According to Mark Lloyd :
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 16:26:49 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:
According to Mark Lloyd :
As a customer, I would consider it unreasonable to get a phone
estimate for one thing, then expect additional work for the same
amount.
Me neither.
However, the question is what is that "one thing"?
You get an over the phone estimate for $50 to hang a new fixture.
The electrician arrives, and discovers that the support point
has rotted out, the wire's insulation is falling off and is half
melted, and it'll require routing a new circuit, with wall
teardown and fishing thru a muddy crawlspace.
"You said you'd do it for $50".
I would know that that $50 is an ESTIMATE (certainly not a guaranteed
amount) that couldn't possibly include unknowns.
_You_ would, but not everyone is that reasonable.
Furthermore, that's not how the courts interpret "estimates", and
the trades are compelled to treat them the same way.
As guaranteed amounts. Think "car repair estimates" most jurisdictions
consider those to be _firm_ upper limits.
I'd also suggest that in renovations (rather than new construction),
"ballpark estimates" (where you tell the tradesperson UP FRONT that
you're only using the number for budgetary purposes, and would
get them to give you a more accurate estimate on inspection)
often vary so wildly as to be _useless_. Because of the infamous
"jackpot!" problem.
Case in point: watched what was supposed to be a dirt simple
fixture swap turn into the electrician fighting for three
hours with too-short K&T, a non-existant box, too small hole,
etc. The alternative (new wire) would have taken over a day.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.