In small claims you typically can only get reimbursed for damages that are real costs. So if you have a receipt or a quote you have proof of a real financial impact that you can claim for reimbursement. Punitive and pain and suffer that sort of stuff is the awarded in Superior court where you will spend more time proving those things. HOWEVER, There is one Small Claims case where the judge awarded pain and suffering to pet owners that witnessed their dog being mauled to death. (My lawyer friends keep up on these tidbits of the law). I think it would have been a stretch to site that case to cover the angst over your power bill.
I bet you would have gotten more if you submitted your power bills as evidence, showed the calculation you used (with citation) and showed what your yearly costs where. Maybe even show the power bill from "this month" and "this month last year". If its documented well it works well in small claims.
Is not the GC's responsible for overseeing the work of the subs he hires? I seem to remember that somewhere in the CSLB stuff. For example I just had a new roof put on. The tear off crew wasn't paying attention and put a foot through my ceiling. . It was actually quite comical, since the roofer told me it was going to happen. Part of my vaulted ceiling has no attic space between the roof and ceiling, and he was sure the tear off crew wasn't going to be paying attention and would step through it at some point.. sure enough.. I was in the kitchen and there was a big crungh.. and then another... they punched through twice, then a face peered through the holes in the family room and said...."Hello? Sorry 'bout that" ...anyway it was the owner of the tear off company that made good on the repair.
Also I find most judges will listen to reasonable explanations. They are people too., So it helps to know the statute you are using to support your claim. You just have to present your case and the why's. Sounds like you had the preponderance of stuff!
I wasn't going after pain and suffering. My punitive damages were based on how the contractor attempted to skirt his legal obligation. He never came and even looked at the problem. He ignored all attempts to communicate. When he finally did respond it was with documents that he very clearly misrepresented as proof. And other things.
My position was going to be that by the judge ruling he only had to pay for the fix, and not for any kind of punitive damages, he would get off with no incentive not to behave that way with his next victim. If he knows he only has to pay for a repair whether he ponies up right away or drags it out all the way into court, then why would he ever do what's right first? Chances are most people will give up before going to court, so he wins most of these confrontations by doing nothing.
I never got the time to express that during the hearing. Nor did I have time to go over the calculations I used to come to the number for lost HVAC costs. I had plenty of proof of that, all neatly presented. I just had too much to go over about the repair and so some of my case never made it in front of the judge. Plus, I couldn't really show HVAC costs from prior months, or "this month last year" because during the period of time in dispute I had installed PV solar panels, which complete trash any sort of trend that might have been seen on the PG&E bills. But you're right, the calc's I could submit might not have been enough.
I knew going in the energy claims and the punitive damages were long shots. I mostly submitted those originally to sway the defendant into settling before court, like maybe he wouldn't want to take the chance on losing more than just the cost of repair. I put it to him that way a couple times in my letters, as in: pay me $1900 now or take a chance and end up paying $2700 later. But he didn't fall for that. I suspect this guy has been to court too many times for that to work. He probably knew he was going to lose, or even 50-50, but because he also knew that he was only going to be on the hook for the repair, why not just wait to see if I'd cave, or the judge would go the other way. Which, or course, was exactly why I had asked for the damages. Court cost (which I won) were only $50. Not enough incentive for the defendant to not roll the dice. It's just the way the system works.
I put in some real effort to stay out of court, because while I was sure I could prove the insulation was missing since original construction, I was never sure I could prove the defendant was actually the responsible party. That was one of the lines of questioning the judge pursued on her own. I sweated that out. But as I described, the guy answered that he
was the guy, when he probably could have just said "Nope, not me."
I was prepared to lose. But I was not prepared to regret not trying to win, so I had to see it through.
Perfect example of no pride in workmanship.
