estimate vs final bill - what is reasonable?

[Daydream believer]

Just as a small thread drift, I wonder if forumites appreciate just how much effort can be required to put together an accurate quotation / estimate for some of the jobs done on boats? In an industry where there are few standard products, almost every job will include working in a different location, with the attendant difficulties in estimating access time, lengths of cable runs, un-fixing previous bodges, locating replacement parts from small volume manufacturers etc etc. And if the engineer doing the job then finds he needs a "special" tool, the odds are that it is back in his van which is 15 minutes walk from the boat. Or worse, back at base an hour's drive away.
So be understanding when your engineer declines to make a quotation, or is slow in coming back to you with an estimate, or makes an estimate which subsequently proves inaccurate. (In which case he should be communicating with the customer as the job goes on and the variance mounts up.)

Very poor. You are trading as a specialist (or one assumes that you are) in the work for which you are quoting & should know what you are doing.
I have quoted for £ millions in my working life & have always had to stand by my quotes. Just because one is a small trader does not make it any less important. Lackadaisical attitudes or a failure to understand simple procedures is no excuse. If you have made a mistake then that is your problem, not the customer's.
But on a slight drift --a quote should be honoured by both parties & I agree that for every cowboy trader there is probably a cowboy customer. They deserve each other

 

[oldgit]

From the other end of the telescope...
Quite frequently after a rough estimate is given with lots of "but ifs" and caveats added, the customer appears to consider it set in stone and can be most afronted when the bill comes to more than expected.
In a recent example,gave an estimate to a customer but warned should a special bit of kit be required it would (and did) double the price.
As the job progressed,with the customer watching my every move,various extra work and jobs were added.Being a decent sort of chap decided not to charge for a couple of jobs added.Presented him with a bill about 50% more than quote and added VAT.
In short he refused to pay it.After some argie bargie,I suggested he pay me what he thought job was worth and to go away and take his business elsewhere in the future.
He paid the original sum quoted and left.
Unfortunately a few days later he had a problem and we were probably the only outfit capable of sorting it.Could he come over urgently ......
Our answer was very brief indeed..

 

[Little Dorrit]

If all quotations had to show the "total gross amount" it would be psychologically negative to business customers who would be seeing a figure 20% larger than the true cost to them.

I accept your point to a degree. I buy a lot of things now for my business on ebay where prices are nearly always inclusive of VAT. I always look to see if companies are VAT registered before purchasing. So most savvy business people would have no problem making sensible financial decisions. The psychological effect of estimating for work excluding VAT prices is only relevant where some people choose to include VAT and some don't; on ebay virtually nobody gives excluding VAT prices. Quoting an excluding VAT price to a customer who is clearly not able to claim back VAT is simply not ethical. However if it is made very clear at the beginning of discussions then I am happy with that. The practice of not mentioning this in verbal estimates is in my opinion a misrepresentation.

 

[Boo2]

I seem to recall that when VAT was first introduced it was made law that for private customers the quote had to include VAT. Thus if nothing was stated then the customer can legally state that VAT was included
Different for commercial customers

I don't believe it is different for commercial customers :

I frequent a software contractor's forum and as a cautionary tale a link was provided to the outcome of a court case where a contractor successfully sued a customer over an unpaid bill but with the rider that the VAT element was disallowed because the written contract made no mention of VAT. The contract was a repeat of a previous contract with the same customer but had different wording. The contractor had invoiced + VAT and been paid the VAT too, but the customer terminated and declined to pay the remainder of the contract term as required. The court found that the remainder of the term did have to be paid but none of the VAT on the repeat contract was payable, including what had already been paid, and this was removed from the sum owing.

So the lesson is that if a contract is agreed then the price includes VAT unless stated otherwise. This is not to say that a suppliers' standard terms may not be deemed to apply, and of course these may state that VAT is payable on top.

Before anyone asks me for a link to the case result, I looked last time this was mentioned here but couldn't find it :-(

Boo2