Company insists we haven't paid bill in full

R

Reyes

Registered User
Messages
12
Delicate problem here. We recently moved into a new house. We asked a local company to lay carpets for us. The bill was in the region of €4k. We paid half up front and half afterwards, they did a great job, no complaints. However, about three weeks later, the company rang to tell us they had undercharged us. When we paid the initial deposit, we paid about €800 in cash and the rest by cheque. They claim to have entered the €800 cash deposit into their system twice by accident. My fiancée was dealing with the bills and, as happens with paying solicitors, plumbers, movers, painters etc, we've kind of lost track of what money has been paid to whom. However, she is 100% sure that we have paid the right amount. We have a receipt, signed by the owner himself, saying that we have 'paid in full'. He's insisting we still owe him money.
I accept that mistakes can be made. We are probably at fault for not keeping a closer eye on what money was going where and such. But all the recipts we have add up to the agreed sum, and as far as we know, the bill has been paid. We also bought about €600 worth of garden furniture off the same company on the day too (for which we weren't given a receipt). We were given a receipt the day we paid the deposit. Then we were given a receipt the day we paid the balance.
Just wondering if anyone has an opinion on where we stand here? I'm not keen to annoy the locals, only two months after we've moved in, but I'm less keen to part with another €800.
 
Are they saying the bill should have been 4,800 and you have paid 4,000 or that the bill should have been 4,000 and you have paid 3,200?
I know it's easy to lose track of money when it's running out the door but could you do a rough tot on your bank accounts - starting position, how much spent on solicitors, plumbers etc. (presumably most/all gave receipts?) - you might be able to figure out whether you still have or haven't got the 800.
If it's down to cash they say that you didn't pay and you have a receipt saying paid in full, I don't think they have any hope of a legal comeback against you. Not a nice situation in a small town though.
 
Yes, they claim we have only paid €3200.

I've been told by quite a few people that as long as I have a receipt, we legally don't owe them anything. However, I can't be 100% certain that we definitely don't owe them anything. I'm considering suggesting a compromise, that perhaps we pay 50% of the disputed fee. What do you think? I'm certain that this guy could quite easily make our lives a misery, so I'd dearly love to sort this out as soon as possible.
 
Well if your girlfriend is sure she paid in full and all your accounts add up I would take it that it has been paid in full.
Why would that company give you a receipt stating "piad in full" unless you had paid in full.

I would fight my corner and consult a solicitor if it came to the crunch.
You do after all have a signed redeipt saying you paid in full
 
ZEGAR said:
Well if your girlfriend is sure she paid in full and all your accounts add up I would take it that it has been paid in full.
Why would that company give you a receipt stating "piad in full" unless you had paid in full.

I would fight my corner and consult a solicitor if it came to the crunch.
You do after all have a signed redeipt saying you paid in full
Click to expand...

We actually have two receipts; one after we paid the initial deposit, and one after we paid the final balance. I really don't want to consult solicitors etc, as it's a small enough town.
Would suggesting a compromise be completely out of order?
 
I know where you are coming from about the small town, I think the compromise option is the best tact. For the sake of €400 and the hassle you might bring on yourslef never mind what you might pay in legal costs offer the €400 and hope he agrees.
 
I'm confused. Is this the situation?

Description / Amount / Supporting Documentation
Total / €4020 / Initial quote verbally or in writing
Cash deposit / €800 / Initial receipt
Cheque deposit / €1210 / Cheque stub and bank statement
Final balance / €2010 / How was this paid?


You need to clarify which of the above there is agreement on and which the supplier disputes. If the dispute is over the cheques, you can prove the amount paid from your bank statements -- some banks even allow you to trace cheque numbers online.

Was some of the final balance paid in cash? Is that the problem? If the final balance was paid wholly by cheque, they have a cheque from you for €1210 and another cheque for €2010, and they have them confused.

The problem with the compromise of €400 is that it could backfire. If they genuinely believe you haven't paid, it might seem like you are trying to pull a fast one. Stress that you are fairly sure you've paid the full amount, but because the service was good and in the interest of good relations in the town you don't want to quarrel over it and are prepared to split the difference.
 
We paid €800 cash and €1200 cheque as a deposit one week before the job was done. We paid the balance in cash the day after the job was done. They claim that they credited 2 x €800 to our account rather than just one. However, we got a receipt after each payment, the final receipt saying 'paid in full' in the owner's handwriting.
 
OK, so the dispute is over the final cash payment -- they say you have only paid €1210 and are €800 short, you say you paid the full €2010. Correct?

In the absence of any other evidence, a final receipt from the owner for €2010 would seem pretty conclusive. Is that what you have? How does he explain that?
 
Yes spot on MugsGame. The recipt is basically an itemised print-out of costs & labour. The numbers add up fine, and it is signed at the bottom by the owner, saying 'paid in full, with compliments..'. He's claiming that because he made a mistake when entering one of the numbers, that we still owe him €800, and he has since sent us another print-out/bill to this effect.
 
Ah, so you don't actually have a *receipt* for the final amount. You have an *invoice* for the total amount which says paid in full. This implies the final amount paid was correct, and would probably be enough if he sued you. But there doesn't seem to be any way you can prove it conclusively to the owner's satisfaction.

How was the supposed error discovered? If he accepts cash payments without giving receipts for amounts as they are received, how can he be sure that's it not another customer who has underpaid?
 
He claims the error was discovered when they were doing their books at the end of the month and noticed the missing money. They did some investigatinig and found that the money had been added twice to our account in error.

I know that I can't conclusively prove that we definitely did pay the full bill. We believe we did, honestly, but that's probably not going to be enough for him. However, I don't think he can conclusively prove to us that we didn't pay the bill either.
 
Reyes said:
I know that I can't conclusively prove that we definitely did pay the full bill. We believe we did, honestly, but that's probably not going to be enough for him. However, I don't think he can conclusively prove to us that we didn't pay the bill either.
Click to expand...

In the event that you can't conclusively prove you did pay and he can't conclusively prove you didn't, then I think your offer of a compromise, the €400 to keep the peace, is fair.

As you're the only one who's met him Reyes, do you think he'd go for it?
 
I don't know to be honest. It's all been fairly amicable so far really, but if I thought it was going to turn for the worst, I'd gladly shell out the €800. Saying that, I'd hate to think that he does this regularly.

I think I'll ring him in a while, see what he says. Just have to pluck up the courage first! Wish me luck!
 
I think you are mad. His records show you paid in full. Your recollection says you paid in full. Sure there is doubt, but I would be holding on to my €400.

If you really want to compromise, then if you are only 50% sure you did in fact pay in full, then pay him 50% of the disputed amount (the 400). If you are 90% sure you paid in full, keep your 90% share of the disputed amount and offer the 10% (€80) as a goodwill gesture, and get a receipt !
 
Is there any point in asking to see the books where he allegedly made the book-keeping error?

Would it be worthwhile calling in some day and asking to see the error - giving no advance warning that you'll be looking to see the books? You did mention above below that you'd hate to think that he does this regularly. This would confirm or not.

A surprise visit, being all nice and friendly, saying that you're there to sort things out, as soon as you've seen the double entry in the books, would tell you whether he's being genuine or not, depending on his reaction to that request.

And there'd be no good excuse for him not showing you the books there and then.
 
ronan_d_john said:
Is there any point in asking to see the books where he allegedly made the book-keeping error?

Would it be worthwhile calling in some day and asking to see the error - giving no advance warning that you'll be looking to see the books? You did mention above below that you'd hate to think that he does this regularly. This would confirm or not.

A surprise visit, being all nice and friendly, saying that you're there to sort things out, as soon as you've seen the double entry in the books, would tell you whether he's being genuine or not, depending on his reaction to that request.

And there'd be no good excuse for him not showing you the books there and then.
Click to expand...

Really? I doubt if there is a business in the country that would allow members of the public to access their book-keeping system. If any of my customers requested access to my own business records, I would run them there and then and tell them never to darken my door again. Were someone to do so giving no advance warning and making a comment such as "I'd hate to think that you do this regularly" they would be calling the Guards for their own protection.

If the OP is cheeky or gullible enough to follow this suggestion, they will run a strong risk of alienating the business concerned and wrecking their chances of negotiating a successful outcome to the query.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top