if it comes from a free Legal Aide Society attorney) regarding one's rights in one's own state, province or country.

None of their advice is factual nor applies at all in my state.

And attorneys still provide free initial consultations for most legal matters here.

Here is a helpful link to Small Claims Courts in the United States and District of Columbia:

State Guide to Small Claims Courts (http://www.consumeraffairs.com/consumerism/small_states.htm)

One will find that in most US states, attorneys are permitted or even required in Small Claims Court when one of the parties is a corporation.

The following jurisdications allow attorneys in small claims courts without question:

Alabama
Alaska
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisianna
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nevada
New Hamsphire
New Jersey
New York
New Mexico
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennesee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

These states permit attorney representation in small claims courts generally if both parties and the court agrees:

Arizona
Colorado
Oregon
Washington


Only the following states outright prohibit attorneys in small claims court:

Arkansas
California
Nebraska
Idaho
Michigan
Virginia

It is CLEAR that very few states actually prohibit an attorney from representing a plaintiff or defendant in a small claims action.

Check the link above for pertinant information regarding small claims matters for your state.

Don't know if this WHERE I should say this but there is an answer to this delimma. We were taken to small claims court and the judge ruled in our favor. They did not get the $2150 they actually sued us for!

Hello screen:

This IS the right place for it, and thank you for letting us know.

Even though you may have been entitled to a lawyer, pursuant to MY advice, you didn't burden yourself with that expense, and you heard the law from the judge - which is exactly what I thought would happen.

excon

PS> That manhattan dude only showed up for THIS argument. I never heard from him before your post or afterwords.

Now all you need to do is wait for his appeal or wait for him to pay you (if he was ordered to pay you anything)... which may be a long time in coming... if at all.

And if he does appeal, now you will be forced to go to court with an attorney to fight the charges out of your own pocket... and if you don't show up for court... he wins... and you have to pay him.

Interesting Post.

Question to Op. If the labor ended up MORE then he had figured on the contract would you pay him more for the estimated labor end. The flip of the coin.

As a contractor I get burned on the other end. Bottom line is simple. Is it cost effective to Battle it out . Most if the times its not depending if you get too stuck on "principle"

Glad its going good so far. I with Manhattan on this. Judgments aren't worth crap in claims court. Most of the time you still have to chase the money and go to court again.

Can I be your Contractor. In the 30 years of contracting ( Sued twice, D#m good track record, I won the one, other suit deal was cut to customer)

I never had a bonus. But I was called back more then once for more work. About a 65% of my work is a referals

Hi screen porch.Being a Contractor for over 30 years I posed my question being on the other end too many times. I run into things like a customer was taking the left over brick from a job we just finished up the day before (hadn't cleaned up yet) an I caught him putting the brick still there into his garage.

I asked what's going on? He said "getting his brick thats left over from the job and I paid for those brick". I said Hold on there, first off I had a Set Contract for the work. Nothing in that Contract had anything pertaining to Materials cost and labor cost. It clearly states, I will supply all the material and labor necessary to preform above said work. I also pointed out those couple of hundred brick siting there (which I ORDERED extras) is because it matches two more repair jobs I have in this development. ( his job was a hearth and chimney for a woosd stove)

This is why I posed the flip of the coin. I also flip the coin and ask the customers. If the re hap took more time and material then I figured, then what. So why doesn't the door swing both ways. Just on a side note I DO buy the best grade materials within reason or give the customer the option to up grade and show the budget for that area of work.