GORNAL MOTOR COMPANY -Engine problem /CCJ Awarded.

[Thegreenpimpernel]

The confusion comes from the fact that since they were not incorporated at the time, the 'Gornel Motor Company' and the owner are / were one and the same.

[Stresful Life]

So whichever one it goes against, shouldn't that still be ok? I believe there are 2 partners. One of the partners is the one I have judgment against.

[Thegreenpimpernel]

To clarify. People often don't get this:

 

Anyone can set up a business. i.e. start selling things, or providing services for financial gain.

 

There are three ways to do this (excluding LLP's for solicitors etc):

 

1) A sole trader

 

or

 

2) A partnership.

 

In both these cases there is no formality or paperwork involved. (other than registering with HMRC, or they will fine you!)

You, or you + partners can trade as any name you wish that does not infringe on other peoples brands or trademarks.

 

You could for example trade as:' Joe Bloggs - Pie maker'. A week later you can call yourself 'The Joe Bloggs Pie Company', both at the same time if you want, and so on.

The legal entity in this case would be:

 

Joe Bloggs T/AS (trading as) The Joe Bloggs Pie company. Or another way of putting it, Joe Bloggs T/AS whatever name he chooses.

 

These are 'trading names', or 'trading styles'.

 

Inserting the word 'company' in the title is irrelevant.

 

For the 'company' to have any legal status, it must be incorporated.

 

Joe Bloggs would have to form and register the company at Companies House, therefore becoming option '3'

 

3) The Joe Bloggs Pie company LTD.

[Stresful Life]

I fully understand that but I still do not know where that leaves me. I purchased the car from Gornal Motor Company, so that is who I claimed against. They were not Gornal Motor Company LTD when I claimed but still called Gornal Motor Company. The 2nd defendant is still one of the partners of Gornal Motor Company.

 

Does that mean I have done something wrong on my claim or not?

 

Thank You

[Thegreenpimpernel]

Our posts crossed there...

 

In answer to your question.

 

I know that if they are in a formal partnership (they have an agreement between them), then BOTH of them are liable for each others debts associated with the business.

 

How this relates to warrants and enforcement, i don't know, but from experience i can confirm that a bailiff in possession of a warrant against 'The Joe Bloggs Pie Company' will normaly enforce that warrant against the partners.

 

The only way out for them, would be to prove that 'The Joe Bloggs Pie Company' was an incorporated LTD company AT THE TIME OF THE TRANSACTION Which they cannot- because it was not!

Edited February 16, 2011 by Thegreenpimpernel

[Thegreenpimpernel]

I don't know the technicalities.

 

Someone else will have to advise whether you can apply to have the warrant amended to read:

 

Mr Bloggs & Mr Smith T/AS 'The Gornel Motor Company'.

 

THAT is who you bought the car off.

[Stresful Life]

I think that answers my question. I believe the warrant should be ok from the sounds of that! Thanks Green

[Thegreenpimpernel]

Hate to say it, but you could ring a bailiff firm to find out!

[Stresful Life]

I think I will do that tomorrow to see what they advise. I mainly want to find out if I need to ammend the warrant in anyway. I will be getting the judgment within 5 days, so before I get the balliffs involved, I want to be sure that the name and location etc is ok for them to proceed.

[Thegreenpimpernel]

You could even try writing to Mr A and Mr B, pointing out that you have untangled their web of BS and will be seeking to enforce a warrant against them BOTH as individuals in line with their trading status / legal entity at the time.

 

They might realize the game is up.

[Stresful Life]

It's a good idea. I guess my best plan of action is to let the judgment go through against the 2nd defendant and call the balliffs tomorrow to ask if the claim/warrant will give them any problems when it comes to collecting and getting my money back etc.

 

Indemnity charges etc are also a worry....

[MARTIN3030]

Can you confirm what date the claims were issued ?

Both of them.

[MARTIN3030]

I just saw that doing a google search for Gornal motor company shows this thread already in 4th place.

hopefully it will soon go to first-so the thread title change did the trick.

[Stresful Life]

I just saw that doing a google search for Gornal motor company shows this thread already in 4th place.

hopefully it will soon go to first-so the thread title change did the trick.

 

That is great Martin!! Cheers.

 

The original claim was issued 03/09/2010

Jouint Judgment was issued on 26/09/2010

Warrant was issued on 20/10/2010

 

My second MCOL claim was issued 26/01/2011

Judgment issued 16/02/2011

 

I will be proceeding with my original claim though, that is what I am waiting for the new judgment on.

 

Thank You

[MARTIN3030]

Good man.

[Stresful Life]

The court said they can stop the judgment from going ahead but it will not be easy getting the claim changed to add LTD on the end.

 

Any know what form I need or what to do to get the defendants name altered before judgment please?

 

Thank You

[Stresful Life]

Spoke to the court, they said the judgment has been stopped and they have sent me the form to amend the details and I have to pay £40! Then once that has been filled in and sent, I can request judgment.

 

Will I be able to get that £40 back?

[Thegreenpimpernel]

Hello.

 

Correct me if I've misunderstood, but surely you don't want to change it to LTD on the warrant.

 

If the sale / transaction was with Mr A & Mr B T/AS The Gornel Motor Company you cannot enforce a warrant against the Ltd company that was formed later.It is a totaly separate legal entity - regardless of the similarity in name.

 

Like i say, the Gornel Motor Company was not really a 'company' until it became Ltd.It was just Mr A & Mr B's 'trading name' or 'trading style'

 

This thread demonstrates that the law regarding trading names needs amending.

 

The fact that anyone, you or i could start trading tomorrow with the name "the Consumer rights company" or even "the consumer rights institute" is a bit misleading.

Edited February 17, 2011 by Thegreenpimpernel

[Stresful Life]

Now I really am confused....

 

I was told by the balliffs that it would be better for them to get more goods etc, if it read LTD on the judgment.

 

Also, the original judgment was set aside, so since this judgment is being applied for in February, doesn't that mean it should apply to how the company is now?

 

Could do with a solicitiors help to clear this up I reckon. Head is spinning!

Edited February 17, 2011 by Stresful Life

[MARTIN3030]

As I see thing now,all the vehicle stock and company assets are presumably in the Limited Company.

Lets look at this from another angle.

In the case of banks and Financial Service providers,where another company took over from an existing one,it remained possible to hold the new company liable.

Examples here are Virgin Media ( ex Telewest and NTL business)

Citibank Group (Associates Credit Card)

HSBC (Midland Bank)

Ford Motor Group (Jaguar Cars)

Etc Etc.

I think the crux of this is being able to determine if there was a buyout,a rebrand,a takeover,or what ?

Presumably much of the Assets and Stock F/Fs etc will have been part of the non Limited Company.

[MARTIN3030]

I have asked Steven from Site team to come and give an opinion.

[Stresful Life]

Gornal Motor Company never advertised as a LTD company and are not now either. The same 2 people are partners etc, so a name brand surely can not prevent anything?

[Thegreenpimpernel]

The confusion is due to the fact that the defendant may not have complied with the Business Names Act 1985.

 

If they had, your invoice would make the identity of the defendants clear.

 

It would either say:

 

a) Mr A & Mr B T/AS The Gornel Motor Company

 

Or after the formation of the ltd company,

 

b) The Gornel Motor Company LTD, Registered Office XXXXXXXXX, Registration Number XXXXXXXX

 

It's as simple as that.

[Thegreenpimpernel]

It's not a 'brand name'.

 

Joe Bloggs T/as 'Joe Bloggs Pie maker'

 

Is a separate legal entity to:

 

Joe Bloggs Pie Makers LTD

 

They cannot be held liable for each others debts.

 

It comes down to what the name is on the invoice.

[Stresful Life]

It wasn't LTD when I started the claim, it is LTD when I am issuing a new judgment. I am pretty sure it does not say LTD on the invoice.

 

So where do I go from here? Does either way stop me from getting my money back?