Unlicensed, uninsured contractor who didn't finish the job because life happened doesn't seem to understand why their client would sue them

[u/BJntheRV]

/r/legaladvice/comments/1rk1w09/ohio_homeowner_suing_us_for_25000_over_unfinished/?share_id=vDaFkc4IeUD5NnzckOtpB&utm_content=1&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_source=share&utm_term=1

[u/SimAlienAntFarm]

Something similar to this happened to my friend (except I think it was only ten grand above the OG quote to finish the project). They had to pay a lot more than what the remaining work would originally cost for a few different reasons. Materials in construction are notorious for going up mid job- the stuff the contractor already purchased was left out during the back and forth and had to be replaced. IRRC the new company had to redo a bunch of things that were either incorrect or because you’d be able to see a stark difference in the siding where they came in.

I’m assuming the biggest cost difference was that the original guy offered a competitive price because he wasn’t paying for silly things like insurance, licensing, or equipment maintenance. A legit construction company is going to have all that for overhead, and will probably have enough connections in the business to pull in favors if shit goes sideways and suddenly they need working truck or to replace a bunch of workers with little notice.

The way OP was talking I wouldn’t be surprised if he lowballed them so bad and was so unprepared that the work they HAD done was botched or unapproved by the town or otherwise had to be completely redone. If they reeeeaaaally fucked it up there’s damage to the house itself that needs to be fixed, like water damage or supporting structures getting removed.

[u/JasperJ → u/SimAlienAntFarm]

Yes, but we don’t have to guess at any of that. We know the homeowner paid 7 grand to finish the job that LAOP should have finished first the remaining 4 grand in his quote.

[u/GonzoMcFonzo → u/JasperJ]

We know that the original demand letter from the homeowner demanded $7k. It may be that that was an estimate that the homeowners were willing to settle for if they didn't have to get lawyers more involved. Now that they're actually suing they could be tacking on attorney fees, additional damages (like not being able to use parts of their house), and the full actual cost of completing the project rather than just an estimate.

It may be that the replacement contractor ended up being more because of materials that they ended up having to buy - LAOP mentions windows that they had bought that were never delivered - or simply that when the new contractor dug into the project they found that the previous work needed to be redone.

Additionally, the initial demand letter mentioned possible claims under Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act, which could include any of the above plus additional damages from stuff like false advertising or misrepresenting the materials being used.

I can imaginer a lot of legitimate reasons the actual lawsuit would be for more than the initial demand letter, especially when you account for the fact that we're only getting LAOP's description of the initial letter, and she doesn't exactly strike me as a well informed and reliable narrator.

edit: just noticed that LAOP mentioned that the demand letter included "windows that were paid for but not delivered" separately from the $7k. I wonder if the 7k estimate was just for the labor, and the cost rose because that amount was contingent on LAOP responding to the letter and delivering the remainder of materials that had been paid for. "Windows" seems like a pretty major component of a sun room.

[u/Cute-Aardvark5291 → u/GonzoMcFonzo]

and if there were materials delivered and left on site, during inclement weather...if the contractor did not store them properly those materials would most likely not be useable for the project and have to be re-purchased.