On 05 November 2016,

I phoned Vault Computers Limited of Bradford, Yorkshire and agreed a price for the computer I wanted them to assemble for me according to certain component options they offered.

We agreed that I could pay by cheque, Vault undertaking to supply the computer “once the cheque had cleared”.

On the same date,

I sent them a letter referring to the phone call,

repeating my assembly options and enclosing a cheque for the agreed amount, crossed and worded “Account Payee” made payable to Vault Computers.

By 19 November 2016 I had heard nothing from Vault

I phoned both numbers given on their website.

Voice recordings said that the numbers were either not available or not accepting calls.

By 05 December 2016,

Vault had made absolutely no contact with me and the payment to them had not left my bank account.

Therefore, on that date, I purchased a similarly priced computer from Amazon.co.uk using my credit card. I received the Amazon computer on 08 December 2016.

On 10 December 2016,

I found that the cheque to Vault had been paid on 07 December 2016.

I immediately phoned Vault to ask them to stop my order,

explaining that I had believed my letter to them had been lost and that I had bought a computer from a different supplier.

They replied that they would attempt to stop dispatch of my order.

They asked me to phone them in a few days for further information.

On 19 December 2016, I phoned Vault again.

They said that the computer they had assembled for me would be added to “stock” and they undertook to make a full refund of the purchase price by cheque.

They said strikes at the Post Office would delay reimbursement until the New Year.

By 01 February 2017,

I had neither heard from Vault nor received reimbursement.

On that day and the next,

I made repeated attempts to speak to Vault on the phone but could not get through.

One number returned the “Not Available” tone and the other, the same recorded message as on 19 November 2016.

I sent letters dated 02 February 2017,

20 February 2017 and

18 March 2017

to Vault’s registered address,

seeking a reply and reimbursement from them.

However, Vault remained silent,

even after receiving my letter-before-action,

sent Recorded Delivery.

On 12 April 2017,

finding that Vault currently has a retail trading unit in Shipley, Yorkshire,

I wrote to them additionally at that address.

By 01 May 2017,

there has still been no further contact with Vault since 19 December 2016

, no computer delivered from them

and no return of my purchase money.

There are no judgements recorded against Vault Computers Limited,

no registered bankruptcies,

and nothing to suggest they are in any trading difficulties.

Vault’s silence is perplexing.

If I format my small court claim according to certain presumptions about how they might defend against it,

I might be furnishing them with a defence they had not considered.

In particular,

I find myself wondering if I should attempt to introduce statutory declarations laying out verbatim the conversations we had on the phone, which I had audio-recorded for the purposes of assisting my memory if I ever needed to to draft such statements.

Those declarations

, if the original audio recordings were present,

might assist the court as evidence that,

for example,

Vault had agreed to accept payment by cheque,

or had undertaken to reimburse me in full in the circumstances I had described to them.

However,

the same evidence might undermine my claim if those matters are not issue in Vault’s defence.

Does anyone have experience of attempting to introduce audio-recordings to support small court claims?

Does anyone have experience of swearing statutory declarations?

There is a third way,

which is to rely on the way things were left by Vault,

expressly that they did not supply the goods within the prescribed period of 30 days,

freeing me from the contract and entitling me to a full refund.

However

, not knowing Vault’s position,

it might be counter-productive if

, for the sake of simplicity

, I omit the pertinent fact that I had asked them to stop my order.

I may have had no right to cancel,

if the goods were “made to the consumer’s specifications or are clearly personalised” per Reg.28 of The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Charges) Regulations.

If there was no right to cancel,

I am still not bound by the contract since Vault did not inform me of the absence of a right to cancel, as they were required to under Regulation 13 of the same body of regulations.

Perhaps I am over-thinking this matter, but Vault’s silence is perplexing.

Somebody say something...

Why can't you cancel the cheque?

Sorry, but if you won't bother to read more than the first few lines of a Post, why make a reply? The payee received the money some months ago.

To the site technical team: -

The CAG server has separated my post into lines at the point of each punctuation mark, as if I had wanted to cater for a slow reader. I do not want to post it again, because, I understand, to do so would cause confusion. Can it be re-assembled the way I wrote it, please?

To the site technical team: -

 

The CAG server has separated my post into lines at the point of each punctuation mark, as if I had wanted to cater for a slow reader. I do not want to post it again, because, I understand, to do so would cause confusion. Can it be re-assembled the way I wrote it, please?

Not to do with slow reader. So many who view CAG do so on mobile devices and therefore unless long posts are spaced out, they are very difficult to read.

In regard to your court claim against Vault, remember that your initial claim needs to be kept simple. It just needs to be that Vault have failed to refund a sum of £x for a cancelled order, after contacting them on number of occasions for a refund. Vault agreed to the refund, after they failed to supply a computer within time period agreed.

If the court claim progresses, then later in the process, you have to supply more information. The chances are that Vault won't bother to defend the claim and you will end up with a default CCJ, you will have to try to enforce using bailiffs. But wait to see what happens. I say this because of Vault now being difficult to contact.

@unclebulgaria

Thank you. I will consult Patricia Pearl "Small Claims Procedure in the County Court" and get back to you once I have better understood the matter of particulars of claim, in effect, if they are needed and if so, when they should be filed.

Meantime, thank you for your reply.

Why don't they teach legal action in schools, do you think?

At least, they didn't in my days, but it is becoming something of a necessity to know at least the basics.

why didnt you stop the cheque in december?

Doing a swear as the declaration is common known as is pointless,

you will get to say it all again in court if you sue them.

your claim is for non performance of contract- they didn't build you a computer in the time agreed and you haven't got anything to show for your money anyway.

Nothing at all to do with regulation 13.

If you spent a bit more time actually doing something rather than reading up on irrelevant asides and then churning out a load of piffle you might be telling us about your successes rather than wondering why a company that has got your money and done a runner isnt talking to you.

You send a lba,

give them a fortnight to cough up and then sue them.

Eli Wallach in "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" had it right-

"when you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk"

My case against Vault may be a little more complex than ericsbrother thinks.

In an unrelated matter and by way of illustration,

I recently booked a hotel room for 2 nights at £130, to be paid on arrival.

The contract provided that the fee for cancelling the booking would be £130, even though nothing had been provided for the consideration.

Furthermore,

in certain types of contract, there is no right to cancel.

As I said in my post,

regulations provide for this and for the absence of a warning of it to the Consumer.

Unfortunately,

as a lay litigant faced with the other side’s solicitor,

I do not have ericsbrother’s faith in the court system.

I refer to my thread

“Wandered into court costs minefield” that I started in 2013, where I came within inches of being crippled financially for the rest of my days.

There are two reasons why I didn’t cancel the cheque.

First, I bank online, but had no computer to take that step.

The Public Library computer would not allow me to access my online account, presumably for security reasons.

Second, Vault neither responded to my letter nor sent the computer with the rapidity they state (one to three days)

after 14 days, I had good grounds to believe the cheque was lost.

It could not be cashed by a third party since it was crossed “Account payee”.

I don’t feel I have to explain this to anyone who is wise only because they have the benefit of hindsight.

About filing a stat dec,

I have seen it in these forums that you should record critical phone calls;

elsewhere,

that such recording may not be introduced in court,

but that a stat dec sworn to contain a true account of the conversation might be permitted, provided the original recording is also in court.

That is not to suggest that,

in this matter,

such documentation would definately be relevant and necessary.

I do not know what Vault’s position is,

except that I should not be given my money back.

Also,

my claim has by now extended to more than the original amount I paid,

in which I will succeed only if I meet a fairly high standard of proof.

If ericsbrother thinks I am wrong to be prepared for a dirty fight,

though I do not know from which doorway the mugger will emerge,

the idea might be for him to explain,

for everybody’s betterment,

how he comes to that conclusion.

I think what ericsbrother meant was that I might be overthinking the matter.

As my post makes entirely clear,

the prescribed letter-before-action has already been sent.

However,

before filing my N1,

I posted on here speculatively, to expose my understanding of this matter to the possibility of alternative,

better experienced and more technically knowledgeable views.

I am grateful for those who have helped me.

Hope it worked out for you.