Letter threat of BK - old ltd company debt - claim form received - help

[citizenB]

That letter should form part of your bundle (witness statement) if it gets that far.

 

Have they provided you with copies of the paperwork they claim to have ?

 

I wonder if signed witness statements from the other 2 directors would boost your defence as well ?

[steampowered]

It doesn't matter what you or the other directors understood, it only matters what a reasonable person would think you should have understood ... which will depend on what is written in the document. What is the guarantee wording and is it clearly placed in the document or buried in small print.

 

The Claimant would normally be entitled to proceed against you for the full amount. However you may be able to join the other Directors as defendants and/or seek a contribution from them, if this is the route you want to go down.

 

Feel free to scan in the guarantee (with personal details covered) if you would like us to take a look and comment.

[mryummy]

What exactly is the wording re the guarantee?

 

Hi DonkeyB

 

I have left it at home and im at work at the moment so will copy and paste it tonight for you to see.

[mryummy]

It doesn't matter what you or the other directors understood, it only matters what a reasonable person would think you should have understood ... which will depend on what is written in the document. What is the guarantee wording and is it clearly placed in the document or buried in small print.

 

The Claimant would normally be entitled to proceed against you for the full amount. However you may be able to join the other Directors as defendants and/or seek a contribution from them, if this is the route you want to go down.

 

Feel free to scan in the guarantee (with personal details covered) if you would like us to take a look and comment.

 

Thanks steampowered.

 

On one of the signed guarantees, it is for a company that I have never owned or never had a shareholding in or been an authorised signatory. The same firm set that company up so not sure as to why this is the case, which to me shows that clearly what I was or wasnt signing wasnt clarity at all.

 

I have submitted a partial admittance, as I did indeed agree to pay them £500. They have sent invoices for ridiculous and non agreed amounts, amounts which I would never have agreed to as I had full knowledge that I couldnt pay as would be out of work.

[mryummy]

Surely its isnt acceptable in any legal sense just to raise invoices for work and figures that wasnt agreed? This is now my main argument with them.

[steampowered]

One other point ... have you started the ball rolling with a complaint to the regulator? (See http://www.icaew.com/~/media/Files/About-ICAEW/What-we-do/resolving-disputes/fee-disputes-booklet.pdf)

[mryummy]

One other point ... have you started the ball rolling with a complaint to the regulator? (See http://www.icaew.com/~/media/Files/About-ICAEW/What-we-do/resolving-disputes/fee-disputes-booklet.pdf)

 

Oh Yes

 

And the claim for proffesional negligence in regards the other issue.

 

Im not going to be bullied by snotty rich people exploiting a situation and a person, or not pay a bill of £4000 when agreed and admitted £500. I would take the CCJ and file myself bankrupt rather.

[mryummy]

It doesn't matter what you or the other directors understood, it only matters what a reasonable person would think you should have understood ... which will depend on what is written in the document. What is the guarantee wording and is it clearly placed in the document or buried in small print.

 

The Claimant would normally be entitled to proceed against you for the full amount. However you may be able to join the other Directors as defendants and/or seek a contribution from them, if this is the route you want to go down.

 

Feel free to scan in the guarantee (with personal details covered) if you would like us to take a look and comment.

 

Hi

 

Just on your point of what a reasonable person would have understood, The situation was this firm of accountants used to provide a service for a company, that for various reasons, had to close. They advised me that they could handle this, instead of appointing a liquidator, and advised me a liquidator would be a waste of money. I had been quoted £2000 from the liquidation company, this firm said they could do it for £500. This was appealing to me as, as they were more than aware, thee company was closing and I had personally lost any money i had. I also didnt have a job to go to so wouldnt be getting any income, so both parties knew my financial obligations and exact situation.

 

This firm are not licensed liquidators and the company is still active at CH. Maybe they have advised me when they clearly were not in a position to do so?

[DonkeyB]

Did they give that advice in writing?

[mryummy]

Would there be a case where they were not authorised to advise on this type of work?

[mryummy]

Did they give that advice in writing?

 

Im not sure to be honest. But it was witnessed as I wasnt alone in the meeting

[mryummy]

Did they give that advice in writing?

 

I have their WIP from the SAR I requested, which states in writing that they gave advice on this on 2 separate occasions.

[DonkeyB]

The detail of what they suggested is important.

 

If they said that instead of insolvency, it would be as simple to advise creditors that the company could not pay its debts and hope nobody issued an SD prior to dissolving the company through the courts, then they would not be advising, technically, on insolvency matters.

 

For example, if creditors raised no objections, you could then have wound the company down and eventually closed it down via voluntary strike off.

 

The devil is in the detail, and what they led you to believe they were offering.

[mryummy]

The detail of what they suggested is important.

