Sorry but the Subbies need to do credit checks themselves…why are they not doing this? It’s common sense..,

It’s a vicious circle. The subbies are at the bottom of the pile. Everyone is scratching for work and taking risks. But there are no net if it goes burst.

Yeah its a disgrace alright…you should pay those who work for you in a timely fashion…those men (subcontractors) get up in the morning to go out and earn a living…that €20k could be the difference between them shutting down and putting skilled people on the dole and further worsening the state of our economy..if that was my firm Id have taken back my stuff long ago…..even the children would learn a lesson…if someone performs a service or sells you something, they have to be paid otherwise its stealing!

Try reading the article again. What these subcontractors did amounts to theft. The Department of Education paid the bill for the services and is legally the owner of the property. The principal was right in that it is a dispute between the contractor and subcontractors. The school is just a weak target they think they can get away with stealing from. I would have full sympathy for them if not for their disgraceful conduct.

Completely agree with Jason. The issue is between the contractor and the subbies. Won’t someone think of the children!

You try getting money out of a contractor who has already spent the money (that you should get also) on his own debt repayments!!!Your left with the threat of “If you take this to court Ill declare bankruptcy anyway!Your not getting your money either way!”.That is what someone very close to me was told.This is happening all across the country and the subby’s are left massively out of pocket!!!!!Yeah its terrible that the kids have to go through this crap but just imagine how desperate you’d have to be to do this……these lads are at their wits end…pressure,pressure, Christmas coming…no other way to get attention but doing this….there’ll be ALOT more of this!!!

I cant agree with you Jason, The school hired a cowboy contractor, simple as, they are at fault unfortunately in my eyes.

It’s an odd situation because if the original supplier hasn’t been paid the the main contractor and the school never had full ownership. Like most sales it probably states all goods belong to the supplier until they are paid in full. Giving them the right to take the goods back

It is ridiculous. These men need to be. It’s there property until its paid for.

That doesn’t excuse blatant theft. Just because the contractor blew the payment on debt does not mean the subcontractors have a right to break into private property and steal items because they are out of pocket. The courts are the only ones who have a right to decide how these subcontractors get their money. Breaking into someone else’s property and taking their items is just an idiotic move and I hope the Gardaí make arrests.

Not to mention the Vat the subcontractors are also stuck with, tax man does not care if subcontractors are paid as long as tax man is!

If you use that argument you would need to mention that the sub contractors willingly worked for this same cowboy builder. It’s.not the schools fault my man… They did something that amounts to theft…nothing more nothing less..

I thought the goods remain the property of the sub contractor until they are paid for in full? Therefore the sub contractors are simply removing their own property.

Sorry, The above is in reply to mr crow..

The fact that the subcontractor’s contract with the contractor has not been honoured is not the school’s fault, nor the fault of the kids.

Saying “you try getting money from a contractor” in no way strengthens your argument.

It was paid for by the school, therefore it’s the schools property..they should have taken it up with the contractor…if they knew he was dodgy…why work for him…or why did they not do a credit check before they throw away their money..

@Jason Culligan Are you ok in the head? Theft?? It’s the sub contractors goods until it’s paid for? The subs “own” the goods until paid for. Read The Avarus Animus’s comments, completely spot on!

This crap has been going on for years where the small contractor gets shafted by the main contractor. If you do the work your entitled to be paid the agreed price. The government could outlaw it in the morning only their big buck friends in IBEC would be upset. Pay the workers first.

Chris , you did not say what was a disgrace.

Keith, firstly I would ignore anyone who resorts to insults on the first go but I’ll ignore it this once.

Secondly the Department of Education had a contract of sale with the contractor. The Department paid upon completion of the project and the contract was complete. A legally binding transaction took place. Everything that happens after that is out of the hands of the school because they paid for and received everything in the contract. To claim the subcontractors have any rights to the property is delusional and ignores everything regarding contractional law.

To the people saying the subbies are justified, if you bought a Samsung TV from Currys but they hadn’t yet paid Samsung for it, would you be happy for Samsung to call around to your house and take the TV off the wall?

As much as I hate to see this happen to them, they need to take it up with the main contractor or the courts.

Well said Jason

I think the actions of the subcontractors is a disgrace. If they are owed money from the contractor they should be taking it up with the contractor. The contractor appears to have been paid in full by the Dept. which is then the responsibility of the contractor. Removing furnishings from a school is as bad as going in and doing the same to a hospital. How do the sub contractors think this will get them their money? The Department of Education dont owe them the money.

Think of the children, yes. also think of the children of the subcontractors employees.

I hear what you are saying lads, but I don’t agree with the law on this one. Enough is enough in this country, time to stop being soft and stick up for ourselves

The school has nothing to do with tendering or deciding on contractors. As with all these projects, the department of education decides everything and pays the bills! The school does not pay the contractor.

Yes let’s stick up for ourselves and pick on helpless children instead? A lot of people seem to be missing the point that the education of children is being adversely affected. This is a disgrace!

@Jason: I’m going to be nice but to be fair you haven’t a clue what your talking about!In the real world where a business needs every penny it can to survive…..the law and the courts are the last thing on your side!!Do you know how expensive it is to challenge a case in an Irish court?Do you know the time and resources that would be wasted for a sub-contractor trying to ply money (he rightly owns) from an unscrupulous, cowardly builder who at any moment could file for bankruptcy!?(and very regularly does!)You talk about theft?Did the main contractor not commit a form of theft(fraud even)by knowingly recruiting a sub-contractor and then not paying for goods and services due?!In 2011, the Seanad passed the “Construction Contracts Bill” whereby building contracts would be reformed to ensure prompt payment for sub-contractors and introduce a dispute resolution mechanism, neither of which have come to fruition and dont look likely to.So when the legislators (law makers) procrastinate and the builders procrastinate by refusing to pay you,and the courts favour expensive prolonged cases…what do you do?What would you do?You have 10,20 men working for you and you haven’t gotten paid?Would you be so faithful to the law and the courts in this situation?My ar*se you would!

I haven’t got a clue what I’m talking about? The man who is saying that stealing something that doesn’t belong to you anymore because the courts take to long is saying that other people are clueless?

Listen mate, no amount of wrongdoing justifies breaking two separate laws (trespassing and property theft) while targeting children who cannot stand up for themselves in either a physical or legal sense. Typical bully-boy tactics, get picked on so pick on someone else and screw the taxpayer who’s property they are stealing. If the courts take too long then that is a shame, but violating the law makes you no better.

Why did the board of education pay the subbys.

So take the law into your own hands because you were naive enough to work for someone who was a cowboy? Give me a break…people in the industry know who is a cowboy and who isn’t

You conveniently didn’t answer my question…..What would you do in that situation?

Check somebody out before I do an hours work for him maybe? Apply logic.

The builder should have not been paid. The principal should be sacked for this. Always the subbys fault. There taking back what there owed. About time somebody took a stand. Who the hell is in charge of running the schools , if that was me I’d take back what I put in.

@croistoir Its the schools job to make everything run smoothly, If they’d hired the right contractor in the first place none of this would have happened. Go back to the root of the problem. No matter what the builders could manage to take back they are still out of pocket and as someone said what about their own kids? Bills, xmas ect.

I wasn’t actually asking you that Mick :P but in that respect, its very hard to get an accurate report on who you will working for and in the resent economic climate…you take business where you can get it..keep the wolf from the door and feed your kids!. Stubbs Gazette helps you find with credit ratings but it used more for customers than someone you go into partnership with.You also dont know if the contractor will just turn around and do a legger anyway!Another thing to note is that all state departments usually have a list of accredited builders/contractors so you’d think as a subby if the state have sourced a builder that they would be to a certain standard..in workmanship terms and in how they run their business affairs.The real culprits in this story are the main contractors and I feel the subbys are doing this to force the hand of the department and the contractor.If this hadn’t been a school (with children involved) and was a hotel or a restaurant or a block of apartments..people would be no where near as emotive on the issue….its a crappy situation but the worst thing you can do to a man or a woman is falsely get them to work for you for weeks maybe and then not pay them….its a despicable thing to do and I’m not going to judge the subbys on this one!

Finally a sensible answer to put that Jason in he’s box.

Because the dept of education payed in full for the work .It doesn’t mean that they have a legal right to ownership of all fixtures and fittings,If the sub contractors have a right to retention of title on all goods supplied if not payed for. That’s the legal standing.
A basic example would be. You bought a car for 10k from a friend not knowing that said friend still owed 12k to the hire purchase company.
As far as your concerned you have full ownership of the car, till d day said car is reposed by the hire purchase company. Because u paid in full it doesn’t make it yours. Now it’s up to you to get back your money from your friend and not the hire purchase company.Same as the dept of education to make sure the main contractor honours his contractual obligations in which all works and fixtures and fittings are supplied even after the subbies remove the goods they haven’t been payed for.
It’s not nice on anyone but that’s just d way it is..

The Department employ the cheapest tender. They pay peanuts and wonder why they get monkeys.
As soon as the main Contractor gets a big payment he clears off and goes in to receivership. In the UK proof is required that all subbies have been paid to date and only then is the money released. Way to go I think !

The subcontractors have not been paid by the main contractor. Action taken by them today implies negotiations for payment with the main contractor were going nowhere. Taking the fixtures back out of the school is clearly not what they want to be doing, they really just want the money that they are entitled to. Looks like a last resort to shame the main contractor into paying up.

What is the exact legal position for the subcontractor here. I’m not a lawyer. If I bought a car on hire purchase and sold it to someone else before making all the payments then the hire purchase company can certainly come and repossess the car from the person I sell it to. That situation looks similar but I wonder does it all boil down to what the wording of the contract is between the main contractor and the sub contractor? Personally don’t agree with what they did but can see why they would pursue this course of action.

Don’t know what d wording is between d parties involved but contracts Would have been between main contractor and dept of education and sub contractor and main contractor . Never between subby and dept of education . Hence d reason they are removing their materials they haven’t been payed for by d main contractor . It’s up to the dept to make sure the main contractor to make good on fixtures and fittings that are removed.

In many cases John..contractors and subbys dont even have formal contracts (signatures on paper)….your told what needs to go where etc, you’ll be scrutinised for safe passes, different building tickets etc etc…all there might be are invoices for materials used and an invoice for the work to be completed!!!Builders want to stay away from higgledy piggledy contracts and most of the time (90%) a mans word was his bond (seriously!) and has been for many years but of course there are people who have no regard for their fellow worker and pull a fast one!If your a subby and you want work to keep afloat the last thing you’ll ask is for the main contractor (or you) to sign a contract ..he’ll give the work to someone else and because if the job goes tits up he can walk away!!Catch 22 crap!

Your right about formal contracts but d subbys will invoice the main contractor for work and materials supplied and on that invoice you’ll find d retention of title clause. It’s standard nowadays .

Keep the wolf from the door by working for someone who you have not checked out…well done kid..great point…says a lot..

The principal should be sacked? Sorry but what the F**k are you on about? The principal of the school had nothing to do with this debacle and was well within her rights to do something about it, it’s the original contractor that’s to blame here not the school or its staff.

It’s the sole responsibility of those that work for these contractors to check these guys out before the work for them…are people blind working for contractors that will not pay?

Did Senator Fergal Quinn not introduce legislation to stop this type of carry-on by main contractors. What happened to it?

No…the onus is on yourself to check who you work for my man…that’s life…get with it.

feels like it -to the kids and their parents-whether it legally is or not.

school would have receipt for goods

And that is between the contractor and the subbies…not between the school and the subbies.

Exactly, they should be taking the furnishings out of DPB in Roscrea, not from little kids classrooms. Bad form!

How is that fair play??

Brian, it’s taken 14 years of campaigning and broken promises for this school to get built.

Sub contractors may be out if pocket, but I doubt the parents are going to let this recently opened school be ripped apart after a 14 year wait.

Brian, you say its the dept’s job to accomodate the children. Is that not what they did by finally providing this school?

Secondly, if the school were to open its doors and allow the fittings be taken as you piously suggest, well then you are leaving the school with a huge debt and nothing to show for it.

Whilst I feel sympathy for the subbies, this is an ill judged move. The school and subbies it seems have a common enemy in the contractor and should be working with each other, not against, to tackle the contractor and get them to pay whats due.

Its swings and roundabouts. I feel deeply sorry for the subbie

As an idiot parent (thanks Joe) – I would gladly have gone with the subcontractors to picket the main contractors house – if they’d suggested this- instead of breaking into the school, cutting off the power and demolishing the place.

A lot of rubbish being spouted here about who owns what… the dept paid the contractor to build the school, the contractor paid suppliers for the equipment, and the subcontractors for their service. At no time had the subcontractors been owners of the the fittings. The subcontractors supplied a service to the contractor, not goods, and unfortunately for them he has reneged on his payment, and there is no protection in Irish law.

It’s not fair on them, and while stealing equipment from the school might shame the main contractor, it should rightly shame them as well for bullying the school. If the subcontractors broke into the contractors house and started ripping it up for material, would their supporters still be vocally in their ‘stand’?

You are stopping people taking back their own material. Peoples incomes are tied up in that. It doesnt belong you, the children or the school. It belongs to the people who fitted it until its paid for. The point is lost on you!

JOE , your view on ownership is wrong . The school has paid in full for the goods / services as per the terms agreed with the main contractor . The sub contractors have been robbed by the main contractor . My support is with the subbie here , but they have taken the wrong step. Their fight is with the main contractor , not the school.it is THEY who need to picket and protest the main contractor .

What is wrong with that? Cuts down cost.

That has no resemblance to what went on…sorry but that’s a stupid comparison.

That is the greatest pile of bullshit I have ever heard.

I have worked for sub-contractor’s, they pay by the day not the hour, they do not pay in your pension contribution’s, you tend to take more chance’s with safety, if you complain about your condition’s, your sacked. You work in all type’s of weather, if you are a member of a union, it is usually because on site’s like the airport your employee’s have to be in a union. When the main contractor use’s, there is a reason, subby’s undercut each other to the bone to get the job, it only stand’s to reason that they cut corner’s to make profit.

Some people here need to at least remember to start their sentence with a capital letter if they intend criticizing other people’s spelling!

@ Donal

While your climbing down off your high horse, you might let us all know when the word ‘criticising’ was spelt with a ‘z’.

Clearly Chris, you missed the intended irony in my comment, which was ridiculing Patrick.

However since you’ve asked: “criticising” has also been spelt “criticizing” ever since the Americans decided to differ from the British on many spellings. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/criticizing?s=t)

“Britain and America, two countries divided by a common language!”