Hi,

Long story which I won't go into but:

-I have a court claim issued against my company, with the company name spelled incorrectly and not identified as "ltd". I.e. our name is ABC DEF LTD, and the claim is against "ABCDEF".

-Supporting paperwork attached to the claim is a pile of invoices issued by, according to the invoices, "XYZ". This name is not a limited company, and it's not identified on the invoices as "ABC T/A XYZ". There is no person's name on the invoices. The claim is then issued only in the name of the individual, not the company. So on the face of it there is no link between the invoices and the claimant.

It would not be possible to argue that we don't know the identity of the claimant - it was a one man band company so we obviously dealt with the guy in question.

However the claim is spurious at best and while we can fully defend it, a strike out or similar based on the above would be a lot more straightforward.

Lawyers are trying to say it's impossible to know if any of the above will help, and basically it will cost several 000 to work it out. This is money I can't afford to waste though would be delighted to pay a solicitor something on that order if they can kill this off straightforwardly for us. Since filing the statute of limitations has passed so it cannot be refiled.

Appreciate any advice,

Thank you.

I will try and find someone to help, please be aware that we are a little thin on the ground due to the Easter Holidays..

What is the date of issue of the claim, you will find this top right hand corner of the claim form

I have until the 30th to file a defence or follow whatever course of action we end up doing. Sorry it's not very long - it's been batted around the lawyers for a little while now.

Thanks for your kind offer - any help appreciated.

Since filing the statute of limitations has passed so it cannot be refiled.

What do you mean? That the debt they are trying to issue a claim on is SB?

It is now statute barred but wasn't at the date of court filing. So if we manage to get this dismissed based on the info in my first post, it can't be filed again. Does that make sense?

Yep. I was just getting it straight in my head. Why has he took so long for the claim?

Part of the long story - like I said we will defend in full if we need to. In fact the claim is from even longer ago, but they are trying to treat a letter sent in 2008 as the cause of action rather than the original invoices.

We don't owe the money but it's going to be an expensive job proving it, hence why I'm so keen to get rid of it quickly on a technicality.

What was in the letter dated 2008 that they are trying to rely on ?

Open to interpretation. They say a clear admission of liability, we say a very non specific and not relevant discussion. It's not clear enough to just get it dismissed though.

Can you just confirm if the claim has been issued in the - Name of the company (even though it was incorrect/wrong) or the name of the individual, please

Do you mean the claimant or defendant?

The defendant is the incorrect name of the company.

The claimant is the name of the individual, which is not mentioned anywhere on the invoices in question.

As long as the defendant's name and address is correct, it apparently doesnt make any difference whose name is on the invoice or named as claimant.

Have a read of http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2010/1011.html and http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2007/701.html.

Basically, I think the wrong defendant name is OK. This is a naming mistake rather than an identity mistake.

I think there might be a strike-out application worth making on the claimant side, though. If your contract was with the company and not with the individual, then he would need to change the identity of the claimant completely and it is not just a naming mistake. The name mentioned on the invoices is evidence of this but is not conclusive.

There is no certainty which way the court would go, especially in small claims, but I think its certainly worth a punt. The case law is quite restrictive about substituting parties after the limitation period has expired. If this is a small claim and you think the whole claim is spurious, then to be honest since small claims hearings are very short anyway you may as well just leave it as something to be decided at the hearing rather than making a separate strike-out application (which could be heard at a hearing anyway).

Hi,

So sorry for the slow reply. Short week has played havoc with my diary.

Re this:

>>As long as the defendant's name and address is correct, it apparently doesnt make any difference whose name is on the invoice or named as claimant.

Surely the point is that the claimant has provided no evidence that he is actually owed any money. The invoices are from "someone else", and there is no wording on the invoices to link them to the personal name of the claimant. Of course it's a technicality but as far as I am concerned surely on a first glance the judge would say, well obviously there isn't a link between the invoices and the claimant so the claim can't proceed? If it was a Ltd Co, then of course this would be a total get-out, as it's a sole trader, it is more fuzzy but to me it seems straightforward still?

Steampowered, thanks, but it's too big for small claims. £30k. It is an either way kind of issue, I don't know where a judge would go on the main case. We are going to try and settle for £5-6k or so but if that doesn't work then we are likely to go all the way as we really don't feel we owe it although can see how it could be interpreted that we might. I have read through those cases and will pass them to our solicitor, but he is pretty much telling us to settle and mostly ignoring this point entirely which is getting on my nerves. Unless you feel he is right and we are really pushing our luck trying to go anywhere with the name thing?

Thanks

It sounds like I misunderstood the reference to 'one man band company' in your opening post. Are you saying the claimant is not a limited company but just a sole trader? If he is a sole trader, I don't think it matters whether he used his trading name or his personal name. Sole traders do not have separate legal personality so it is all the same person.

To be honest I don't think the name on the invoice is that important. The real legal question is whether or not you owe money. For me the key question is whether the claimant and the defendant on the court documents are the correct legal entity (i.e. the correct person or the correct limited company). As per the case law linked earlier the courts are generally OK with minor naming mistakes so long as the identity of the claimant/defendant is clear.

Thanks. We don't believe we do owe the money, but clearly they do. However the dispute goes back as far as 8 years, all the details are pretty fuzzy, nothing written down, etc, so to be honest no one really knows. I wasn't even in the business, but my colleague who was there at the time is more than happy to stand in court and have his day defending us. However it will be pricey to get there and there really is no guarantee either way by the looks of things.

It seems like we'll have to keep spending and fighting all the way rather than hoping for an easier get out early on.

I take your point about the sole trader - yes I understand there isn't a separate entity so possibly we will struggle under those rules. If there was a ltd on one set of paperwork and not the other it would be an open and shut case.

Thanks for your help and I appreciate the time you've spent. I'll come back if any more of this arises as we start the process of defending ourselves.

No worries.

Have you considered whether part of the claim may be statute barred? If the 'cause of action' (i.e. the right to bring a claim) arose more than six years ago, that would be a valid defence.

I am following this thread with interest although it sounds more complicated than my case.

We supplied materials to a limited company at address "A" but the County Court Form is in an individuals name with a different address, address "B". We recognise the guys name as one of those we were dealing with and I think he is a director of the company we sold the goods to, but do we have a defence of wrong name and address on the form as we did not sell anything to him as an individual?

He is claiming that the materials we sold were not fit for the purpose and we do not agree with that as he clearly made a mess of the work and is simply trying to blame our materials.

John if you could start your own thread on your issue...you will get a better response and therefore not complicate this thread.

Regards

Andy

PS Welcome to CAG