Advice Needed Re County Court
Discussion
So I have reached a point with the firm who were supposed to sort my solar panels out that I need to get someone else to sort them and then try to get the money back via MCOL.
I sent a letter giving them 14 days to rectify the situation via recorded delivery but they have refused to accept the letter.
My question is can I now engage a professional to sort this situation and start proceedings? I understand normally you need to give the party a chance to sort it but they clearly think they have stopped any proceedings by not accepting the letter.
Anyone had a similar situation or knows what my options are?
TIA
I sent a letter giving them 14 days to rectify the situation via recorded delivery but they have refused to accept the letter.
My question is can I now engage a professional to sort this situation and start proceedings? I understand normally you need to give the party a chance to sort it but they clearly think they have stopped any proceedings by not accepting the letter.
Anyone had a similar situation or knows what my options are?
TIA
Here's a thing: all the amateur lawyers here will tell you to send letters by recorded delivery or what not. Factoid: real lawyers, if they send hard copy letters, usually just use ordinary post to do so. There is also a radical new invention called email, and some daring, cutting edge, modernist companies use it. I am just saying.
Send your letter again, by first class post and/or, if you are down with the kids, by email. Or drop if off by hand if the addressee is not far from you.
Wait for a response. Then you can decide what to do next in the event of a response, if any, or of no response, if that is what happens.
Send your letter again, by first class post and/or, if you are down with the kids, by email. Or drop if off by hand if the addressee is not far from you.
Wait for a response. Then you can decide what to do next in the event of a response, if any, or of no response, if that is what happens.
Sending the letter by that method was a pointless waste of time and money. Your assumption that the company think that they have avoided proceedings by not accepting a letter is, if you think about it for half a second, a bonkers assumption. Do the company possess X ray specs? Did someone there read the letter through the envelope before forming the cunning plan of rejecting it and sitting around mwahahahahahahahing?
If you were to sue now you might be criticised for failing to engage with the company in a sensible way. Email, or send a letter by ordinary post.
If you were to sue now you might be criticised for failing to engage with the company in a sensible way. Email, or send a letter by ordinary post.
Breadvan72 said:
Sending the letter by that method was a pointless waste of time and money. Your assumption that the company think that they have avoided proceedings by not accepting a letter is, if you think about it for half a second, a bonkers assumption. Do the company possess X ray specs? Did someone there read the letter through the envelope before forming the cunning plan of rejecting it and sitting around mwahahahahahahahing?
If you were to sue now you might be criticised for failing to engage with the company in a sensible way. Email, or send a letter by ordinary post.
Have just sent the same text by email.If you were to sue now you might be criticised for failing to engage with the company in a sensible way. Email, or send a letter by ordinary post.
Marty Funkhouser said:
I sent it recorded delivery and they refused to accept it.
I had this with Whizz air when I sent a recorded letter to there UK Office,In the end hired a no win no fee aviation company who got money in 4 weeks, rather than the 6 months of them leading me a merry dance.
Was quite surprised over the refusal to accept a signed letter, i guess its a ploy by this sort of company to avoid saying they received correspondence.
Now I follow up with email as well.
When will the penny drop that recorded delivery is a waste of time and money? People probably think that it adds some sort of legal solemnity or cachet to a letter. It doesn't. Email, or post normally.
As for ploys, er, probably not. Conspiracy theories always fall down on silly points such as this. How the Hell does the addressee know who sent or what's in a letter so that it can carefully avoid accepting it? Answer: it can't. It doesn't. A company might have a general policy of refusing to accept recorded deliveries, perhaps knowing that the people who send such items may tend to be green ink loonies.
The trouble with paranoia is that it makes your brain fall out.
As for ploys, er, probably not. Conspiracy theories always fall down on silly points such as this. How the Hell does the addressee know who sent or what's in a letter so that it can carefully avoid accepting it? Answer: it can't. It doesn't. A company might have a general policy of refusing to accept recorded deliveries, perhaps knowing that the people who send such items may tend to be green ink loonies.
The trouble with paranoia is that it makes your brain fall out.
Good to see you back.
Recently acting as a defendant, I submitted my defence papers directly to the claimant's solicitor's home address. The same solicitor advised the court that my defence papers had not been received, therefore I was out of time.
Following sound advice from several PH posters, including yourself, I decided on taking the mediation route. I found the mediation hearing rather stressful, and the occasion rather impaired my judgment, whilst a settlement was reached, the solicitor imposed a non disclosure/discussion clause in the settlement agreement, the same that I did not pick up on.
A few weeks after the above hearing, I received via Royal Mail my letter, defence papers to the claimant's solicitor, with the envelope marked "Return to Sender", the side of the envelope sliced open, the same allowing a person/s to read the contents etc.
Possibly you will arrive at that same conclusion that I did.
Shortly afterwards the SRA restricted the solicitor from acting or managing client's monies etc. etc., with the solicitor, although still in practice, being made bankrupt.
Recently acting as a defendant, I submitted my defence papers directly to the claimant's solicitor's home address. The same solicitor advised the court that my defence papers had not been received, therefore I was out of time.
Following sound advice from several PH posters, including yourself, I decided on taking the mediation route. I found the mediation hearing rather stressful, and the occasion rather impaired my judgment, whilst a settlement was reached, the solicitor imposed a non disclosure/discussion clause in the settlement agreement, the same that I did not pick up on.
A few weeks after the above hearing, I received via Royal Mail my letter, defence papers to the claimant's solicitor, with the envelope marked "Return to Sender", the side of the envelope sliced open, the same allowing a person/s to read the contents etc.
Possibly you will arrive at that same conclusion that I did.
Shortly afterwards the SRA restricted the solicitor from acting or managing client's monies etc. etc., with the solicitor, although still in practice, being made bankrupt.
Marty Funkhouser said:
I sent it recorded delivery and they refused to accept it.
As has been said. You only need to send the letter. If they do not receive it that is of no consequence to building your case.So send the letter by normal 2nd class mail to their registered office if they have one. If not to the address that you know they are at. You can if you want, ask for a proof of posting from the PO. But it is not a requirement. You have then done what is legally required.
If you hear nothing you can then decide if you want to proceed with a claim. You must have put in your letter that if you do not hear from them you will/may issue proceedings. You should also have put in the letter what your claim is for. It's known as the 'letter before action'LBA.
Before you start MCOL...
You will have to consider how much money is involved AND if the claim is successful can you get the money from the defendant.
When defendants ignoer letters it can be a good thing as they may throw Court papers away also. In which case you win by default.
kestral said:
If they do not receive it that is of no consequence to building your case.
When defendants ignoer letters it can be a good thing as they may throw Court papers away also. In which case you win by default.
I'm not a legal expert, and can only speak from personal experience.When defendants ignoer letters it can be a good thing as they may throw Court papers away also. In which case you win by default.
We won a judgement via MCOL. The other side applied to have it set aside on the basis that they'd not received any documentation.
We went to this hearing, and yes the judgement was set aside on the basis that they'd not seen any of the papers.
(I got the buggers in the end though
)They'll be MCS registered so make a complaint through MCS here https://mcscertified.com/complaints-compliance/
2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:
I'm not a legal expert, and can only speak from personal experience.
We won a judgement via MCOL. The other side applied to have it set aside on the basis that they'd not received any documentation.
We went to this hearing, and yes the judgement was set aside on the basis that they'd not seen any of the papers.
(I got the buggers in the end though)
Yes that's correct 'The papers' being the County Court documents. I doubt it was the LBA. A case can still and will proceed even if the defendant say's they have not received it. All that counts is it was sent before proceedings. It's covered under the pre action protocols.We won a judgement via MCOL. The other side applied to have it set aside on the basis that they'd not received any documentation.
We went to this hearing, and yes the judgement was set aside on the basis that they'd not seen any of the papers.
(I got the buggers in the end though
)If the defendant has not received the County Court documents it is quite proper that the case should be set aside. That only means it starts over again when they receive the reissued papers.
"I got the buggers in the end"
kestral said:
As has been said. You only need to send the letter. If they do not receive it that is of no consequence to building your case.
So send the letter by normal 2nd class mail to their registered office if they have one. If not to the address that you know they are at. You can if you want, ask for a proof of posting from the PO. But it is not a requirement. You have then done what is legally required.
If you hear nothing you can then decide if you want to proceed with a claim. You must have put in your letter that if you do not hear from them you will/may issue proceedings. You should also have put in the letter what your claim is for. It's known as the 'letter before action'LBA.
Before you start MCOL...
You will have to consider how much money is involved AND if the claim is successful can you get the money from the defendant.
When defendants ignoer letters it can be a good thing as they may throw Court papers away also. In which case you win by default.
So send the letter by normal 2nd class mail to their registered office if they have one. If not to the address that you know they are at. You can if you want, ask for a proof of posting from the PO. But it is not a requirement. You have then done what is legally required.
If you hear nothing you can then decide if you want to proceed with a claim. You must have put in your letter that if you do not hear from them you will/may issue proceedings. You should also have put in the letter what your claim is for. It's known as the 'letter before action'LBA.
Before you start MCOL...
You will have to consider how much money is involved AND if the claim is successful can you get the money from the defendant.
When defendants ignoer letters it can be a good thing as they may throw Court papers away also. In which case you win by default.
Ignore this^ guy.
I normally default to recorded delivery (so I *know* they got the letter) but if that bounces back then I fall back to simply sending via normal mail, as I'm aware of this trick!
Still doesn't stop someone from trying to get a set aside for a default claim by not having received the paperwork, as the court tends to err on the side of Royal Mail being useless and gives people a chance to sort things.
Still doesn't stop someone from trying to get a set aside for a default claim by not having received the paperwork, as the court tends to err on the side of Royal Mail being useless and gives people a chance to sort things.
Wings said:
Good to see you back.
Recently acting as a defendant, I submitted my defence papers directly to the claimant's solicitor's home address. The same solicitor advised the court that my defence papers had not been received, therefore I was out of time.
Following sound advice from several PH posters, including yourself, I decided on taking the mediation route. I found the mediation hearing rather stressful, and the occasion rather impaired my judgment, whilst a settlement was reached, the solicitor imposed a non disclosure/discussion clause in the settlement agreement, the same that I did not pick up on.
A few weeks after the above hearing, I received via Royal Mail my letter, defence papers to the claimant's solicitor, with the envelope marked "Return to Sender", the side of the envelope sliced open, the same allowing a person/s to read the contents etc.
Possibly you will arrive at that same conclusion that I did.
Shortly afterwards the SRA restricted the solicitor from acting or managing client's monies etc. etc., with the solicitor, although still in practice, being made bankrupt.
CSB, but you either agreed a non disclosure clause, or you didn't. An agreement is not imposed. As for serving papers at the home address of an opposing party's lawyer, what was that all about? Recently acting as a defendant, I submitted my defence papers directly to the claimant's solicitor's home address. The same solicitor advised the court that my defence papers had not been received, therefore I was out of time.
Following sound advice from several PH posters, including yourself, I decided on taking the mediation route. I found the mediation hearing rather stressful, and the occasion rather impaired my judgment, whilst a settlement was reached, the solicitor imposed a non disclosure/discussion clause in the settlement agreement, the same that I did not pick up on.
A few weeks after the above hearing, I received via Royal Mail my letter, defence papers to the claimant's solicitor, with the envelope marked "Return to Sender", the side of the envelope sliced open, the same allowing a person/s to read the contents etc.
Possibly you will arrive at that same conclusion that I did.
Shortly afterwards the SRA restricted the solicitor from acting or managing client's monies etc. etc., with the solicitor, although still in practice, being made bankrupt.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff