When engaging a decoration company for home renovation, apart from requesting the contractor to provide a detailed, clear and accurate quotation before the project commencement, consumers should also reach a consensus with the decoration company as to the arrangements of defects rectification and the settlement of the final payment, and these should be clearly spelt out in the contract. As revealed from the complaints received by the Consumer Council, the majority of renovation-related complaints involved disputes over the renovation quality, material and design during the middle or later stages of the project. The Council reminds both consumers and decoration companies to set clear contract clauses regarding not only the defects rectification, payment settlement arrangements, but also the scope and clauses for future maintenance. Besides, both parties should communicate closely during the works period. They should inspect and agree on the renovation progress regularly and settle the payment according to the payment terms in the contract. Should there be any variations, incompletion of work items or extra charges incurred due to materials or other reasons encountered during the renovation, both parties should confirm the changes in written form and if the project is getting close to completion, a defective works rectification checklist should be jointly prepared to avoid subsequent disputes.
Case 1: Decoration company suspected of locking client’s metal gate and removing renovation items due to failure in collecting final payment
The complainant appointed “Company A” to undertake the renovation works for the whole apartment for almost $210,000. Upon inspecting the unit during the planned move-in period, the complainant found that the bathroom door was different from the original design, she thus notified Company A. When both parties met up 2 days later to discuss the defects rectification issues, Company A requested the complainant to settle the outstanding payment of around $40,000, but the complainant insisted that Company A should rectify the defects first, including changing the bathroom door.
A few days later, the complainant found that the main door of her apartment had been removed with the metal gate being chained up. A locksmith had to be hired to cut the chain. Upon entering the unit, it was found that several doors had been dismantled. The installed light switches and sockets were removed with electric wires exposed, and the toilet was also clogged. The complainant suspected these were done by Company A.
After Council’s intervention, although Company A contacted the complainant for further discussion, the complainant had already lost confidence in Company A in view of its adamant attitude and she would consider making a report to the police and seek legal advice with regards to Company A’s action in locking up the apartment and dismantling the furniture. The Council was asked to keep this case on record.
Case 2: Engaging another decorator to rectify outstanding defects; legal actions ensued over dispute on payment settlement
The complainant appointed “Company B” to handle renovation works at a cost close to $430,000, including a custom-made living room raised platform with storage, equipped with an electric height-adjustable coffee table. After completion of the project, the complainant found that the raised platform did not meet the requested design. Company B eventually admitted that its failure to deliver but did not inform the complainant of such. Upon negotiation, Company B adjusted the design, but the result was unsatisfactory in that the height-adjustable table was unstable, resulting in insufficient support. The complainant hence requested to replace the whole set of furniture. The complainant gradually discovered more problems, including obvious dents and scratches on the shelving units, scratch marks on the bathroom marble tiles, and the wooden door lock being installed inside out.
The complainant alleged that Company B requested a full payment ($58,000) or partial payment of the balance ($48,000) before rectifying the defects. As both parties could not come to a settlement, the complainant decided to appoint another company to reconstruct the raised platform. As the project quotation of the new company exceeded the outstanding balance requested by Company B, the complainant sought the Council’s help to negotiate the cancellation of the entire payment balance. However, Company B indicated that as all the works had been completed, they reserved the right to pursue legal action should the outstanding payment not be settled. The complainant also appointed a loss adjuster to assess the loss of the unit, and expressed that he would consider claiming $70,000 compensation from Company B through civil action.
Case 3: Cost raised twice for additional decoration items; unsatisfactory work quality issues referred to C&ED for Follow-up
The complainant appointed “Company C” to renovate her apartment at a cost of around $860,000. However, Company C issued revised quotations twice within 4 months after commencing the project and the cost was raised to over $900,000 with new project items involved. The complainant deemed the cost unreasonable and at the same time expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of the renovation works, such as discrepancies in the number of power switches and fluorescent lights, using Spanish tiles instead of Italian tiles as requested, and uneven floor surface, etc. Though the complainant had raised her dissatisfaction, Company C stated that they had completed all the works stipulated in the contract and urged the complainant to settle the outstanding payment of over $130,000.
Upon the Council’s conciliation, Company C agreed to resolve the matter by adjusting the outstanding balance to $40,000 for covering the works cost and disbursement for materials and parts. However, both parties eventually failed to settle the dispute. The complainant decided to seek further legal advice and contemplated civil action to resolve the matter. On complainant’s request, the Council also referred the case to Customs and Excise Department (C&ED) for investigation. However, C&ED concluded that there was insufficient evidence to prove that Company C was in contravention of any provisions under the Trade Descriptions Ordinance.
Home renovation is often a lengthy process during which unforeseen situations may inevitably arise, resulting in the possible deviation of the renovation works from the original contract and subsequent disappointment stemming from the disparity in expectation. Consumers should pay heed to the following when using home renovation services:
- The contract clauses must be detail and clear, stipulating each project item and its cost, as well as clearly stating items as “labour and material”, “materials purchased by the contractor” or “materials supplied by the customer”. Should there be any specific requirements regarding the renovation design or construction materials, it should be clearly included in the contract;
- For custom-made furniture, be mindful of the warranty period and the responsibility of future maintenance and the cost. Keep the furniture design drawings for record;
- Proactively look into the flow of inspection, defects rectification and payment of the balance, as well as the scope and clause of future maintenance;
- Settle the payment in stages in accordance with the works progress. Inspect the progress and cross-check the costs with the decoration company before each stage payment to make sure all the works are in line with the contract. All changes made during the project should be clearly documented including supplemented the revised terms in the contract.
The Consumer Council reserves all its right (including copyright) in respect of CHOICE magazine and Online CHOICE.