that's correct I merged them.

else whats been advised is a waste of time and the history.......

dx

Thanks! Any advice greatly appreciated. Have a sick feeling in my stomach

prob wont hurt

ring the court and check it was easter closedown after all.

and you are a litigant in person

mistakes are allowed.

The court used to send a last chance 7 day warning letter to pay but since the recent new rules regarding trial fees I don't think they do anymore. They may still be playing catch up with the post so might be best ring them and see if they will still accept payment over the phone.

Thanks guys. Court was happy to take my money. What a relief.

Next question. The defendant has not filed a witness statement with either myself or the court. The hearing letter states that this should arrive 14 days before the hearing. I don't think he has any intention of filing this as he filed a lengthy defence and thinks that is all he needs to do.

Is there anything I can do to use this lack of witness statement to my advantage? In reality will it make much of a difference on the day? Should I inform the court that I have not received this letter?

Many thanks.

Is there anything I can do to use this lack of witness statement to my advantage? In reality will it make much of a difference on the day? Should I inform the court that I have not received this letter?

In small claims track, I don't think it really matters.

If he is just raising things already covered in the defence, I don't think you can complain.

If the defendant tries to ambush you with any new facts which are not raised in the defence, you could perhaps invite the judge to disregard them as he hasn't complied with the order to serve evidence of fact 14 days before the hearing. Although not sure how far you would get with this.

I'm gearing up to attend court this week. Is there any general advice out there on what I can expect/what I can do to prepare. I've attended magistrates court a few times, but really have no idea what to expect in small claims. I feel like the defendant is going to cloud the case with irrelevant information, and I just want to focus on the core issues and the law surrounding it.

Nothing like a normal court. Basically its you, the claimant and a judge that sits around a table and discusses it.

Thanks. If I win, can I ask for additional costs not included in my claim? I've had to book a hotel and I'm driving across the country - costs I didn't consider when I initially filed my claim.

Also, I'm reading some similar cases trying to prep for the day. While I understand decisions from small claims aren't case law, can I use some of them as examples on the day, if I feel things aren't going my way. Or should I refrain from using law in an attempt to guide the judges decision? This is of particular interest: Barnes v McGrath Evesham County Court May 2011 as no Ts&Cs were defined by the dealer

I think the most important thing is to be able to explain - in one sentence - what your claim is for. You need to be able to explain your claim clearly and concisely. At the end of the day this case is very simple legally, you are simply alleging that the car was not satisfactory quality or not fit for purpose - which is a factual question rather than a legal one. So focus on proving that.

It is helpful to be able to point to the specific parts of the Consumer Rights Act you are relying on (perhaps have a printed copy with you).

If you have a case to back you up, that's great. But I definitely would not rely on it too much. If you want to do this you would need to have a full copy of the actual judgment - the judge won't know what you are talking about otherwise. You'd also need to be able to point to the specific paragraph in that judgment which you are relying on, and explain to the judge in a sentence why it is relevant.

Thanks. If I win, can I ask for additional costs not included in my claim? I've had to book a hotel and I'm driving across the country - costs I didn't consider when I initially filed my claim.

Have a read of https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27#27.14 which sets out what you can claim.

Another goofy question. When I outlined my claim, it was based on an invoice. The receipt is for quite a bit more than I claiming for because I had additional work carried out while it was in pieces. I've now redone the maths, and I've claimed for about £100 more than I should have. None of my original claim amount using MCOL includes costs (travel, hotel, cost of my expert witness, missed work etc.). Two questions:

1. Will if reflect badly on me if I reduce the amount I'm claiming for on the day? I want to be completely transparent and fair in what I'm seeking

2. If I win, I assume the issue of costs arrises after that? Or should I have included them in my original claim (even though I didn't fully know what they were at the time). Do I just bring evidence of these costs?

Thanks guys. If I win, I am donating a percentage of it to this awesome site

1. Will if reflect badly on me if I reduce the amount I'm claiming for on the day? I want to be completely transparent and fair in what I'm seeking

It doesn't look great if you are confused about what is owed, but hopefully you will be able to explain in a clear and concise manner what you are claiming for.

