Legal Help Needed (taking LA to court?)
Discussion
Chaps,
Short story attached to this one, and I need some advice. Because ... I'm a bit confused!
Story is thus:
22nd April. My car is parked on my road, council plant a tree next to it. In doing so, they scatter it with grit and stones, and (badly) wipe them off. In the process, they scratch the paintwork and windscreen. No notification - I walk out of my house at around 6.00pm to find a mess, and a scratched car.
I take lots of good photos, call council informing them that I am not happy, am told to write in with details. I managed to polish the scratches out of the bonnet, get two quotes for replacement windscreen, and write to them on 29th May with copies of the photos and the windscreen quotes.
6th June, Get a standard "Thanks for your letter" letter, saying they will investigate.
16th July have heard nothing more, so write to them giving them two weeks to reply with a progress update, or I will take legal advice.
31st July, have heard nothing, so issue a claim on moneyclaim.gov.uk for the cheaper of the windscreen replacement quotes, plus court costs, and other costs (time wasted if I need to get the windscreen replaced, petrol etc.) Moneyclaim gives the council 14 days to reply.
19th August (more than 14 days later), they respond to the court with a defence, which is forwarded onto me. It has copies of the first letter I sent to the council (29th May), and of the letter they sent back to me (6th June) and their defence is (and I quote), "The above claimant alleges that the damage to his vehicle was caused by the workman's (sic) who attempted to wipe debris from his car. It is like (sic) that this matter will be referred onto the council contractors."
This is, to my eyes, no defence at all - just a vague notion that they may refer the claim onto someone else.
What do I do? I have until the 5th Sept to respond, and my choices are to drop it at this stage, or to take it a stage further, and ask for a court hearing.
If I do proceed to the court hearing, it will cost me money, and I have no idea of what their defence will be (if anything), or even if they will have got around to referring it to the contractors by then (how long does this sort of thing usually take to get to court? Days/weeks/months?)
I am confused as to what to do. I am reluctant to pursue it further until I have heard their side of the story (knowing what I am 'up against'), but I am also very reluctant to just drop it, as the bills for repair come to just shy of £700.
(Before you ask, I have spoken to my insurance broker, who said that if there is an identifiable culpable party then I can claim on my insurance for a new windscreen and they will pursue the third party, or I can claim directly from the third party. I can't just do the 'pay the £100 excess for new glass and get the insurance company to pay' in this scenario.)
Suggestions?
Oli.
Short story attached to this one, and I need some advice. Because ... I'm a bit confused!
Story is thus:
22nd April. My car is parked on my road, council plant a tree next to it. In doing so, they scatter it with grit and stones, and (badly) wipe them off. In the process, they scratch the paintwork and windscreen. No notification - I walk out of my house at around 6.00pm to find a mess, and a scratched car.
I take lots of good photos, call council informing them that I am not happy, am told to write in with details. I managed to polish the scratches out of the bonnet, get two quotes for replacement windscreen, and write to them on 29th May with copies of the photos and the windscreen quotes.
6th June, Get a standard "Thanks for your letter" letter, saying they will investigate.
16th July have heard nothing more, so write to them giving them two weeks to reply with a progress update, or I will take legal advice.
31st July, have heard nothing, so issue a claim on moneyclaim.gov.uk for the cheaper of the windscreen replacement quotes, plus court costs, and other costs (time wasted if I need to get the windscreen replaced, petrol etc.) Moneyclaim gives the council 14 days to reply.
19th August (more than 14 days later), they respond to the court with a defence, which is forwarded onto me. It has copies of the first letter I sent to the council (29th May), and of the letter they sent back to me (6th June) and their defence is (and I quote), "The above claimant alleges that the damage to his vehicle was caused by the workman's (sic) who attempted to wipe debris from his car. It is like (sic) that this matter will be referred onto the council contractors."
This is, to my eyes, no defence at all - just a vague notion that they may refer the claim onto someone else.
What do I do? I have until the 5th Sept to respond, and my choices are to drop it at this stage, or to take it a stage further, and ask for a court hearing.
If I do proceed to the court hearing, it will cost me money, and I have no idea of what their defence will be (if anything), or even if they will have got around to referring it to the contractors by then (how long does this sort of thing usually take to get to court? Days/weeks/months?)
I am confused as to what to do. I am reluctant to pursue it further until I have heard their side of the story (knowing what I am 'up against'), but I am also very reluctant to just drop it, as the bills for repair come to just shy of £700.
(Before you ask, I have spoken to my insurance broker, who said that if there is an identifiable culpable party then I can claim on my insurance for a new windscreen and they will pursue the third party, or I can claim directly from the third party. I can't just do the 'pay the £100 excess for new glass and get the insurance company to pay' in this scenario.)
Suggestions?
Oli.
Phylet,
The suggestion seems to be in that direction (but not clearly so), but there is no indication that I should contact the 3rd party, or that they (LA) will even pass it on to them. (And, to be honest, the main reason I started the court process was because they were taking so damned long to sort it all out. And, let's be honest, general pissed-off-ness with the shower of incompetence that is the LBTH.)
Marcus,
Thanks. "Badly constructed" sentences seems like a very good way of putting it. Sage advice too. Appreciated.
Sleep Envy - ditto. Thanks.
:ReachesForForm,Ticks"TakeItToTheNextLevel"Box:
Oli.
The suggestion seems to be in that direction (but not clearly so), but there is no indication that I should contact the 3rd party, or that they (LA) will even pass it on to them. (And, to be honest, the main reason I started the court process was because they were taking so damned long to sort it all out. And, let's be honest, general pissed-off-ness with the shower of incompetence that is the LBTH.)
Marcus,
Thanks. "Badly constructed" sentences seems like a very good way of putting it. Sage advice too. Appreciated.
Sleep Envy - ditto. Thanks.
:ReachesForForm,Ticks"TakeItToTheNextLevel"Box:
Oli.
Chaps,
More helpful comments, thanks.
I can see that the contractors probably are responsible for the damage, but as lunarscope said, it is the council who are responsible for maintaining the street, and the contractors will be working on their behalf. My 'contract' is with the council, therefore I hold the council responsible. If they want to defer that responsibility to someone else, they can, but they need to do this. If this means the council claims money back from the contractor as a result of the court case, so be it.
Bedders, you've lost me. You may be a latin scholar, but I'm just thick.
FPC - sadly, you are right; it seems that the '14 days to reply or you lose the case' doesn't apply (not sure why) and they are still allowed to 'defend' after 14 days. I sincerely hope that they don't attend the hearing - it'll make things much easier for me!
Greendog - legal protection with motor insurance; yes, I do have it. Didn't think of that! D'oh! (Would it have dented my NCD if I had used it?)
Meeja - your non-legal mind is thinking along the same lines as my non-legal mind.
Oli.
More helpful comments, thanks.
I can see that the contractors probably are responsible for the damage, but as lunarscope said, it is the council who are responsible for maintaining the street, and the contractors will be working on their behalf. My 'contract' is with the council, therefore I hold the council responsible. If they want to defer that responsibility to someone else, they can, but they need to do this. If this means the council claims money back from the contractor as a result of the court case, so be it.
Bedders, you've lost me. You may be a latin scholar, but I'm just thick.
FPC - sadly, you are right; it seems that the '14 days to reply or you lose the case' doesn't apply (not sure why) and they are still allowed to 'defend' after 14 days. I sincerely hope that they don't attend the hearing - it'll make things much easier for me!
Greendog - legal protection with motor insurance; yes, I do have it. Didn't think of that! D'oh! (Would it have dented my NCD if I had used it?)
Meeja - your non-legal mind is thinking along the same lines as my non-legal mind.
Oli.
Expensive Shark, thanks. As a fellow resident of LBTH, I suspect you already know the quality of the staff they employ; regular reminders to breathe are broadcast on the office PA system, I believe. I shall indeed proceed with the case, encouraged by the comments on here.
Swilly, Interesting comments, thanks. Out of interest, what would you suggest I should do? I don't know who the contractors are, and the council has spent the last 4 months failing to suggest I should do anything other than pursue the claim with them - indeed, their response to the moneyclaim would have been an ideal opportunity for them to do so, and again they failed.
You are correct in that I do not have a formal written contract with the council, hence my use of inverted commas. However, I pay council tax, and in turn they are responsible for maintaining the street and the trees within it; this is what I meant by 'contract'. As a part of this, they paid for the planting of the new tree, which was the process in which my car was damaged. I expect them to exercise due care and attention when performing their work, and to ensure that due care and attention is exercised by their contractors when they subcontract work. If I claim from them, they can further claim from their subcontractor, if they so wish (and indeed as a council tax payer, I would encourage them to do so.)
I'm not knocking your point of view, I'm keen to hear what you would suggest. (Your profile says you are a Civil Engineer; you probably know a whole load more about this than I do.)
Oli.
Swilly, Interesting comments, thanks. Out of interest, what would you suggest I should do? I don't know who the contractors are, and the council has spent the last 4 months failing to suggest I should do anything other than pursue the claim with them - indeed, their response to the moneyclaim would have been an ideal opportunity for them to do so, and again they failed.
You are correct in that I do not have a formal written contract with the council, hence my use of inverted commas. However, I pay council tax, and in turn they are responsible for maintaining the street and the trees within it; this is what I meant by 'contract'. As a part of this, they paid for the planting of the new tree, which was the process in which my car was damaged. I expect them to exercise due care and attention when performing their work, and to ensure that due care and attention is exercised by their contractors when they subcontract work. If I claim from them, they can further claim from their subcontractor, if they so wish (and indeed as a council tax payer, I would encourage them to do so.)
I'm not knocking your point of view, I'm keen to hear what you would suggest. (Your profile says you are a Civil Engineer; you probably know a whole load more about this than I do.)
Oli.
Swilly,
I see the logic in what you are saying, but I don't see it as being terribly watertight - not helped by comments such as "liability is with the contractor (generally)". I also have to say that my thoughts are that the council is liable, hence my pursuing them - something that has been reinforced by every comment and turn thus far, with the sole exception of yours and jamoors. (Incidentally, while I was disconsolately admiring the scratches on my car on the evening the damage occured, my local councillor happened to walk past, and stopped for a chat. I filled him in on the situation, and his immediate response was to pursue the council as well.)
(Having said this, my nagging fear is that you may be correct and hence I am barking up the wrong tree, due to some legal technicality!)
Oli.
I see the logic in what you are saying, but I don't see it as being terribly watertight - not helped by comments such as "liability is with the contractor (generally)". I also have to say that my thoughts are that the council is liable, hence my pursuing them - something that has been reinforced by every comment and turn thus far, with the sole exception of yours and jamoors. (Incidentally, while I was disconsolately admiring the scratches on my car on the evening the damage occured, my local councillor happened to walk past, and stopped for a chat. I filled him in on the situation, and his immediate response was to pursue the council as well.)
(Having said this, my nagging fear is that you may be correct and hence I am barking up the wrong tree, due to some legal technicality!)
Oli.
UPDATE
Council have written to me today, letter dated 22nd September. Looks like this (some bits chipped out/edited.)
Do I continue as it currently is, and take the council to court? Do I cancel the current case and instead raise a case against Blah Tree Company? Do I start a new case against Blah Tree Company and keep the case against the council running? Should I contact either the council or Blah Tree Company?
I'll await more informed guidance from the PH masses, but my gut instinct is to carry on with the council claim. My letter to them gave them 3 weeks to respond or I would issue against them in court. They didn't respond in this timeframe (in fact, it has taken them almost exactly 5 months to simply tell me who they use to plant trees), therefore I am inclined to continue against them.
All advice welcomed. Thanks.
Oli.
Council have written to me today, letter dated 22nd September. Looks like this (some bits chipped out/edited.)
letter said:
22nd September 2008
Dear Mr zcacogp,
RE: Alleged incident: XYZ Road
Date: 22nd April 2008
I write with reference to your claim concerning the above incident.
My invesitgation has revealed that responsibility for the incident rests with the following Councils Contractor:
[i]Blah Tree Company
Blah Tree Address
Blah Tree Telephone Number[/i]
who was carrying out works to the location at that time.
The claim was referred to the contractor on 19 September 2008, and they have been requested to either forward the claim to their own Public Liability Insurers or deal with you direct. If you do not hear from the contractor within the next 21 days I would suggest that you contact them yourself.
Should any difficulties be experienced in the pursuit of your claim with the contractor, please do not hesitate to contact above (sic)named officer for further assistance.
Yours sincerely,
XYZ Claims handler.
So, what to do? I sent back the thingummie to the Small Claims Court, asking to pursue the council in court about 3 days after this thread was started; so over a month ago now (although I don't have a court date yet.) Dear Mr zcacogp,
RE: Alleged incident: XYZ Road
Date: 22nd April 2008
I write with reference to your claim concerning the above incident.
My invesitgation has revealed that responsibility for the incident rests with the following Councils Contractor:
[i]Blah Tree Company
Blah Tree Address
Blah Tree Telephone Number[/i]
who was carrying out works to the location at that time.
The claim was referred to the contractor on 19 September 2008, and they have been requested to either forward the claim to their own Public Liability Insurers or deal with you direct. If you do not hear from the contractor within the next 21 days I would suggest that you contact them yourself.
