Small Claims Advice...
Discussion
northwest monkey said:
No worries
One of the guys in this link is my next door neighbour.
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/10177405...
Within months, he was doing exactly the same thing (even an incredibly similar name) but with the mother in law as the director and him as the H&S manager. Incidentally, the mother in law is over 80...
Nothing to do with my tale of woe, but interesting all the same!
Didn't realise that a ltd company protection could be removed after the event. Obviously in this case it it tax related (even I know never to fOne of the guys in this link is my next door neighbour.
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/10177405...
Within months, he was doing exactly the same thing (even an incredibly similar name) but with the mother in law as the director and him as the H&S manager. Incidentally, the mother in law is over 80...
Nothing to do with my tale of woe, but interesting all the same!
k with the tax man), I imagine if this had been about other debts (suppliers etc) then the ltd co protection would still have applied. 
Markbarry1977 said:
northwest monkey said:
No worries
One of the guys in this link is my next door neighbour.
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/10177405...
Within months, he was doing exactly the same thing (even an incredibly similar name) but with the mother in law as the director and him as the H&S manager. Incidentally, the mother in law is over 80...
Nothing to do with my tale of woe, but interesting all the same!
Didn't realise that a ltd company protection could be removed after the event. Obviously in this case it it tax related (even I know never to fOne of the guys in this link is my next door neighbour.
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/10177405...
Within months, he was doing exactly the same thing (even an incredibly similar name) but with the mother in law as the director and him as the H&S manager. Incidentally, the mother in law is over 80...
Nothing to do with my tale of woe, but interesting all the same!
k with the tax man), I imagine if this had been about other debts (suppliers etc) then the ltd co protection would still have applied. So one scenario could possibly be (though I haven't thought this through in too much detail) is where someone sets up a business, racks up loads of debt, business fails, then the chap goes up and sets an identical business with identical customers under another name.
I would say that the courts are very protective of limited liability and it will only be avoided where there is obvious wrongdoing.
janesmith1950 said:
Did the set aside application (unsurprisingly) fail?
Wasn't that unsurprising to me (I was stting myself to be honest!), but yes.The judge asked they why they didn't respond in March, and they said it was because they didn't have a pen at the last hearing so didn't write anything down. She asked them why they didn't contact the court until the end of April & they didn't really give an answer. To say the judge was unimpressed is an understatement.
She then checked their application against a legal thing (something 3.9) and there are 3 things to consider when looking at this application. Was their breach serious (yes), did their breach impact other court users (yes) and something else (yes). For that reason she dismissed their application and lifted the stay.
Then it got quite funny. They had come prepared with a load of bumf about how skint they are and that they wanted the judge to set up a payment plan so that could stop the bailiffs coming round. The judge said she was very sorry, but as it had been transferred to High Court, it was nothing to do with her and that they had to deal with the bailiffs. At that point, they stormed out and slammed the door
:After doing a bit of digging last night, there is a bit more to this, but I'll update that later. It's very interesting - honest!
Massive, massive thanks though to everyone that's given advice - this thread and my previous ones.
Putting everything in chronological order definitely helped as the judge referred to that document a couple of times.
northwest monkey said:
She has plastered the "FSB" logo all over her letter - can I find out if she is a member of the FSB?
.https://www.fsb.org.uk/about-us/company-informatio...
https://www.fsb.org.uk/media-centre/latest-news/20...
E-mail the relevant Regional Chairman.
https://www.fsb.org.uk/contact-us#tab-three
There is no good reason for the FSB not to disclose whether the individual and/or the company is a member.
Your reason, if asked, is that you concerned that the logo is being used when there is no entilement to do so and thereby misleading the public.
If they start quoting the DPA at you refer them to Section 35(2).
That said, membership of the FSB is no big deal. Its just means somebody had paid a £172.50 membership fee to receive certain benefits.
It is no guarantee of fitness for purpose or the probity of the individual/s involved.
northwest monkey said:
She then checked their application against a legal thing (something 3.9) and there are 3 things to consider when looking at this application. Was their breach serious (yes), did their breach impact other court users (yes) and something else (yes). For that reason she dismissed their application and lifted the stay.
Rules and Practice Directions Part 3 Case Management Powers. See 3.8 Sanctions and 3.9 Relief.northwest monkey said:
After doing a bit of digging last night, there is a bit more to this, but I'll update that later. It's very interesting - honest!
Bookmarked! 
xjay1337 said:
And yet, there's no update... just tell the story FFS.
Sorry - was busy yesterday!As I never got a receipt for the car, I did the small claims against the director of the company I bought the car from - not the company itself. My original judgment in December was against the director. In March at the set-aside, she asked for her name to be taken off, and the claim put in the company name. The judge added the company on, but more importantly, left her on. From the way she (and her partner) behaved at the hearing in March, I think they thought she'd been removed and the case purely now in the name of the company.
In late April, she applied to companies house for the company to be struck off - despite knowing there was legal action pending against the company. This sort of explains why she never bothered responding to the court order asking for a response by the 31st March as she thought it was no longer in her name, just the company name.
Once she got the judgment against her, that's when she applied for a 2nd set-aside which was thrown out this week.
She's now filled in an N245 form claiming poverty and also that her partner doesn't work (despite having 3 cars for sale on AT & Gumtree) and asking to pay in instalments. I've rejected the offer and replied to the court with details of all the cars they have for sale (nearly £20k worth).
And I've also reported her to Companies House for applying to strike off a company despite knowing of legal proceedings. Looks like she's pissed someone else off as well though as her application to strike out has already been suspended...
Daft thing is, if she'd gone ahead with mediation last year, I would have taken £1k & got on with my life. It's not really about the money now - it's more personal than that for all the pissing about that's been involved.
OP, to whom precisely did you make payment for the car and how?
My bet is that her other half is the real trader, not her. Hiding behind her skirts in the hope of escaping any comeback.
If he is in reality running the show that makes him a shadow director.
The High Court has held that such a person has fiduciary duties to the company.
If you have any factual evidence of his involvement report that to Companies House as well.
It will also be of interest to the Insolvency Service and/or a liquidator if an application for winding up is successful.
If there was a party who opposed the extant application they may know something you don't.
My bet is that her other half is the real trader, not her. Hiding behind her skirts in the hope of escaping any comeback.
If he is in reality running the show that makes him a shadow director.
The High Court has held that such a person has fiduciary duties to the company.
If you have any factual evidence of his involvement report that to Companies House as well.
It will also be of interest to the Insolvency Service and/or a liquidator if an application for winding up is successful.
If there was a party who opposed the extant application they may know something you don't.
Red Devil said:
OP, to whom precisely did you make payment for the car and how?
The bloke - only saw his Mrs briefly. Paid half cash and half my old car.Red Devil said:
My bet is that her other half is the real trader, not her. Hiding behind her skirts in the hope of escaping any comeback.
If he is in reality running the show that makes him a shadow director.
The High Court has held that such a person has fiduciary duties to the company.
I wouldn't bet against you... I've mentioned to Companies House that she's applying to wind up her car sales business from her home address yet he has just set one up from her home address.If he is in reality running the show that makes him a shadow director.
The High Court has held that such a person has fiduciary duties to the company.
Red Devil said:
If you have any factual evidence of his involvement report that to Companies House as well.
It will also be of interest to the Insolvency Service and/or a liquidator if an application for winding up is successful.
If there was a party who opposed the extant application they may know something you don't.
I'd love to find out who the other party was who has opposed it but I wouldn't have a clue how to do that. Knowing that they buy cars from a London auction (I found an advert on Shiply from the trader asking for a price for 3 cars to be moved up North), I imagine it's probably someone like that who has given them a line of credit.It will also be of interest to the Insolvency Service and/or a liquidator if an application for winding up is successful.
If there was a party who opposed the extant application they may know something you don't.
If nothing else, I just really want to, for want of a better phrase, f
k their st up for the next few years. If I see any money, it's a bonus, but I'll be delighted knowing that they can't get credit without immense difficulties for something they could and should have sorted very easily.popeyewhite said:
Remarkable perseverance, well done. I've done the Small Claims thing and won, but it was very straightforward and only for £150.
Likewise, same with me!OP - please keep us updated, a very interesting read & story. I say go for it, about time Karma caught up with some people. Massive respect for your patience & determination, well done.
Well, after approximately 18 months, several appearances in court, countless emails, letters and phone calls to courts, posts on here, I've got my money (just over £2,500).
Still not sure if the situation is over as the defendant paid me direct rather than the bailiff - the bailiffs went round (again) and then I received a payment - not quite sure what's going on yet but I'm sure I'll find out soon enough!
I'll post an abridged version of what happened -as it may help others. To get to this stage it's not been as easy as "just take the dealer to Small Claims" as some people make out...
Still not sure if the situation is over as the defendant paid me direct rather than the bailiff - the bailiffs went round (again) and then I received a payment - not quite sure what's going on yet but I'm sure I'll find out soon enough!
I'll post an abridged version of what happened -as it may help others. To get to this stage it's not been as easy as "just take the dealer to Small Claims" as some people make out...
northwest monkey said:
Well, after approximately 18 months, several appearances in court, countless emails, letters and phone calls to courts, posts on here, I've got my money (just over £2,500).
Still not sure if the situation is over as the defendant paid me direct rather than the bailiff - the bailiffs went round (again) and then I received a payment - not quite sure what's going on yet but I'm sure I'll find out soon enough!
I'll post an abridged version of what happened -as it may help others. To get to this stage it's not been as easy as "just take the dealer to Small Claims" as some people make out...
Fantastic news, well done OP on the perseverance! Always nice to have an ending like this, especially when the original thread gets updated! Still not sure if the situation is over as the defendant paid me direct rather than the bailiff - the bailiffs went round (again) and then I received a payment - not quite sure what's going on yet but I'm sure I'll find out soon enough!
I'll post an abridged version of what happened -as it may help others. To get to this stage it's not been as easy as "just take the dealer to Small Claims" as some people make out...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff