N1 Claim Form - No Particulars

[AndyOrch]

OK, what can I do about it?

 

Incidentally, the order requiring the Claimant to send in a completed AQ stated "If you do not comply with this notice, your claim will automatically be struck out without further order of the court." Does that make any difference?

 

Well yes it means that no order will be issued but nether the less the claim as been struck out, therefore you now need to issue a wasted costs order

[rgkrgk]

Thanks! I'll do that.

 

Do you know if I should first send an invoice to the Claimant and wait a certain time for a reply before sending the n244?

 

Do you know whether I need to go into detail of costs, send copies of invoices for books etc. in with the n244?

[AndyOrch]

Yes approach the Claimants Sol firstly with your breakdown and figure test the water so to speak. See what response you get.

 

Andy

[rgkrgk]

Yes approach the Claimants Sol firstly with your breakdown and figure test the water so to speak. See what response you get.

 

Andy

 

OK, there's been a development. Any thoughts appreciated.

 

I sent a request for costs to the claimant on 11th November and have heard nothing back from them.

 

Today I received a notice of hearing of application (n244a) on 17th feb 2011. They have asked for the claim to be re-instated, claiming that they sent the AQ back on time and were on holiday when they received the order telling them that the case would be struck out if the AQ was not received in 7 days.

 

They say they got back from holiday on 9th November and they personally visited the Court on 16th November to get the case reinstated. After advice from the court they sent their app. in on 17th.

 

You may recall from earlier in the thread that there is already a Leasehold Valuation Tribunal case relating to the same service charges that are being claimed. This case was brought by me against the new landlord (a connected party to the County Court Claimant). On 15th we had a pre-trial review where the Chairman refused an application for them to join the case as the Respondent.

 

Not sure what's going on but shouldn't they have checked before going on holiday that their AQ had been received? They are a limited company (property management). Shouldn't he have been contactable/checking back in case there were problems?

 

There is also a case with this Claimant against another leaseholder in the building. A hearing had been arranged for 9th November and it is being claimed that when the AQ for my case was sent in they also requested a later date for the hearing because they were on holiday until the 9th. An unsigned copy of this letter dated 15th September is attached to the notice I received. This means they not only didn't check that their AQ had been received or their check cashed, they also went away without checking to see whether their hearing had been rescheduled.

 

Thoughts appreciated.

[rgkrgk]

Are you there Andy?

 

Anyone?

 

Thoughts on this would be really appreciated. I am unsure now whether to send in my wasted costs application. Should I wait for the decision on whether the case is re-instated or should I apply now. It will cost £75 for the application.

[AndyOrch]

Morning RGk

 

I would wait to see the out come of their application.They have had your estimated costs.Wait to see the decision and then slap in your WC with the DJ if then hearing goes your way.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[rgkrgk]

Thanks again Andy.

[rgkrgk]

Hi Andy,

 

Just an update on this.

 

There was a 10 minute hearing today to decide on whether the applicants request to have the case re-instated would be granted. The applicant didn't turn up and the application to re-instate was struck out. The judge explained that this means the original claim remains 'struck out'.

 

I submitted an itemised claim for wasted costs to the Judge (£780) and he has ordered that costs be awarded but a detailed assessment of costs should be carried out. He said I should send my costs claim to the claimant and then if we don't come to an agreement I should apply for a 'detailed assessment of costs'

 

This seems like good news but I imagine that it might not end here.

 

I will send my claim for costs to the claimant. How long should I give them to respond? Should I wait for the order from the court before sending it? Any other advice?

[AndyOrch]

Hi RGK

 

You can wait for the order but dosent really matter.Get your costs in now.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[rgkrgk]

Hi RGK

 

You can wait for the order but dosent really matter.Get your costs in now.

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Hi Andy, thanks for your response.

 

How long should I give the claimant to settle/respond to my letter? 14 days, 21? 28?

[AndyOrch]

14 should be ample

[rgkrgk]

14 should be ample

 

I've been discussing this with somebody with a bit of personal experience with CC claims and he's not sure I can claim for research (reading CPR's, online forums and the statutes relating to leasehold law). I'm sure I read something on here about research. Any thoughts on that?

 

Also, I've seen that CPR 48.6(3)© says I can claim for the costs of obtaining expert assistance in assessing the costs claim. That seems almost like a 'no brainer'. Do you know anybody who will do this on a 'no win, no fee' basis?

