Paul Shanahan, managing director of Greystoke Builders Ltd, played a key role during nine episodes of BBC’s “Cowboy Trap,” in which he was called in to salvage “disasters” and botched jobs done by unscrupulous rogue operators.
But now he is facing claims from widow and African studies academic Dr Zohor Aylwin that his workers left multiple defects behind after a £100,000 revamp at her £1.2m house including a “boot print of the company’s employee” in paintwork, a toilet that wouldn’t flush and a shower too low to get under.
The company however is denying what it says are “alleged but unsubstantiated defects” and demanding £50,000 in unpaid bills for the work, in a case that has run up £460,000 in lawyers’ bills.
In online promotional material for Greystoke, Mr Shanahan describes “working with BBC1 as the good guys on the Cowboy Trap – going in and rectifying the disasters previous builders have left”.
But now his company is in a legal fight with widow and Moroccan culture expert Dr Zohor Aylwin after Greystoke carried out a £100,000-plus revamp on her £1.2million home in the Oaks, Watford, in 2019.
The case began when Mr Shanahan’s company sued Dr Aylwin for unpaid invoices totalling about £50,000, with her then suing the company in return over an alleged series of defects in the work.
Her barrister, Ashley Pratt, told Judge Nicholas Parfitt KC at Mayors and City County Court that she has a number of complaints about the quality of the revamp project – ranging from the cost of replacing a boiler, sub-standard paintwork including one surface being marked with a “boot print of the company’s employee”, problems with the newly fitted Howden’s kitchen, and a toilet that failed to flush.
“The shower was clearly too short to fit under and was clearly unsuitable,” he added, also claiming there were “fittings defects for the dishwasher”, problems with the kitchen electrics, defective tiles in an en-suite bedroom – as well as “gross over-charging” when installing sliding doors in a bedroom.
Dr Aylwin is disputing the claim, saying there were multiple defects in the work done which effectively “extinguish” the building company’s £50,200 bill.
Dr Aylwin’s barrister further claimed that even on Greystoke’s best case the debt owing would only amount to £44,000, and insisted that the company did not prepare a proper contract or operate a coherent invoicing system.
“The invoicing and estimate process was nothing short of shambolic,” he told the court.
But in court, Greystoke’s barrister Paul Fisher denied there was evidence of the defects alleged and highlighted the north London-based company’s “many years experience undertaking work of the nature undertaken at the property”.
He told the judge: “Indeed one of the company’s witnesses and directors, Mr Paul Shanahan, worked as an expert on the BBC television programme ‘Cowboy Trap’, in which his team sought to rectify and compete works in residential homes initially undertaken by ‘cowboy’ builders.”
Mr Shanahan was personally engaged in the renovation works at Dr Aylwin’s home, the court heard, and had also negotiated the contract and “scope of works”.
Mr Fisher said the company took on the project in 2019, with Mrs Aylwin’s son, Idris, overseeing the project for his parents.
Greystoke had sent a series of invoices to the Aylwin family, said Mr Fisher, receiving just over £67,000 and leaving – the builders say – a £50,200 shortfall.
The company claims the right to recover its £50,200 debt – or alternatively is asking the judge to assess what is due.
“The defects alleged by the defendants do not come close to a sum that would set off or nullify the total debt claimed by the claimant,” he told the judge.
Greystoke insists its team did their utmost to carry out a successful overhaul of Dr Aylwin’s home.
Mr Fisher highlighted expert evidence suggesting that “the property had not been maintained to a very high standard prior to the claimant undertaking its works”.
The decor was in “visibly poor pre-existing condition”, said the barrister, adding that the previous poorly finished paintwork “clearly had an impact on the visual appearance of the claimant’s works”.
Mr Fisher labelled the case a “relatively simple debt claim which has spiraled out of control by virtue of alleged but unsubstantiated defects that have been raised by the defendants”.
As a result, he said the relatively small-scale debt dispute has mushroomed into a three-day court action involving expert witnesses and with total legal costs projected at around £460,000, which will leave whoever loses over £500,000 out of pocket.
The judge has now reserved his decision in the case.
