A BC moving company sued a client, but the case backfired on the movers because of a counterclaim.
It’s a BC moving company that has been involved in many BC Civil Resolution Tribunal decisions: 2 Burley Men Moving.
Initially, 2 Burley Men Moving sued Shandi Stadelman for $2,229.25, suggesting that’s what it was owed for the move.
In response, Stadelman claims Burley overcharged them.
- You might also like:
- PIVOT! Moving company takes BC resident to court and she fires back
- BC moving company arrives to client with truck half full, gets sued
- BC resident sues strata after being asked to move air conditioning unit
Stadelman hired Burley to complete a residential move scheduled for March 10, 2023. The move would take 12 to 16 hours, and Stadelman said the booking agent quoted them around $2,500.
No written contract was submitted as evidence. Burley included an appointment confirmation page for the move, which notes a $180 hourly rate for three movers, plus 30 minutes for travel time and a $50 fuel fee per day.
While Burley didn’t deny that it provided an estimate to Stadelman, it said the estimate was based on an hourly rate and that Stadelman didn’t tell the booking agent about the volume of the move and access issues, which included 30 stairs that the movers would need to go up and down. Does that remind you of anything?
Stadelman disputed Burley’s claim, suggesting she told the booking agent all the details. Burley told Stadelman it would need to get another truck and one or two additional movers.
Burley told the tribunal that it charged $7,229.25 for the move and that Stadelman only paid $5,000.
While the tribunal found Burley’s overall rates reasonable, it discovered that Burley ultimately overcharged Stadelman.
“I find that once Shandi Stadelman told Burley about the access issues and volume of the move, it was for Burley, as a professional moving company, to ensure it had the necessary number of movers and trucks to complete the move in a timely manner,” the decision states.
“The evidence shows that as a result of not having enough movers on March 10, Burley’s three movers became easily fatigued, which I find resulted in delays and inefficiencies. The evidence also shows that Burley’s movers did not have the necessary tools to disassemble Shandi Stadelman’s bed on March 10, which I find resulted in additional delays.”
Stadelman’s counterclaim included photographs of damages she claimed Burley caused to several items, and the tribunal accepted her claim.
“On a judgment basis, I find Shandi Stadelman is entitled to $400 in damages for the cost of replacing the lampshade with a similar, used lampshade and for the cost of repairing the fireplace’s frame and the chair’s leather seat.”
The tribunal did find that Stadelman owed Burley some money ($208), not as much as the moving company claimed. However, that debt was offset by the amount Burley owed Stadelman for damaging her items.
Burley was ordered to pay Stadelman $342 in damages.
Follow Channels and Categories