[AndyOrch]

Hadituptohere V Cabot ** CASE STRUCK OUT**COSTS PAID**

 

All you need to know re wasted costs (sorry the link dosent work but im under privileged) not allowwd to attach in other words.

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

[rgkrgk]

Thanks again Andy.

 

Just been looking at CPR3.5. Do I need to obtain judgement? I have already been awarded costs, it's just that they need a detailed assessment to work out exactly what they are.

 

I also seem to remember the judge saying that the claimant can make a new claim regarding the same alleged debt. Is that right?

 

Also been looking at this post which seems to be something of an authority post on the subject as it's reproduced on several wasted cost threads. This mentions that if the claimant doesn't come back to me within the specified time with points of dispute then I will be able to apply for a default costs judgement. I'm wondering whether this always applies. I did get the opinion from the judge that a hearing on costs would be required.

 

If a default costs judgement is given, is that the end of the matter? I get the feeling that you can never be sure that a claim will not rise up again either as a new claim or some other way of getting an earlier decision overruled.

[rgkrgk]

I've also come across this post in my travels. It mentions getting the striking out officially recorded. What does that mean?

[rgkrgk]

I sent my bill of costs to the applicant on 16/5/11 and have today received a n244 application from the court stating "The notices of a hearing sent to me on 18th November 2010 were never received. Judgement was made in my absence. The matter has now been referred to a District Judge who has given leave for me to have the judgement, dated 25th February 2011, set aside". This is accompanied by 2 unsigned copies of letters to the Court. One dated 8/3/11 states that they were not told of the need to attend a hearing and the other dated 21/3/11 states the Applicant wants to appeal the decision made in their absence.

 

A hearing has been set for 20/6/11. This is getting ridiculous. When will this be over? I'm also dealing with this issue at a tribunal and it's plain to see that the application has only been made because I've made the application for costs.

 

Here's a summary of events with approx. dates:

 

5/7/10 I made an application to the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal in regard to disputed service charges made by Landlord

16/7/10 CC applicant makes claim for approx. £1500

? Case struck out because applicant fails to submit AQ

17/11/10 application to re-instate - applicant claimed he sent the AQ. In regard to a similar case against my neighbour he claimed he missed a hearing that had been arranged as he asked for a hearing to be rearranged because he would be on holiday, when he got back he found that the hearing had not been rearranged.

17/2/11 applicant failed to show at rearranged hearings. Application to re-instate struck out and wasted costs awarded to me.

16/5/11 my bill of costs sent

19/5/11 application to re-instate

 

In the LVT case the applicant has claimed to have incurred approx £4000 of costs. Although this is in regard to a disputed amount of £1500 the case may well be allocated to the fast track because of its complexity. The LVT is a 'no costs' jurisdiction but I'm worried that they are playing a game in keeping the CC case going to try and get their costs back if they win.

 

My neighbour has so far not received a notice of application to re-instate her case.

 

Out of my depth here. Any help appreciated. Andy?

[rgkrgk]

I sent my bill of costs to the applicant on 16/5/11 and have today received a n244 application from the court stating "The notices of a hearing sent to me on 18th November 2010 were never received. Judgement was made in my absence. The matter has now been referred to a District Judge who has given leave for me to have the judgement, dated 25th February 2011, set aside". This is accompanied by 2 unsigned copies of letters to the Court. One dated 8/3/11 states that they were not told of the need to attend a hearing and the other dated 21/3/11 states the Applicant wants to appeal the decision made in their absence.

 

A hearing has been set for 20/6/11. This is getting ridiculous. When will this be over? I'm also dealing with this issue at a tribunal and it's plain to see that the application has only been made because I've made the application for costs.

 

Here's a summary of events with approx. dates:

 

5/7/10 I made an application to the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal in regard to disputed service charges made by Landlord

16/7/10 CC applicant makes claim for approx. £1500

? Case struck out because applicant fails to submit AQ

17/11/10 application to re-instate - applicant claimed he sent the AQ. In regard to a similar case against my neighbour he claimed he missed a hearing that had been arranged as he asked for a hearing to be rearranged because he would be on holiday, when he got back he found that the hearing had not been rearranged.

17/2/11 applicant failed to show at rearranged hearings. Application to re-instate struck out and wasted costs awarded to me.

16/5/11 my bill of costs sent

19/5/11 application to re-instate

 

In the LVT case the applicant has claimed to have incurred approx £4000 of costs. Although this is in regard to a disputed amount of £1500 the case may well be allocated to the fast track because of its complexity. The LVT is a 'no costs' jurisdiction but I'm worried that they are playing a game in keeping the CC case going to try and get their costs back if they win.

 

My neighbour has so far not received a notice of application to re-instate her case.

 

Out of my depth here. Any help appreciated. Andy?

 

Really need some help here. Anybody?

[bazaar]

Did they ever pay your wasted costs? It seems to me that this reinstatement application is retaliation in nature, it might be worth looking into it a little. As for their costs, can they justify them? You do need some more help here, so clicked the warning

[rgkrgk]

Did they ever pay your wasted costs? It seems to me that this reinstatement application is retaliation in nature, it might be worth looking into it a little. As for their costs, can they justify them? You do need some more help here, so clicked the warning

 

Hi bazaar,

 

Thanks for your help.

 

They are looking to set aside the order that said they should pay wasted costs and which ordered the striking out of the application to re-instate the case.

 

They submitted this application to set-aside just 2 days after my bill of costs was sent. I had deliberately waited 3 months before sending my bill of costs because I also sent a bill of costs after the case was originally struck out, only for them to apply for it to be re-instated (because the courts hadn't received their AQ).

 

The issue here for me, and why I submitted my bill of costs, is that there was already a case at the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal when they took out their claim. There was no need to burden me with all the work associated with the CC claim. The LVT will eventually come to their decision and any amount due will be paid.

[bazaar]

I would have thought that would be enough to strike out the application due to it being with LVT

[AndyOrch]

RGK

 

Can you scan in what you have received less personal, difficult to decipher whats going on here

Fresh eyes etc.....

 

Regards

 

Andy

[rgkrgk]

Hi Andy,

 

I'm not really in a position to scan what I have received. I've summarised the situation in post #67.

 

What I have just received is a notice of a hearing - "The hearing of the defendant's application for Judgement to be Set aside (see copy attached) will take place at.... [note: it is actually the claimants application]

 

Attached to the notice is the n244 application which states ""The notices of a hearing sent to me on 18th November 2010 were never received. Judgement was made in my absence. The matter has now been referred to a District Judge who has given leave for me to have the judgement, dated 25th February 2011, set aside"

 

Attached to the application are 2 letters from the applicant to the court. One dated 8/3/11 which asks for the matter to be investigated because the claimant cannot accept that it can be struck out without being able to represent himself". The other dated 21/3/11 claims he didn't receive notification of the hearing (the one as a result of the application to re-instate after he didn't send in the AQ).

 

The order that he is trying to set aside is dated 25/2/11 and states:

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

1. Application to reinstate struck out.

2. The Claimant do pay Defendant's wasted costs of and occasioned by this claim and to be the subject of detailed assessment in default of agreement.

[AndyOrch]

Sounds like this LiP Claimant is ping ponging and isnt aware of the CPR.Just attend the hearing with all your documentation

and let the DJ order your wasted Costs (dont forget to add the hearing travel costs)

 

Andy

[rgkrgk]

Sounds like this LiP Claimant is ping ponging and isnt aware of the CPR.Just attend the hearing with all your documentation

and let the DJ order your wasted Costs (dont forget to add the hearing travel costs)

 

Andy

 

I'm not so sure. The applicant is a very wealthy managing agent operating through a limited company. He has started the case on behalf of the old landlord (managing agent owners son). The LVT case I brought is against the new owners (Limited company owned by old landlords mum and her sister). For the LVT case there is a solicitor representing both old and new landlords and they claim to have racked up about £4000 in costs but the LVT is a 'no costs' jurisdiction. I'm wondering whether they are keeping this CC case on simmer so they can incorporate the costs spent. I suspect the applicant is being coached in order to keep the CC court case alive.

Edited June 2, 2011 by rgkrgk

[AndyOrch]

I'm not so sure. The applicant is a very wealthy managing agent who has started the case on behalf of the old landlord (managing agent owners son). The LVT case I brought is against the new owners (Limited company owned by old landlords mum and her sister). For the LVT case there is a solicitor representing both old and new landlords and they claim to have racked up about £4000 in costs but the LVT is a 'no costs' jurisdiction. I'm wondering whether they are keeping this CC case on simmer so they can incorporate the costs spent. I suspect the applicant is being coached in order to keep the CC court case alive.

 

 

All will be revealed at the hearing make the above known to the DJ at the hearing.

 

Regards

 

Andy