How do I actually go about suing someone?
Discussion
This may seem like a simple question but I guess the tag line here is "in an economical way".
Having had no legal issues for years I now have two:
The first is a small matter of just £400 that is owed to my business for what I believe to be a breach of contract. This is Small Claims Court territory, right? How do I go about filing a claim? I have no idea. Is it difficult? Any tales of experience here would be welcome.
The other matter is one for about £8,000 in a dispute with a retailer over an item purchased that I don't believe is "of merchantable quality" (or whatever the official term is). This is larger than Small Claims Court but is it large enough to warrant getting a solicitor on the case? By the time you've paid them their hourly rate for a few hours - and the rest is well-earned, I'm sure, I'm not disputing that - you have to wonder if it will be economical on a case that you may/may not win. Am I throwing good money after bad? I'm happy to throw some money at trying to right this but I guess I'd like to know the most sensible way to go about this.
Can anyone with experience of this kind of litigation advise please? Thank you.
Having had no legal issues for years I now have two:
The first is a small matter of just £400 that is owed to my business for what I believe to be a breach of contract. This is Small Claims Court territory, right? How do I go about filing a claim? I have no idea. Is it difficult? Any tales of experience here would be welcome.
The other matter is one for about £8,000 in a dispute with a retailer over an item purchased that I don't believe is "of merchantable quality" (or whatever the official term is). This is larger than Small Claims Court but is it large enough to warrant getting a solicitor on the case? By the time you've paid them their hourly rate for a few hours - and the rest is well-earned, I'm sure, I'm not disputing that - you have to wonder if it will be economical on a case that you may/may not win. Am I throwing good money after bad? I'm happy to throw some money at trying to right this but I guess I'd like to know the most sensible way to go about this.
Can anyone with experience of this kind of litigation advise please? Thank you.
First, make quite sure you have a case and can prove it - in other words that you have a decent chance of winning. What you may view as 'wrong' might in fact be legally acceptable.
On the £400, if you still wish to engage in combat, you can either obtain the relevant forms from your local court or do it online: https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome The small claims process is a simple step-by-step procudeure designed for laymen. It's not hard BUT you must do everything correctly. Read every instruction and follow it. Clarity and proveable facts are your friends, not pages of 'he said I said' waffle.
On the £8,000, this sounds like a 'SOGA' matter (ie 'repair, replace, refund'). Whilst you may want the money back, the retailer may not be obliged to do so. Rather than blow money on a solicitor, show the details to CAB or call Trading Standards to see where you stand. Both are free.
So, get your ducks in a line before doing anything. Good luck.
On the £400, if you still wish to engage in combat, you can either obtain the relevant forms from your local court or do it online: https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome The small claims process is a simple step-by-step procudeure designed for laymen. It's not hard BUT you must do everything correctly. Read every instruction and follow it. Clarity and proveable facts are your friends, not pages of 'he said I said' waffle.
On the £8,000, this sounds like a 'SOGA' matter (ie 'repair, replace, refund'). Whilst you may want the money back, the retailer may not be obliged to do so. Rather than blow money on a solicitor, show the details to CAB or call Trading Standards to see where you stand. Both are free.
So, get your ducks in a line before doing anything. Good luck.
for £400 you have to really make sure that you have a cast iron guarantee that you will win (e.g. client agreeing that money is owed for breach of contract etc.)
without it you will rack up more in costs and time than you get back...
never go into suing as retribution - so so when it is the best non-emotive / commercial way of getting the maximum cash back
without it you will rack up more in costs and time than you get back...
never go into suing as retribution - so so when it is the best non-emotive / commercial way of getting the maximum cash back
akirk said:
for £400 you have to really make sure that you have a cast iron guarantee that you will win (e.g. client agreeing that money is owed for breach of contract etc.)
without it you will rack up more in costs and time than you get back...
MCOL is £35 for a £400 claim. https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/cour...without it you will rack up more in costs and time than you get back...
But I agree the OP must be sure he has a good case, and be prepared to fight if the defendant files a defence.
Folks,
I appreciate the advice - thank you.
To clarify a few of the points you have raised:
- No, neither one is an emotive matter for me. It's just business. I feel I have been harshly treated and would like an independent view on this i.e. a judge) and am prepared to pay for it to put my mind at ease if nothing else but there are limits to my level of unrest about these matters an therefore what I will pay.
- Am I certain of my position? No. Who ever can be? The small case is a Letting agent who - on verbal contract - said fees would be £x but when they finally got a tenant, they made a lot of mistakes with the letting, went against instructions I had verbally issued then and then charged 2 x £x. Fair enough it comes down to 'he said I said' but should I just roll over and because they took the money from the tenant's first month's rent accept the old maxim of "possession is 9/10ths of the law" apply here? There is other evidence to suggest this agent acted in an unprofessional way and my calculated view is a judge will believe me over them for this reason. While no one can ever be sure, am I wildly mistaken or misguided here?
- The larger issue is an item I purchased that arrived, I didn't like it and returned it. They then declined to give a refund because of marks they found on the item that one can only see with a magnifying glass. I contend the marks were always there but were so small an unnoticeable that I didn't bother mentioning them when the item arrived (true). Cue a long standoff and when they finally declined my entreaties and returned the item to me there was further damage done to it - much more noticeable - that they had never recorded in the first instance (i.e. it must've happened while they held the item). Yes, this is a less-clear situation but, again, should I roll over and just allow the fact that they have my money to determine that I take no action here when I think I have a justifiable case?
If the legal system is so inaccessible that a claim of £8,000 is not worth pursuing then isn't there a worry that all retailers could behave callously towards their customers knowing that the cost of seeking redress is beyond only the wealthiest and most stubborn customers? Surely it can't only be 'cast iron' cases that are worth putting forward. Mustn't there be an achievable arbiter of the grey areas into which most disputes will fall? There must be a better way and hence my post on this board.
I appreciate the advice - thank you.
To clarify a few of the points you have raised:
- No, neither one is an emotive matter for me. It's just business. I feel I have been harshly treated and would like an independent view on this i.e. a judge) and am prepared to pay for it to put my mind at ease if nothing else but there are limits to my level of unrest about these matters an therefore what I will pay.
- Am I certain of my position? No. Who ever can be? The small case is a Letting agent who - on verbal contract - said fees would be £x but when they finally got a tenant, they made a lot of mistakes with the letting, went against instructions I had verbally issued then and then charged 2 x £x. Fair enough it comes down to 'he said I said' but should I just roll over and because they took the money from the tenant's first month's rent accept the old maxim of "possession is 9/10ths of the law" apply here? There is other evidence to suggest this agent acted in an unprofessional way and my calculated view is a judge will believe me over them for this reason. While no one can ever be sure, am I wildly mistaken or misguided here?
- The larger issue is an item I purchased that arrived, I didn't like it and returned it. They then declined to give a refund because of marks they found on the item that one can only see with a magnifying glass. I contend the marks were always there but were so small an unnoticeable that I didn't bother mentioning them when the item arrived (true). Cue a long standoff and when they finally declined my entreaties and returned the item to me there was further damage done to it - much more noticeable - that they had never recorded in the first instance (i.e. it must've happened while they held the item). Yes, this is a less-clear situation but, again, should I roll over and just allow the fact that they have my money to determine that I take no action here when I think I have a justifiable case?
If the legal system is so inaccessible that a claim of £8,000 is not worth pursuing then isn't there a worry that all retailers could behave callously towards their customers knowing that the cost of seeking redress is beyond only the wealthiest and most stubborn customers? Surely it can't only be 'cast iron' cases that are worth putting forward. Mustn't there be an achievable arbiter of the grey areas into which most disputes will fall? There must be a better way and hence my post on this board.
Teh £400 is as you say he said she said. I would chalk it up to experience to always get your agreements in writing.
The £8000 item, given you still have it, and have no photos presumably of it's condition before you returned it first time. What is it worth if you sold it privately? Let's say it's worth £7000. Then you are really fighting over £1000 not £8000.
The £8000 item, given you still have it, and have no photos presumably of it's condition before you returned it first time. What is it worth if you sold it privately? Let's say it's worth £7000. Then you are really fighting over £1000 not £8000.
Aquarius909 said:
- No, neither one is an emotive matter for me. It's just business. I feel I have been harshly treated and would like an independent view on this i.e. a judge) and am prepared to pay for it to put my mind at ease if nothing else but there are limits to my level of unrest about these matters an therefore what I will pay.
Life is not always fair. Someone can treat you unfairly but it doesn't mean they're breaking any law. Courts enforce laws not fairness.Aquarius909 said:
Am I certain of my position? No. Who ever can be? The small case is a Letting agent who - on verbal contract - said fees would be £x but when they finally got a tenant, they made a lot of mistakes with the letting, went against instructions I had verbally issued then and then charged 2 x £x. Fair enough it comes down to 'he said I said' but should I just roll over and because they took the money from the tenant's first month's rent accept the old maxim of "possession is 9/10ths of the law" apply here? There is other evidence to suggest this agent acted in an unprofessional way and my calculated view is a judge will believe me over them for this reason. While no one can ever be sure, am I wildly mistaken or misguided here?
