Overcharging Tradie...

[bricks]

Dear Gents,

If you’re interested in the whole issue of trying to avoid getting ripped off by dishonest tradesmen, have a read of this one and give me your opinion. It is not meant in any way to be aimed at all tradesmen - just the ones that do the sort of thing described below. I don't expect that there are any such tradies on this Forum, because it would just be too out of character to shaft somebody by day, and then help somebody else out by night over the net on a Forum...

Anyway, the scenario is that my brother’s neighbour is in the process of renovating their house, and my brother has kindly agreed to allow access to the required machinery through his front and back yards to enable the neighbour to do so. In the course of watching the excavations being done, my brother arranged for the earthworks contractor to also do some digging in his yard too. The terms were $70/hr for just one man and the machinery, plus an extra $50/hr if a second man could turn up who would be able to load the truck with a Bobcat, and then take the load away, so that the first man could get on with the Drott-work. My sister-in-law kept an eye on proceedings over the course of the two days that it took to complete the work in their own yard, and categorically observed that whilst a second man did turn up for most of both days, he was simply standing around for at least 75% of the time, either talking on his mobile phone, or just relieving the fellow on the Drott whenever the guy needed a break. This was because the second guy didn’t seem to know enough about the gear to be able to load the truck with the Bobcat by himself, and he was quite slow on the Drott too, whenever he took the controls. It apparently looked a bit like the first guy was having to teach the second guy how to operate the gear whenever he handed over. Knock-off was at around 3.30 on both days...

Anyhow, at the end of the two days, the main fellow told my sister-in-law that the bill (even with an apparent 10% discount built-in, mind you) would come to $1740, with the subtle threat that it would have to be greater if an invoice was required.

Now, the number of hours that my brother is therefore being charged for both men is $1740 divided by $120/hr, which comes to14.5hrs - ie. Two whole days. The simple truth, though, is that only one of the men worked effectively for the two days, while the second guy did bugger all. My brother is therefore being overcharged by something in the region of at least $500 (ie. At least 10 useless hours for the second guy to stand around at $50/hr...)

The whole thing was done without a written quote or estimate of any sort, and my brother and I are now in the process of scratching our heads trying to work out how to actually dispute this thing. I rang the QBSA, and the woman who took the call was not only unhelpful, but also somewhat hostile. Anyway, she reckoned there was effectively nothing my brother could do except pay up, unless he wanted to risk throwing good money after bad...

Have any of you ever had something like this happen, and if so, what did you do about it?

Many Thanks,
Batpig.

Just wondering who payed for the truck? or was that free?

[Rossluck]

Right from the first moment I read Batpig's initial post I saw this whole issue as a difference in expectations. I think that when it comes to earthmoving equipment you're setting yourself up for a sort of personal torture if you're going to watch through windows to make sure that your contractor is constantly moving.

I can imagine that the drott operator and the other fella just ignored the hourly rate thing and had a guess at the value of the overall job. This, in my experience, is typical of the way these fellows work, and if you get a good operator the value for money is good.

But if you're not used to this way of working, and you really think that both men needed to be working constantly to earn the money, then you've set yourself up for ... well, the situation Batpig describes here.

So, to my way of thinking it comes down to the value of the work done. Did the two men and their machines do $1740 worth of work? So insead of getting caught up in the complex process of mathematically superimposing the hourly rates over the perceptions of their ergonomic output, this is what Batpig and his brother and sister-in-law should be focusing on. Ask another drott operator to come and have a look and tell you how much he would have charged. Then pay that.

[Batpig]

Just wondering who payed for the truck? or was that free?

Et tu, Bricks?...

The short answer is No. The explanation is that like any other one-man show, the operator gets paid his rate (in this case $70/hr) no matter whether he is on Drott, Bobcat, or in Truck - as long as he's working one of them at any particular time. He stockpiles a truckload of soil with the Drott, then stops the Drott and hops on to the Bobcat, and then loads the Truck, then stops the Bobcat and jumps into the Truck and takes the load away. When he gets back, he starts the whole process again. Costs less per hour because of only one man, but takes longer...

You pay more for a two man outfit (in this case an extra $50/hr for what should have been a second man on Bobcat and Truck) because he saves the first man from having to jump off the Drott in order to load the Truck with the Bobcat and then take the load away - ie. the next load is being dug up and stockpiled by the Drott, even as the last load is being Trucked away. Costs more per hour because of two men, but is done quicker...

What you should never get (in Earthworks, or in any other business/industry/enterprise) is an extra rate charged for a guy who was supposed to be doing something to shorten the job, but didn't actually do it and the job took the longer amount of time anyway...

We will charge for an extra operator but only if the machine he is supposed to be using is moving. Its a bit hard to charge for something that is not being done.

Rossluck, the chap wouldn't and didn't quote an overall figure at the start of the job - just the rates - for the same reason that Bluegum cited in the full version of his post. He can't then have it both ways at the end of the job ie. charge the greater of either the length of the job by the rate, or an overall amount that he secretly had in his mind as a minimum figure that he didn't tell the customer about. He can't have it both ways...

Best Wishes to both of you guys,
Batpig.

[Calm]

[quote] Originally Posted by Calm
Batpig i can understand your feelings on this but as the second man was on site - working or not - then you must pay for him. You are splitting hairs by saying he was there but not working - the point is HE WAS THERE.

Look at it from the "tradie's" point of view. He has to pay the second man for the day as he was under his employe - so who do you suggest he charge his time out to?

I think the best thing to do is calculate the hours there by 1st man times $70 and the hours there by 2nd man x $50 pay that and tell him to whistle for the rest.

That way you are paying for what you were originally quoted 1st man $70 2nd man - if on site - $50, they cant argue with that.

Sorry if you dont like the responses you are getting, but you started the thread and asked for opinions and that is what i am giving an honest opinion. If you only want people to agree with you dont ask for our thoughts.[quote]


Come on Batpig you are still not commenting on the parts in RED, dont they suit your argument??

[dazzler]

Hi Calm

If he gives a quote to get the job done then its not an issue who does what and for how long. he can do it all on his own or pay a mate to come and helpl.

But if he is charging by the hour then its hours of work, not hours of standing around. It is unreasonable to charge for someone who is not doing the work. (this is based upon the assumption that batpigs bros wife is correct).

I wouldnt pay for work not done.

[Calm]

Hi Calm

If he gives a quote to get the job done then its not an issue who does what and for how long. he can do it all on his own or pay a mate to come and helpl.

But if he is charging by the hour then its hours of work, not hours of standing around. It is unreasonable to charge for someone who is not doing the work. (this is based upon the assumption that batpigs bros wife is correct).

I wouldnt pay for work not done.

So whose job do you suggest the contractor charge the $50 an hour out too?? - he is there so has to be paid by someone.

[Batpig]

Thanks Dazzler. It's pretty straightforward, hey.

Calm, you might be missing the whole point... I never replied to your text in red because it's basis is something that never happened, namely a rate being quoted by the contractor for an extra guy to come in whose job was to just stand around on his mobile phone and do nothing. I don't think anyone's ever quoted a rate for an extra guy to do that, ever...

I think you're getting confused with the possibility that was originally mentioned of an extra guy who might come in to run full-time on the Bobcat and Truck for an extra $50/hr. Read my previous post and you'll see how the setup is supposed to work with the extra guy. But there was no mention at any stage of bringing in an extra guy to just stand around for $50/hr.

Heck, if that was the case, I could bring all the guys from the Touch-Footy team in with me to your place, and even though I was the only one doing the work (and it took longer as a result) I could charge you for the whole team anyway (for the whole of that longer time too!) It's just too crazy for words...

Have a think about this: Dazzler and Bluegum both do Earthworks and both of them have said that you can't charge for a guy that's not doing any work. I think you'll find that the same applies for honest Tradies in any of the disciplines.

The answer to your question about who pays the extra $50/hr in your last post is therefore "No-one". Not my brother for one thing because he was never quoted a rate for, or agreed to, a $50/hr stand-about to be brought in. Certainly not the neighbour either because the guy wasn't standing about smoking and on his mobile phone in the neighbour's yard for all of the two days either - he smoked and made phone calls from both yards...

Best Wishes,
Batpig

[dazzler]

He sucks it up big time. If he is that stupid as to bring someone onto a worksite who cant operate the machinery without being shown how then bad luck. Pay him what hes worth. If he worked for 3 hours during the day then pay him for what he did.

Imagine you are going to have your house painted and the painter says a couple a days with five blokes a day @ $45 each.

You watch em and one of em cant paint but is being told how to. He aint no painter, he's a learner and is the problem of the main man or is paid as a labourer.

The whole thing could have been avoided if the earthmoving contractor had told them that he would need the help of bill, who is still learning and only does a few hours of actual work. Then you can decide whether you will accept learner bill at a reduced rate or pay the rate for an offsider who can do the job properly.

With my business I run the skidsteer and the tipper. I do one or the other at a flat $75 ph. This way no one is standing around twiddling thumbs.

cheers

dazzler

[chrisp]

Look at it from the "tradie's" point of view. He has to pay the second man for the day as he was under his employe - so who do you suggest he charge his time out to.

