I hired a plumber to have fix few pipe issues. He did not fasten screws and he attached brass ferrule to plastic tubing (this was for ice maker).

Any way was a leak under sink and I did not see it. Next day my neighbor complained about leaking roof. I called this plumber again he came back and fixed issue. But he would not listen to damage he has caused downstairs and who will pay for it or whether he has liability insurance. Now he is avoiding my phone calls.

I know each situation is different. What are my options.

Should I file complain with BBB?

Or how does state plumbing license works?
Any suggestions please!

 

Call your insurance and tell them what happened. let them go after him for compensation. He is responsible. You could also take him to court. Even the threat to sue might be enough to make him come around. Since you can no longer make contact, you must send everything my certified mail and keep proof of everything, phone calls, e-mails, text messages. Both you and your neighbor must also mitigate any further damage by taking measures to prevent any further damage. Keep any all quotes and repair bills.

 

Apart from a lawsuit, I cannot think of much that would help. Even in a lawsuit you would not get back 100% of damage cost. The courts will believe you had a certain level of responsibility to detect the problem before it got too costly.

I am always telling my wife. I don't trust plumbing. Plumbing must first earn my trust. All that is saying is that if I make a connection, I keep an eye on it quite frequently until I am sure it is not leaking. Especially if the connection is threaded or pex, sharkbite or compression. I am not talking about 10 minutes. I am talking about every hour or so for the first few hours and every day for the first week. It would make no difference to me who did the connections. I would still keep an eye on it. It is water under pressure, after all.

Now even a good plumber cannot see a leak that is happening in someone else's house. Of course, it should not have leaked in the first place, but his shoddy work mainly created the first leak. The lack of a watchful eye created the larger damage. I suspect a court would probably, at best, find you both 50% responsible.

The above is all just speculation on my part.

 

I disagree completely with Optsyeagle comment. Complete negligence and shoddy workmanship is responsible for damages. Plumbing work, if done properly does not need long or short term observation. There test procedures that can be done to insure proper connections. Of course unforeseen things can happen, but this was not unforeseen. This was poor workmanship (unintentional or otherwise). If this was an electrical problem with similar "leakage", consequences could be fatal.

I'm betting a court of law would cover all damages including court cost and possible "other" damages.

 

Well, we should wait to hear the judge's opinion. I don't disagree that the work could have been done better, but I know that unless these connections were behind a wall, it would not have got to the point of serious damage if it were done in my house. I would have been annoyed but I would have noticed it long before the costs started to mount.

All I am saying is that he will need to factor in a personal liability reduction to the judgement so he can accurately determine if a civil suit is worth it. Unless the judge just had a bad plumbing issue the week before his case, I suspect he will not get back 100% of the damages.

Just my opinion, of course.

 

So you would hire a plumber to install, fix or add new plumbing and allow for bad workmanship? And pay him for a complete job even though it's not working properly? So I suppose permits, licenses, experience and certification is not necessary? And if the workmanship is faulty you would not expect it to be fixed at his expense , but you pay for all problems? So you would have the same opinion on a similar electrical situation, even when that could be fatal? Even poor plumbing work can cause physical harm.

I don't how you do things in Canada, but here we have codes, rules and legal recourse for bad workmanship.

edit...If it were your house? How about the women or guy for that matter who has no inkling about plumbing and needs to be at work most of the day or out of town and cannot monitor assumed proper repair work? Or the handicap person who must rely on profession help and have complete confidence in the workmanship. If said workmanship is faulty, the victim must pay?

 

I certainly never said anything like that. This one must be a little personal for you.

All I am saying is that the courts may make the homeowner responsible to some percentage. I agree the plumber is at fault, but does the homeowner have no responsibility. That is what we have judges for.

I remember a time when I had a plumber install a toilet for me. I would have done it myself but it was in a Condo and I do not have a license for plumbing and they have rules requiring one. Anyway, I remember this guy was a little cocky. I told him how I found it annoying that the bolts holding the tank to the bowl always required more tightening later because if you tightened them too much something might crack. He went on about how he had done it so many times he knew exactly how tight they should be. I assume he felt around the bolts after the tank was full to ensure they were good. Anyway, a few hours later, they leaked. I had to tighten them a little more.

The OP should think about calling the manager if that plumber has one. I know I would want to make all necessary repairs but he has already stated that this plumber seems just fine avoiding him. If that is the case and there is no person above him, the courts are all that are left. In that case I suspect about a 75% judgement. If it turns out to be 100% great, at least he didn't set his expectations too high.

Again, just my opinion.