If no one can ever be sure, neither can the judge. There is no firm information on which to make a judgement. I'm surprised so much of a business contract would be only verbal, especially fees. No T&Cs? If you haven't got things in writing you haven't got a case.You could invest £35 as an experiment, and it might rattle them a bit and prompt a concession before any hearing, but I can't see that you'd win. The likely outcome IMHO is that the judge would dismiss the case due to lack of evidence.
Aquarius909 said:
The larger issue is an item I purchased that arrived, I didn't like it and returned it. They then declined to give a refund because of marks they found on the item that one can only see with a magnifying glass. I contend the marks were always there but were so small an unnoticeable that I didn't bother mentioning them when the item arrived (true). Cue a long standoff and when they finally declined my entreaties and returned the item to me there was further damage done to it - much more noticeable - that they had never recorded in the first instance (i.e. it must've happened while they held the item). Yes, this is a less-clear situation but, again, should I roll over and just allow the fact that they have my money to determine that I take no action here when I think I have a justifiable case?
As before, nothing can be proved. It's certainly not worth going legal with this one. You could perhaps fire a solicitor's letter at them to make you feel better but if they bin it, don't be surprised. Aquarius909 said:
If the legal system is so inaccessible that a claim of £8,000 is not worth pursuing then isn't there a worry that all retailers could behave callously towards their customers knowing that the cost of seeking redress is beyond only the wealthiest and most stubborn customers? Surely it can't only be 'cast iron' cases that are worth putting forward. Mustn't there be an achievable arbiter of the grey areas into which most disputes will fall? There must be a better way and hence my post on this board.
Every argument has two sides and no-one can make a valid judgement if the debate is on a 'you said/I said' basis. In both cases perhaps you were too trusting, expecting the other side to be honest. In any contract never leave things open to chance, put it in writing.Above small claims level the legal process is expensive because legal professionals are expensive. If there was a system of free jurisdiction for every dispute, it would instantly be clogged with cases such as yours. 'You damaged my bookcase' 'No we didn't'. Everybody would be lining up to have a free pop at someone. How can there be any resolution to that?
NB As a bit of light homework, whilst I know this programme is for entertainment, it does give you a good idea of how judges work - Judge Rinder.
MCOL is a fairly simple website to navigate - go and have a look.
Have a read here https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-rights/l...
As Mr Overheads has said, your claim for the £8,000, based on what you say, will not be for the full amount in any event. However, even if it is, its still under the £10k small claims track ceiling. The issue fee will be greater than the £400 claim but the principles little different.
A small claims track claim has its positives and negatives for you. Solicitors costs are likely to be unrecoverable so if you were to require assistance the costs would have to come out of what you recover (if anything at all). On the other hand, you don't face risk of considerable costs exposure to a Defendant if you bring an unmeritorious claim (caveat applies in that costs CAN be awarded if the Court considers you have behaved unreasonably - see CPR 27.14 https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/... In my experience, the Court is very reluctant to make such an Order against a litigant in person unless it is very clear cut.
Have a read here https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-rights/l...
As Mr Overheads has said, your claim for the £8,000, based on what you say, will not be for the full amount in any event. However, even if it is, its still under the £10k small claims track ceiling. The issue fee will be greater than the £400 claim but the principles little different.
A small claims track claim has its positives and negatives for you. Solicitors costs are likely to be unrecoverable so if you were to require assistance the costs would have to come out of what you recover (if anything at all). On the other hand, you don't face risk of considerable costs exposure to a Defendant if you bring an unmeritorious claim (caveat applies in that costs CAN be awarded if the Court considers you have behaved unreasonably - see CPR 27.14 https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/... In my experience, the Court is very reluctant to make such an Order against a litigant in person unless it is very clear cut.
Aquarius909 said:
- The larger issue is an item I purchased that arrived, I didn't like it and returned it.
Are you sure you had the right to return it and get all your money back? There are some distance selling regs that allow for refunds within certain time periods and the seller may have a returns policy that you can rely on contractually but if it is discretionary then you should be aware that deciding that you don't like something is not necessarily enough reason to expect a refund.
nikaiyo2 said:
Would the £8000 claim not be on the multi track (I think that's what it's called) opening the OP to potential unlimited costs if he fails?
No. It wouldn't even be on the fast track if it's £8k in money only. Small claims track limit is £10k in a bog standard money claim. Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff