Small Claims Court
Discussion
The Judge must have been having a moment, as even 25 years ago allowing the brother of a party to give expert evidence was unacceptable.
The Court does not pre approve an expert witness, but should attach zero weight to an expert who lacks independence, or who lacks relevant expertise.
The Court does not pre approve an expert witness, but should attach zero weight to an expert who lacks independence, or who lacks relevant expertise.
twokcc said:
Jazzer said:
Good news!!
The other party offered to settle as soon as I indicated that I was proceeding to court.
I declined the offer, but they have now settled for the full amount, including my costs.
I did not want to go into detail on here, for fear of revealing information that could potentially be used against me.
Thank you all for your help.
Be wary, had this in the past relating to a car, only saying that as it is a car forum. Was advised to turn up at court so that agreement to settlement could be recorded by court. The other party offered to settle as soon as I indicated that I was proceeding to court.
I declined the offer, but they have now settled for the full amount, including my costs.
I did not want to go into detail on here, for fear of revealing information that could potentially be used against me.
Thank you all for your help.
The car dealer sent a solicitor and only short hearing BUT my understanding is that enforcement is possible if outcome has been recorder by the court with specific term in which payment has to be made
An agreement just between two parties is just that and if they don't pay you're back into the situation of having to start claim again. Hopefully you will have written evidence that they agreed to but they could change their mind.
Dealer paid up but on last day of agreed term.
Edit Doh missed the bit saying already paid in full
Edited by twokcc on Sunday 8th December 11:03
Breadvan72 said:
The Court does not pre approve an expert witness.
It absolutely does....At a prelim hearing it will appoint an expert witness (hopefully accepted by both parties) agree their cost and set out a timeline for them to report to the court ahead of the final hearing.
In my case there were several recommendations made to the judge and he picked one - they then reported to the court by the required date (not required to attend the hearing ) and the judge went with their findings
The other side picked up the expert costs as they lost the case - it too was clear cut and they were chancers but they did go all the way
Breadvan72 said:
The Judge must have been having a moment, as even 25 years ago allowing the brother of a party to give expert evidence was unacceptable.
The Court does not pre approve an expert witness, but should attach zero weight to an expert who lacks independence, or who lacks relevant expertise.
I don't remember if she even asked!The Court does not pre approve an expert witness, but should attach zero weight to an expert who lacks independence, or who lacks relevant expertise.
In the end I wasn't needed so no harm.
Tyre Tread said:
KungFuPanda said:
If it’s a small claim, just let the matter proceed until you receive full payment. Fast track, get a Consent/Tomlin Order Dewan up between the parties.
He's received full payment as he says in is earlier post.KungFuPanda said:
Tyre Tread said:
KungFuPanda said:
If it’s a small claim, just let the matter proceed until you receive full payment. Fast track, get a Consent/Tomlin Order Dewan up between the parties.
He's received full payment as he says in is earlier post.In which case I'd definitely want a Tomlin order agreed if the offer was on the steps of the Court.
Tyre Tread said:
KungFuPanda said:
Tyre Tread said:
KungFuPanda said:
If it’s a small claim, just let the matter proceed until you receive full payment. Fast track, get a Consent/Tomlin Order Dewan up between the parties.
He's received full payment as he says in is earlier post.In which case I'd definitely want a Tomlin order agreed if the offer was on the steps of the Court.
Edited by KungFuPanda on Sunday 8th December 18:25
Willhire89 said:
It absolutely does....
At a prelim hearing it will appoint an expert witness (hopefully accepted by both parties) agree their cost and set out a timeline for them to report to the court ahead of the final hearing.
In my case there were several recommendations made to the judge and he picked one - they then reported to the court by the required date (not required to attend the hearing ) and the judge went with their findings
The other side picked up the expert costs as they lost the case - it too was clear cut and they were chancers but they did go all the way
I am in a good mood so I shall not be rude to you. It appears that you are referring to the relatively rarely used single expert procedure. In most cases, especially high value ones, where expert evidence is deployed, each party calls one or more expert witnesses. The court must grant permission for this, but does not vet the experts in advance. You have I assume done one case involving expert evidence. One case is a slender basis from which to extrapolate general statements. At a prelim hearing it will appoint an expert witness (hopefully accepted by both parties) agree their cost and set out a timeline for them to report to the court ahead of the final hearing.
In my case there were several recommendations made to the judge and he picked one - they then reported to the court by the required date (not required to attend the hearing ) and the judge went with their findings
The other side picked up the expert costs as they lost the case - it too was clear cut and they were chancers but they did go all the way
I’m not sure how this thread has got to this point, but for the record.....
I made excellent use of Kestral’s advice, provoking the defendant into payment of my claim in full, without court proceedings.
The sum due to me was paid into my account at 1417 hours on Friday.
Kestral has a wee something coming his way.
The defendant paid up in the hope of avoiding further embarrassing coverage on national TV, although that may well happen anyway.
So it’s all good.
Breadbin, please do bear in mind, I have been wronged significantly here, so the outcome is just lovely, be happy for me!👍
I made excellent use of Kestral’s advice, provoking the defendant into payment of my claim in full, without court proceedings.
The sum due to me was paid into my account at 1417 hours on Friday.
Kestral has a wee something coming his way.
The defendant paid up in the hope of avoiding further embarrassing coverage on national TV, although that may well happen anyway.
So it’s all good.
Breadbin, please do bear in mind, I have been wronged significantly here, so the outcome is just lovely, be happy for me!👍
Edited by Jazzer on Sunday 8th December 20:19
Breadvan72 said:
Willhire89 said:
It absolutely does....
At a prelim hearing it will appoint an expert witness (hopefully accepted by both parties) agree their cost and set out a timeline for them to report to the court ahead of the final hearing.
In my case there were several recommendations made to the judge and he picked one - they then reported to the court by the required date (not required to attend the hearing ) and the judge went with their findings
The other side picked up the expert costs as they lost the case - it too was clear cut and they were chancers but they did go all the way
I am in a good mood so I shall not be rude to you. It appears that you are referring to the relatively rarely used single expert procedure. In most cases, especially high value ones, where expert evidence is deployed, each party calls one or more expert witnesses. The court must grant permission for this, but does not vet the experts in advance. You have I assume done one case involving expert evidence. One case is a slender basis from which to extrapolate general statements. At a prelim hearing it will appoint an expert witness (hopefully accepted by both parties) agree their cost and set out a timeline for them to report to the court ahead of the final hearing.
In my case there were several recommendations made to the judge and he picked one - they then reported to the court by the required date (not required to attend the hearing ) and the judge went with their findings
The other side picked up the expert costs as they lost the case - it too was clear cut and they were chancers but they did go all the way
Since you never get the same judge for each CC hearing (and they all have slightly different approaches) they all had in mind for one independent expert.
Ahead of issuing proceedings I had two reports done - one from a metallurgist and the other from a race engineer and these were both ignored by the judge despite being exactly in line with what the court appointed expert later reported.
Obvs I'm special
Willhire89 said:
I can only report on what actually happened in the real world with the standard MCOL track.
Since you never get the same judge for each CC hearing (and they all have slightly different approaches) they all had in mind for one independent expert.
Ahead of issuing proceedings I had two reports done - one from a metallurgist and the other from a race engineer and these were both ignored by the judge despite being exactly in line with what the court appointed expert later reported.
Obvs I'm special
You are confusing your experience in one case with a general rule. That is very PH. Since you never get the same judge for each CC hearing (and they all have slightly different approaches) they all had in mind for one independent expert.
Ahead of issuing proceedings I had two reports done - one from a metallurgist and the other from a race engineer and these were both ignored by the judge despite being exactly in line with what the court appointed expert later reported.
Obvs I'm special
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff