P20SPD

iTrader: (1)

Wow, very interesting.

Can see where you are coming from diablo, but with reference to your comment earlier
The goods that they will/may have supplied and work carried out are 2 seperate things, i think.

The work done can not have a retention of title clause on it surely, as it is intangible to a large extent.

The goods, assume we are talking about wiring, sockets, and so forth will have been altered from their original state. Along the lines of plastic sheathing removed from ends to reveal cable etc (petty i know), but more importantly they will have probably been channelled into walls flooring and so forth.

I agree that Greg must write to the liquidators and receive confirmation, but if the goods are altered in such a way, then surely the ROT does not apply.

I also agree that Greg should avoid any communication with the EC other than to point them in the direction of the liquidator.

Steven

Diablo

Agreed that the labour element is intangeable.

But, goods are only incorporated if to remove them is to deplete there value (case law) so things like electrical sockets, switches, light fittings, towel rails, electric showers could, in theory, all be removed with no loss in value to the items.

Cabling etc is a different matter, as you have said.

Now, having said all that, from an Insolvency Practitioners perspective, we will argue that any "fixing" is incorporation..LOL...

gregh

>>electrical sockets, switches, light fittings,

were supplied by ec, so could be removed. cost to replace in worst case isn't that much, and I doubt they will seriously want to remove them, cost in doing so would be expensive for little or no resalable items afterwards.

>>towel rails, electric showers

rail was supplied by prime/plumber, shower supplied by me

greg

P20SPD

iTrader: (1)

Sounding better then

Diablo

Much better

But you can do without the hassle

D