Calm,

It's simply not the consumer's problem! I'm sure the contractor has to pay things such as GST(), worker's comp, insurance, income tax, fuel, maintenance, leave entitlements, wear and tear on the equipment, and heaps of other things. But so what? The agreement was x$ per hour (by implication) of work.

If I go and buy milk from the corner shop and it happens that I'm the only customer they've had all day, I don't expect to pay extra because someone has to pay the wages of the staff. As far as I'm concerned they're running a business selling milk and I just pay for the milk. The profitability, or the internal costs, of the business are not my concern.

[manoftalent]

I think most would agree that the work carried out over two days ...two men plus machines = $ 1700 something as being reasonable and fair price ....so the issue really is the guy standing around doing nothing .....well the job got done ...the price was fair ...leave it at that, and chalk it up to experiance....as tax payers we watch this practise over and over when councils dig up the road for repairs ...road gets ripped up and repaired .....then board of works come out and rip it up again to "clean up " the access valve covered partially by previous repairs ....then gas a fuel come out and rip it up and do the same ......to uncover their access valves ....cost of job .....3 times what it should have been, if all depts worked together...but that never happens

[Batpig]

I think most would agree that the work carried out over two days ...two men plus machines = $ 1700 something as being reasonable and fair price ....so the issue really is the guy standing around doing nothing .....well the job got done ...the price was fair ...leave it at that,

Hi Manoftalent,

The thing is, the price isn't fair. It wasn't "two men plus machines" - there was only 1 man working the machines. At $70/hr, over the course of the two shortish days, that works out to around $1000. That means there is about $700 of overcharging in the bill. Harder to accurately establish is the further amount of overcharging due to the time that the operator spent in the neighbour's yard during those two days, but for which my Bro is being slugged.

Best Wishes,
Batpig

[Bluegum]

He sucks it up big time. If he is that stupid as to bring someone onto a worksite who cant operate the machinery without being shown how then bad luck. Pay him what hes worth. If he worked for 3 hours during the day then pay him for what he did.

Imagine you are going to have your house painted and the painter says a couple a days with five blokes a day @ $45 each.

You watch em and one of em cant paint but is being told how to. He aint no painter, he's a learner and is the problem of the main man or is paid as a labourer.

The whole thing could have been avoided if the earthmoving contractor had told them that he would need the help of bill, who is still learning and only does a few hours of actual work. Then you can decide whether you will accept learner bill at a reduced rate or pay the rate for an offsider who can do the job properly.

With my business I run the skidsteer and the tipper. I do one or the other at a flat $75 ph. This way no one is standing around twiddling thumbs.

cheers

dazzler

I have to agree with you dazzler, when I was a learner I worked for the experience and a couple of times customers could see I was just a learner and hit the boss up for a discount. When I started getting paid its was for machine time only. your rate is quite cheap mate, its about $88 plus gst now around here for a bobcat and truck, combo is around 92. Tipper goes out at what ever is on the back of it plus tipping fees and travel,

[dazzler]

I also think $75 ph is a little low. Around here things are somewhat slower than other areas. Diesel costs alone will start to push up prices here like elsewhere. I am lucky in that I dont rely on the business to support the family as my wife keeps me . So I can have some breathing space while the business grows.

[Rossluck]

I also think $75 ph is a little low. Around here things are somewhat slower than other areas. Diesel costs alone will start to push up prices here like elsewhere. I am lucky in that I dont rely on the business to support the family as my wife keeps me . So I can have some breathing space while the business grows.

I'm so glad to read this Dazzler, because I was worried about the future of your business. I was concerned about your own pricing if you feel that Batpig's brother was ripped off by a drott operator, a bobcat operator, (with a truck) charging $1750 for two days. I actually ran this scenario past a friend who runs a drott business and he feel that Batpig's drott operator has to be on drugs to have charged so little. The important point to remember here is that a drott can do in ten minutes what a Bobcat takes an hour to do. As I've said before, this was an issue of expectations.

[Batpig]

As I've said before, this was an issue of expectations.

Rossluck - I guess my brother must have expected him to just charge the rate he quoted, which was $70/hr, instead of the rate he actually ended up charging, which was about $120/hr. Big Difference don't you think - especially if the guy won the job over another more honest operator who might have quoted more than $70/hr, but less than $120/hr. Regardless of whether or not the guy's missus was also working, it stinks as a Modus Operandi, and I reckon a lot of decent Tradies must have been done out of work in the past by similar tactics...

The misaligned expectations must be a regional thing too, because the neighbour is also in dispute with the guy for a variety of reasons, including an approximately 30% blowout of earthworks costs compared to her builder's estimates of the likely figure based on the rate the operator gave him when he first came around to see the site before the job started.

Best Wishes,
Batpig.