One of our clients specializes in the construction of country houses made of logs and timber. The customer, who was dissatisfied with the quality of the built house, made a claim regarding a number of identified defects and demanded the return of the money paid for the house. In response to the claim, our client provided a detailed justification for the insignificance of the identified defects and offered to eliminate them free of charge as soon as possible.
The customer did not accept the offer and applied to the Leninsky District Court of St. Petersburg with a claim for termination of the contract, recovery of funds paid for the construction of the house, penalties, moral damage, a fine and court costs in the total amount of more than 2.5 million rubles.
The judicial examination appointed in our petition showed that the quality of work complies with the requirements of the contract, the shortcomings are insignificant, and did not arise from the fault of our client, but from the fault of the customer himself, who did not properly maintain the house during its operation. In this regard, the court refused to satisfy the claims in full. The repeated examination appointed by the St. Petersburg City Court during the consideration of the plaintiff’s appeal confirmed these conclusions, in connection with which the appellate court upheld the decision made in favor of our client. At the same time, the appellate court noted that the house has been operated by the customer without incidents for more than 5 years, which in itself indicates the insignificance of the shortcomings.
