# Bid was attractive because builder had subtracted the grant I was eligible for



## Turkey Lurkey (22 Jan 2020)

Hi,

I chose a builder who was cheapest by €4k for an extension and retrofit. When I went to apply for the €4,500 SEAI insulation grant he told me his tender return wasn't based on what the subcontractors were charging, it was based on what I'd pay after my grant had been put towards the work. 

I talked to the 2nd cheapest, he hadn't done this. With him I could have got the grant and put it towards his bill making it the cheaper. When choosing a builder I hadn't been comparing like with like - if I'd known this I would have chosen the 2nd builder. 

Do you think it's reasonable to have reduced a tender return by the expected grant amount? I feel I was misled. Is this simply a misunderstanding, an alternative way to present costs that I should have asked about? I've signed a RIAI contract with the builder and work commences in a week and a half so I suppose I just have to accept this arrangement? 

Thanks.


----------



## elcato (22 Jan 2020)

So he's not giving you receipts or stamping anything then I presume ? Sounds like a cash job.


----------



## noproblem (22 Jan 2020)

Are you saying that he's collecting the grant? If you're getting or trying to get a retrofit grant, shouldn't the builder doing the work be on the approved list?


----------



## RedOnion (22 Jan 2020)

In my experience it's common for the insulation industry to quote net of grant figures, but I've only ever dealt directly.

It sounds like the builder used a subcontractor for the insulation and only put the net figure on quote?


----------



## Turkey Lurkey (22 Jan 2020)

@elcato and @noproblem: He is applying for the grant using an approved subcontractor and I'll see the receipts when the grant is claimed under my name with SEAI.  It's just that I had thought that I'd get the grant, but it's going to the builder instead.

@RedOnion : I talked to someone in SEAI and they also said yes, builders sometimes quote net. So I'll accept that it could be just me thinking it was the less transparent way to quote. Unfortunate that I didn't know I should ask.

But I'm happy to drop the question now. Why? I rang the doorbell of a house they worked on before and the owners told me there's no need to worry - the builders were fine to deal with and had done a great job and they were happy to show me. I just needed some reassurance that they weren't pulling a fast one and I got that. Phew. I can look forward to the project again.

Thanks!


----------



## Turkey Lurkey (22 Jan 2020)

I don't think I explained my problem with all this very well.

A: Quotes 45k net of grant
I pay him 45k and also give him the 5k grant
Total out of pocket: 45k

B: Quotes 50k (independent of grant)
I pay him 50k, I keep the 5k grant 
Total out of pocket: 45k

A and B would cost me the same but I went with A because he appeared 5k cheaper.  

So, I now accept that A wasn't trying to mislead, it's just different presentation, I should have asked which he was using.


----------



## noproblem (22 Jan 2020)

He's also done all the paperwork for you. What happens if the new build/retrofit doesn't achieve the A rating or is it B for the retrofit grant?


----------



## Turkey Lurkey (23 Jan 2020)

Yes, he's doing the paperwork, that's great.

A "major renovation" retrofit (> 25% of surface) requires either B2 or a package of improvements set out in TGD Part L’s Table 7 (typically EWI, attic insulation and boiler upgrade). My architect has this and more covered. Your typical case of "while we're at it we might as well do x, y and z too." 

All this is new to me so I'm on high alert trying to see what's coming down the track.


----------



## RedOnion (23 Jan 2020)

Turkey Lurkey said:


> So I'll accept that it could be just me thinking it was the less transparent way to quote. Unfortunate that I didn't know I should ask.


If you had been dealing with the insulation subcontractor yourself it would have been transparent (at least in my experience). It's complicated by using a main contractor.

Was he being clever and trying to mislead you? I don't think you could have been expected to know to check, but the breakdown of quotes should have shown the insulation being 4.5k cheaper with one.

It sounds like you hadn't done your reference checks beforehand, but now that you have you're happier?

Best of luck with the work, and hopefully this is your biggest hiccup with it.


----------



## noproblem (23 Jan 2020)

Turkey Lurkey said:


> Yes, he's doing the paperwork, that's great.
> 
> A "major renovation" retrofit (> 25% of surface) requires either B2 or a package of improvements set out in TGD Part L’s Table 7 (typically EWI, attic insulation and boiler upgrade). My architect has this and more covered. Your typical case of "while we're at it we might as well do x, y and z too."
> 
> All this is new to me so I'm on high alert trying to see what's coming down the track.


Like RedOnion has said, I too wish you good luck with it. You've got a great quote and hope it works out for you and the family. You might let us know how it works out when completed.


----------



## Buddyboy (23 Jan 2020)

Hi Turkey, it's good that you got assurances regarding the builders work, that's worth a lot. It appears he's been straight with you, and it was a misunderstanding.

But it does point out an important issue, in quotes for goods and services where a grant is involved (e.g. SEAI or electric cars), the buyer should establish if any price is net or gross of the relevant grant. The grant can be a sizable amount of money.


----------



## SPC100 (23 Jan 2020)

If the grant is not shown/mentioned as subtracted in his tender then I think it is bad practice and unfair.


----------



## Leo (23 Jan 2020)

SPC100 said:


> If the grant is not shown/mentioned as subtracted in his tender then I think it is bad practice and unfair.



It's also potentially a GDPR issue if the OP didn't authorise the contractor to share their details.


----------