2. If I win, I assume the issue of costs arrises after that? Or should I have included them in my original claim (even though I didn't fully know what they were at the time). Do I just bring evidence of these costs?

The issue of costs comes later, after the main claim.

 

The issue of costs comes later, after the main claim.

As in the same day?

As in the same day?

Yes, you typically make your submissions on costs immediately after the judge makes his decision on the main claim.

Court tomorrow. I've submitted a long witness statement, but I've attempted to condense the facts. Trying to heed advice and be as concise as possible. He hasn't submitted a statement. Wondering if you guys would take a read through everything I want to say and give me your thoughts. Does it tick off everything it needs to? Could it be even more concise? Any final tips appreciated.

Sept 28 car purchased

October 24th

Car develops a very loud grinding noise in all gears.

25th October

Prior to a full diagnosis, I clearly stated to Mr X that if he was unwilling to meet the cost of diagnosis and repair, we would like to invoke our right to return the vehicle for a full refund under the CRA 2015.

October 26th

Again, I stated in two separate messages that if Mr X was unwilling to meet the costs of the labour, we would like to invoke our right to return for a refund. It’s worth noting that at this stage all parties involved felt that the warranty company would cover the bulk of costs, and we were simply aiming to recoup labour costs.

October 27th

Mr X emailed me stating, quote “Ok please supply me with a formal quotation from the garage you have instructed to strip the gearbox down we can now move forward closer to a solution. Once received we can then establish the actual issue. Thanks .”

October 28th

A diagnosis was emailed to defendant (see exhibit X). At this stage it became apparent that the warranty would not cover the repair. The diagnosis also stated that the disc brakes were badly corroded and needed replacing.

October 31st (Monday)

Invoice and diagnosis sent directly to defendant. AA report emailed to defendant. Defendant contacts garage directly for a conversation.

Nov 1st

Once again, I outline what I believe to be the our right to return the vehicle. In response, the defendant makes an offer which only represents a portion of the total cost of repairs.. I declined the offer and instructed the garage to carry out work.

Nov 2nd Claim filed using MCOL

On November 10th I sent a copy of the independent engineers report directly to Mr X which stated that on the balance of probability, the fault existed long before the purchase of the car.

I made one final attempt at resolving the dispute outside of court stating that if Mr X were to meet the full cost of the gearbox repair and diagnosis, I would cease legal action and personally cover the cost of the independent report, the brakes and the car rental.

As I understand the Consumer Rights Act, there is an automatic assumption that if the fault materialises within a reasonable period of time after the contract was made, the goods are deemed to be defective at the time they were supplied. The engineers report only serves to reinforce this assumption.

I gave Mr X every opportunity to remedy the issue in whatever manner he saw fit. He could have arranged to have the car collected and repaired at a garage of his choosing, or taken the vehicle back for a refund as I requested on three separate occasions. There was a period of 8 days from when he was made aware of the breakdown to when he made his first and only offer. I felt this was a reasonable period of time given that my wife was renting a car at a daily rate in order to get to work. Mr X did not provide a returns or repair policy and I believed the costs of repair to be reasonable.

by the way, some of this may not seem relevant but the main bulk of his defence was that I was not forthcoming with information, and it's laid out to give a precise timeline of what was provided to him and when.

So how did it go in court?

I've been meaning to log on and give folks an update. I won! From the moment I walked in I sensed that I would. The judge guided everything along nicely and refused to get bogged down in the defendant's irrelevant and lengthy defence.

She didn't agree to some of my claim so I wasn't awarded to full amount, but enough to make it worthwhile. There were also a couple of costs I think I should have got which she didn't give me. I only got mileage for a one way trip (a 260 mile each way journey). And she did not allow me to claim for £40 airbnb, saying I could have driven there in the morning (hardly!).

But other than that, it was a decisive win.

Thanks so much for all your input guys. It made all the difference. Now to see if he actually pays!

Well done and great news.

Indeed, now to see if he actually pays, or if you need to send bailiffs round ...