Should any difficulties be experienced in the pursuit of your claim with the contractor, please do not hesitate to contact above (sic)named officer for further assistance.
Yours sincerely,
XYZ Claims handler.
Do I continue as it currently is, and take the council to court? Do I cancel the current case and instead raise a case against Blah Tree Company? Do I start a new case against Blah Tree Company and keep the case against the council running? Should I contact either the council or Blah Tree Company?
I'll await more informed guidance from the PH masses, but my gut instinct is to carry on with the council claim. My letter to them gave them 3 weeks to respond or I would issue against them in court. They didn't respond in this timeframe (in fact, it has taken them almost exactly 5 months to simply tell me who they use to plant trees), therefore I am inclined to continue against them.
All advice welcomed. Thanks.
Oli.
) UPDATE AGAIN
Sorry to be thick, but what does this mean?
I am guessing that it means that the council's defence has been considered to be insufficient, and they get an opportunity to try again. It does NOT mean that the case has been decided in my favour.
Is this correct? If so, what can I expect to have happen now? If not, what does it mean? (I am on the 'phone to the court as I type this, but they have spent the last 15 minutes failing to answer the 'phone and PH may well be quicker ... and will certainly be more helpful!)
Thanks, again.
Oli.
Racylady said:
... have their current defence struck out.
Racylady's comment above proved particularly prescient ... I wrote back to the Small Claims people asking that this case should go to court, and have just received a letter back from the court saying that ... Bow County Court said:
Before DISTRICT JUDGE **** sitting at Bow County Court, <address>.
Upon the Courts own motion. The Court has made this order of its own initiative without a hearing. If you object to the order, you must make an application to have it set aside, varied or stayed within 7 days of receiving it and
Upon the Court considering the papers filed and the Court noting that the defence filed does not disclose any defence to the claim and that the defence is not signed
IT IS ORDERED THAT
The Defence is struck out.
Dated 15 September 2008
<Court Stamp>
(Bolds, line breaks, punctuation etc all as per the original letter.)Upon the Courts own motion. The Court has made this order of its own initiative without a hearing. If you object to the order, you must make an application to have it set aside, varied or stayed within 7 days of receiving it and
Upon the Court considering the papers filed and the Court noting that the defence filed does not disclose any defence to the claim and that the defence is not signed
IT IS ORDERED THAT
The Defence is struck out.
Dated 15 September 2008
<Court Stamp>
Sorry to be thick, but what does this mean?
I am guessing that it means that the council's defence has been considered to be insufficient, and they get an opportunity to try again. It does NOT mean that the case has been decided in my favour.
Is this correct? If so, what can I expect to have happen now? If not, what does it mean? (I am on the 'phone to the court as I type this, but they have spent the last 15 minutes failing to answer the 'phone and PH may well be quicker ... and will certainly be more helpful!)
Thanks, again.
Oli.
Timsta,
Thanks. Very helpful.
As it is, the letter is dated 25th Sept, and I only got it today (30th).
Given that it took the council 5 months to tell me who planted a tree, the odds of them constructing a decent defence in 7 days are short, I suspect, but we'll see what comes of it.
It's a drawn-out old process, isn't it!
Thanks again for your help. I'll keep this thread updated as I learn more. (Should anyone be at all interested.)
Oli.
Thanks. Very helpful.
As it is, the letter is dated 25th Sept, and I only got it today (30th).
Given that it took the council 5 months to tell me who planted a tree, the odds of them constructing a decent defence in 7 days are short, I suspect, but we'll see what comes of it.
It's a drawn-out old process, isn't it!
Thanks again for your help. I'll keep this thread updated as I learn more. (Should anyone be at all interested.)
Oli.
OK, keeping this thread up to date as I said I would. Not that anyone is particularly interested, I don't suppose ... !
I had heard nothing back from the court or from the local council further to my last post (namely, that on the 15th September the defence had been struck out.) I was expecting them to write to tell me whether a new defence had been offered, but they didn't.
So I called them. (Spent 36 minutes in a queue to talk to someone!) And have been told that I need to complete a form that came with the original application I made to court, asking for a judgement to be made in my favour immediately. Apparently, I have made an accusation and the local authority have failed to defend it, but the courts don't make a judgement without being asked. If I ask for a judgement to be made, it will be made - no further stages to go through.
Of course, having a judgement isn't the end of the process. I then need to get the local authority to pay ... if they don't, the court will 'enforce it'.
So, that's the story. The nice lady on the telephone was very helpful, and explained that I can also claim interest at 8% between the date the case was issued and the date I ask for the judgement. She advised that, seeing as it is Christmas, I should wait until January before writing to ask for the judgement, as they are closing for Christmas and therefore nothing would be done over this period anyway. And if I write later then I can claim a few quid more interest.
So, it's not success yet, but it looks like progress.
Thanks again for your input and advice chaps.
Oli.
I had heard nothing back from the court or from the local council further to my last post (namely, that on the 15th September the defence had been struck out.) I was expecting them to write to tell me whether a new defence had been offered, but they didn't.
So I called them. (Spent 36 minutes in a queue to talk to someone!) And have been told that I need to complete a form that came with the original application I made to court, asking for a judgement to be made in my favour immediately. Apparently, I have made an accusation and the local authority have failed to defend it, but the courts don't make a judgement without being asked. If I ask for a judgement to be made, it will be made - no further stages to go through.
Of course, having a judgement isn't the end of the process. I then need to get the local authority to pay ... if they don't, the court will 'enforce it'.
So, that's the story. The nice lady on the telephone was very helpful, and explained that I can also claim interest at 8% between the date the case was issued and the date I ask for the judgement. She advised that, seeing as it is Christmas, I should wait until January before writing to ask for the judgement, as they are closing for Christmas and therefore nothing would be done over this period anyway. And if I write later then I can claim a few quid more interest.
So, it's not success yet, but it looks like progress.
Thanks again for your input and advice chaps.
Oli.
Kevin,
Well done. Thanks for posting and it's good to hear a good outcome from a similar case. I'm glad it worked out for you.
While I certainly do NOT advocate claiming from your local council un-necessarily, I DO think it is a good thing that when the council causes problems (either by activity - in my case, or through inactivity - in your case, inactivity being not maintaining the roads) then they should be bought to book for it. I know a lot of people would have shrugged and coughed up for the windscreen themselves in a case like mine - I think that doing this condones and permits bad standards on behalf of the council, and is counter-productive in the long term.
I'll be filling in that form in the new year, and will keep people posted with what comes of it.
Oli.
Well done. Thanks for posting and it's good to hear a good outcome from a similar case. I'm glad it worked out for you.
While I certainly do NOT advocate claiming from your local council un-necessarily, I DO think it is a good thing that when the council causes problems (either by activity - in my case, or through inactivity - in your case, inactivity being not maintaining the roads) then they should be bought to book for it. I know a lot of people would have shrugged and coughed up for the windscreen themselves in a case like mine - I think that doing this condones and permits bad standards on behalf of the council, and is counter-productive in the long term.
I'll be filling in that form in the new year, and will keep people posted with what comes of it.
Oli.
Chaps,
An update.
I wrote to the court asking them for judgement in default. And on the 16th February recieved a letter from them entitled "Judgement for Claimant (in default)". It states the following:
I have heard nothing from the council (defendant), so logged back on to the moneyclaim website to see how to progress the claim.
However, when I did so I was surprised to see that the claim is listed as "Halted", with the explanation "The judgment has been halted, this means that the status of the claim does not allow you to continue with your judgment".
What does this mean?
I've eMailed the court, and will call them tomorrow morning (they are only open from 10.00am to 4.00pm, and take forever to answer the 'phone.)
All advice welcome!
Oli.
An update.
I wrote to the court asking them for judgement in default. And on the 16th February recieved a letter from them entitled "Judgement for Claimant (in default)". It states the following:
letter said:
To the Defendant
You have not replied to the claim form.
It is therefore ordered that you must pay the claimant £901.59 for debt (and interest to date of judgement) and £60.00 for costs.
You must pay the claimant a totla of £961.59 forthwith."
It is dated the 12th February 2009. You have not replied to the claim form.
It is therefore ordered that you must pay the claimant £901.59 for debt (and interest to date of judgement) and £60.00 for costs.
You must pay the claimant a totla of £961.59 forthwith."
I have heard nothing from the council (defendant), so logged back on to the moneyclaim website to see how to progress the claim.
However, when I did so I was surprised to see that the claim is listed as "Halted", with the explanation "The judgment has been halted, this means that the status of the claim does not allow you to continue with your judgment".
What does this mean?
I've eMailed the court, and will call them tomorrow morning (they are only open from 10.00am to 4.00pm, and take forever to answer the 'phone.)
All advice welcome!
Oli.
Edited by zcacogp on Tuesday 10th March 17:55
Right, no answer to my last post. It turned out to be that the website is administered centrally from Northampton, but if the case is transferred to your local court (i.e. the other party contests it), the website is no longer updated. You need to call your local court to get information.
Judgement was in my favour, but that didn't mean that the council paid up. No, they ignored it. I contacted my local councillor to ask whether he could facilitate payment or whether I should apply to the court for enforcement (baliffs.) Councillor clearly contacted the department in question who passed the 'request' on to the contractor, asking them whether they 'wanted to pay the sum'.
Contractor contacted me, asking for details of the damage. (This was the first pro-active contact I had had from anyone about the case.) I explained to the contractor that the problem wasn't theirs - it was the councils, that I had judgement against the council and that I expected the council to pay.
Cutting a long story short, the contractor went back to the council and suggested they may like to pay before the baliffs knocked on their door.
So ... quite an explanation, but I had a payment for just over £960, into my bank account, today. (No apology, no words of concern or promises that it wouldn't happen again, just a payment.)
So, result. Many thanks for your input, it was appreciated. This whole sorry saga is now at a close, the original cost of the claim has increased by over 50% by the way the council mis-managed it, but I'm happy.
Job done. Thanks.
Oli.
Judgement was in my favour, but that didn't mean that the council paid up. No, they ignored it. I contacted my local councillor to ask whether he could facilitate payment or whether I should apply to the court for enforcement (baliffs.) Councillor clearly contacted the department in question who passed the 'request' on to the contractor, asking them whether they 'wanted to pay the sum'.
Contractor contacted me, asking for details of the damage. (This was the first pro-active contact I had had from anyone about the case.) I explained to the contractor that the problem wasn't theirs - it was the councils, that I had judgement against the council and that I expected the council to pay.
Cutting a long story short, the contractor went back to the council and suggested they may like to pay before the baliffs knocked on their door.
So ... quite an explanation, but I had a payment for just over £960, into my bank account, today. (No apology, no words of concern or promises that it wouldn't happen again, just a payment.)
So, result. Many thanks for your input, it was appreciated. This whole sorry saga is now at a close, the original cost of the claim has increased by over 50% by the way the council mis-managed it, but I'm happy.
Job done. Thanks.
Oli.
Swoxy - thanks. Result indeed!
g_attrill - I'd love to. Snag is that the local paper is owned and run by the local council. Yes, really. It is pretty much their political mouthpiece (and, I suspect, one of the reasons why the council can be so incompetant, because their incompetence is never aired in public.) I am however considering contacting a larger paper, although I wonder whether the story is so small as to be of no interest.
dontfollowme - it does.
SJonson - see my comment to dontfollowme. I'd suggest you get the process started SOON, and stick with it. And all the best - hope it works out.
Oli.
g_attrill - I'd love to. Snag is that the local paper is owned and run by the local council. Yes, really. It is pretty much their political mouthpiece (and, I suspect, one of the reasons why the council can be so incompetant, because their incompetence is never aired in public.) I am however considering contacting a larger paper, although I wonder whether the story is so small as to be of no interest.
dontfollowme - it does.
SJonson - see my comment to dontfollowme. I'd suggest you get the process started SOON, and stick with it. And all the best - hope it works out.
Oli.
sleep envy said:
nice one Oli - glad it got found in your favour and you've had your costs recovered
Thanks! The amount claimed was the quote from an OPC, plus costs for travel to OPC, time taken off client activites while work is done etc etc etc. I think I may just find a good local windscreen fitter and see what the best price he can do is, for cash ... !
Oli.
HRG said:
personally I'd have loved to see the bailiffs on the council steps 
So would I - I was more than a little disappointed! (Had it got that far I would probably have called up the court and tried to find out when the Baliff was due to call, just so I could go along for a discreet squiz ... ) Oli.
VxDuncan said:
Nice one! Good one for keeping on it! Had a similar thing with a used car dealer - took over a year, but got the money back in the end. One thing - did you not have to pay the court fees before submiting the claim on moneyclaim online? In which case why not just go ahead with the court action anyway?
It had got beyond that stage - I paid the fees before submitting the claim online, they defended the claim, the defence was struck out (it didn't make sense), I had judgement in my favour and they still made no effort to contact me, let alone pay the settlement. Next step would have been baliffs, but the local councillor at least got them to realise that something needed to be done. In retrospect I should probably have gone the baliff route, just to shame them further.
Oli.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff