Technology0 min ago
Negligence/Breach of Contract
4 Answers
Another scenario here. I think I have a rough idea but so many ppl ive spoken to have different ideas so;
John owns a plot of land. He builds a house on the land which he intends to sell. After the house is built he employs Paul to do the plumbing in the kitchen. Paul is a lazyarse and when he realises that he doesnt have the correct washer for the sink he uses an old crap one he removed from a sink last week. John pays Paul and is none the wiser.
John then sells the house to Mary. A few days later Mary slips on a puddle on the floor in the kitchen and breaks her hip. It is later discovered that the puddle was their because of a leak from the sink Paul had been working at.
Question - Who, if anyone, can sue who and for what? (Negligence, breach of contract)
John owns a plot of land. He builds a house on the land which he intends to sell. After the house is built he employs Paul to do the plumbing in the kitchen. Paul is a lazyarse and when he realises that he doesnt have the correct washer for the sink he uses an old crap one he removed from a sink last week. John pays Paul and is none the wiser.
John then sells the house to Mary. A few days later Mary slips on a puddle on the floor in the kitchen and breaks her hip. It is later discovered that the puddle was their because of a leak from the sink Paul had been working at.
Question - Who, if anyone, can sue who and for what? (Negligence, breach of contract)
Answers
1 to 4 of 4
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by fabtasticbob. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Buying a house is a case of caveat emptor. You have to get a surrvey to see if a house is worth the asking price and if it is fit to live in.
John is not liable, unless he has given giarantees. There may be a case against Paul, depending how long has gone by between the bad workmanship and the accident. But Paul may claim that Mary should have noticed the puddle, and her short-sightedness was not his problem.
Ask the Citizens Advice Bureau if this is a real case
John is not liable, unless he has given giarantees. There may be a case against Paul, depending how long has gone by between the bad workmanship and the accident. But Paul may claim that Mary should have noticed the puddle, and her short-sightedness was not his problem.
Ask the Citizens Advice Bureau if this is a real case
1 to 4 of 4
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.