construction-flooring -fraud
We hired a reputable licensed flooring company to install all new floors throughout our house. Without our knowledge they hired an unlicensed independent contractor to do the job. Both the company we hired and the installer led us to believe the installer, and his crew, were employees of the hired company. The installer and his crew even wore uniforms with the name of the hired company imprinted on their clothes when they came to do the job. The job was botched due to clear mistakes the installer made during installation. The floors are a total loss and have to be removed and replaced. We got several quotes when looking to hire a flooring company. We checked licensing and would have never knowingly hired anyone unlicensed to install our floors. The company has already stated in writing that the installer is most definitely a sub contractor and not an employee (this includes all of the installers employees as well)My question is: Does the fact that they led us to believe we were hiring a licensed contractor constitute fraud on the part of the company we hired to do the job? And if it does, are we entitled to additional damages including punitive and or attorney’s fees (and expert’s fees) etc?
Thank you for any help
Re: construction-flooring -fraud
You didn't describe the evidence that would tend to prove your allegations in court other than to say the facts have been admitted in writing; did they also give you an explanation or excuse? Whether and how well you would succeed in court against the "reputable" firm depends upon several factors:
(1) How conclusive is your evidence that the work was subcontracted to an unlicensed flooring company, and that the unlicensed company was not under the supervision and direction of the license holder?
(2) What defenses is the prime contractor likely to raise, and how credible and exculpatory are they?
(3) What does the contract say about subcontracting, assignment, attorney fees and warranties?
(4) How large are your monetary losses?
(5) Is the "reputable" prime contractor sufficiently solvent and interested in its reputation that it might settle out of court before trial?
You seem to have a case, but evaluating it from the viewpoint of an attorney considering whether to take the case would raise the foregoing questions, among others. Fraud is often hard to prove, and a breach of contract or breach of warranty claim may be the more sound and winnable charge to bring, but clearly good practice is to sue on as many alternate theories as you can dream up and fit to the facts.
Re: construction-flooring -fraud
You didn't describe the evidence that would tend to prove your allegations in court other than to say the facts have been admitted in writing; did they also give you an explanation or excuse? Whether and how well you would succeed in court against the "reputable" firm depends upon several factors:
(1) How conclusive is your evidence that the work was subcontracted to an unlicensed flooring company, and that the unlicensed company was not under the supervision and direction of the license holder?
(2) What defenses is the prime contractor likely to raise, and how credible and exculpatory are they?
(3) What does the contract say about subcontracting, assignment, attorney fees and warranties?
(4) How large are your monetary losses?
(5) Is the "reputable" prime contractor sufficiently solvent and interested in its reputation that it might settle out of court before trial?
You seem to have a case, but evaluating it from the viewpoint of an attorney considering whether to take the case would raise the foregoing questions, among others. Fraud is often hard to prove, and a breach of contract or breach of warranty claim may be the more sound and winnable charge to bring, but clearly good practice is to sue on as many alternate theories as you can dream up and fit to the facts.
Re: construction-flooring -fraud
You didn't describe the evidence that would tend to prove your allegations in court other than to say the facts have been admitted in writing; did they also give you an explanation or excuse? Whether and how well you would succeed in court against the "reputable" firm depends upon several factors:
(1) How conclusive is your evidence that the work was subcontracted to an unlicensed flooring company, and that the unlicensed company was not under the supervision and direction of the license holder?
(2) What defenses is the prime contractor likely to raise, and how credible and exculpatory are they?
(3) What does the contract say about subcontracting, assignment, attorney fees and warranties?
(4) How large are your monetary losses?
(5) Is the "reputable" prime contractor sufficiently solvent and interested in its reputation that it might settle out of court before trial?
You seem to have a case, but evaluating it from the viewpoint of an attorney considering whether to take the case would raise the foregoing questions, among others. Fraud is often hard to prove, and a breach of contract or breach of warranty claim may be the more sound and winnable charge to bring, but clearly good practice is to sue on as many alternate theories as you can dream up and fit to the facts.