 

If they said that instead of insolvency, it would be as simple to advise creditors that the company could not pay its debts and hope nobody issued an SD prior to dissolving the company through the courts, then they would not be advising, technically, on insolvency matters.

 

For example, if creditors raised no objections, you could then have wound the company down and eventually closed it down via voluntary strike off.

 

The devil is in the detail, and what they led you to believe they were offering.

 

To be fair, that is exactly what they have advised me. I have just spoke to companies house who told me that there was the "standard" HMRC objection which is now cleared so just waiting in the list to be struck off. Not going to go any further with that at thsi stage now.

 

Just the tax credit issue and professional negligence claim now, which we have appointed a solicitor following a review of the information etc.

 

I have also reviewed all the SAR information they sent me and many of the invoices raised are not for the company with the alleged guarantee on so will be using such for teh defence subject to it coming to this.

[mryummy]

Just heard from the claimant. They have rejected my partial admittance and sent the form back to the court, INCORRECTLY FILLED OUT (no surprise).

 

They have also very kindly sent a terribly put together letter (like my 10 year old would write) confirming their stance and what the invoices relate too. They also very kindly, in writing, admit that the bill for closing the company down was much greater than expected and quoted, so will be able to use this as my defence as it was never agreed and they have nothing to state it was.

 

Also, in the letter, they explain what the other invoice was for, which actually relates to personal work done for the other 2 directors and work for 3 other companies, who i used to be a director for, but not with any PG's in place what so ever, so again this just demonstrates that thi sis a clear personal vendetta campaign against me, along with the fact I dont owe the money!

 

I am now very much looking forward to attending court

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Shooting themselves in both feet and the backside as well!!!

[DonkeyB]

Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear...

 

I would suggest you look at making a Part 36 offer based on what you acknowledge you owe and any reasonably incurred costs. They would have a limited time to respond to this.

 

If they fail to accept this – given your admission – then they will not get any costs at all, or anything at all, if the judge awards an amount smaller than that which they are claiming.

 

Then it’s who blinks first!

[AndyOrch]

If this is SCT part 36 offers do not apply.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[DonkeyB]

Hi Andy

 

Has a track been allocated yet? If not, can Part 36 still apply?

[AndyOrch]

Hi Andy

 

Has a track been allocated yet? If not, can Part 36 still apply?

 

Mmmm not really DB:-

 

Extent to which other Parts apply

27.2

(1) The following Parts of these Rules do not apply to small claims –

(a) Part 25 (interim remedies) except as it relates to interim injunctions(GL);

(b) Part 31 (disclosure and inspection);

© Part 32 (evidence) except rule 32.1 (power of court to control evidence);

(d) Part 33 (miscellaneous rules about evidence);

(e) Part 35 (experts and assessors) except rules 35.1 (duty to restrict expert evidence), 35.3 (experts – overriding duty to the court), 35.7 (court’s power to direct that evidence is to be given by single joint expert) and 35.8 (instructions to a single joint expert);

(f) Subject to paragraph (3), Part 18 (further information);

(g) Part 36 (offers to settle);

[DonkeyB]

Thanks Andy. My thoughts were just that, as no track has been allocated (as far as I can see), then I wondered if it could apply.

 

As you know, it is possible for a judge to allocate a claim to fast track where there are complicated issues, even if the claim is below £5k (or £10k now).

[mryummy]

Thanks Andy. My thoughts were just that, as no track has been allocated (as far as I can see), then I wondered if it could apply.

 

As you know, it is possible for a judge to allocate a claim to fast track where there are complicated issues, even if the claim is below £5k (or £10k now).

 

Hi Donkey B

 

thanks for your input on this. Without sounding terribly thick, can you advise me how i would do this?

[DonkeyB]

The track is usually decided by the court based on the prima facie claim, but a judge could subsequently order it to be put onto the fast track. But as Andy says, it may prove tricky, though you could request fast track (and give reasons) at the AQ stage.

[mryummy]

Ladies and gents

 

Well this has been allocated a fast track claim and also a mediation. I have agreed to the mediation and so has the claimant, however the HMRC mediation service hasnt been able to contact the claimant to arrange a date as yet (no surprise)

 

Having looked through the claimants documents, there is a personal guarantee that has apparently been signed by the 3 directors at the time. Myself and the 2 other directors have no recollection of this agreement and the other 2 directors have stated that they have never met the representatives from the claimant at any time. Also, the guarantee that has been signed is also not witnessed by an independent 3rd party, just signed for the claimants company by someone. The 3 signatures are on the 2nd page of the alleged agreement which brings us 3 to the conclusion that this could have been mis represented to us or indeed never signed by ourselves.

 

My question in relation to this is, should a personal guarantee of this legality be independently witnessed and signed? It is my belief that it should but would welcome any feedback.

 

what adds to this conclusion is that the company have also produced another document for another ltd company that i dont own or have any control, authorised signature/directorship/shareholding in and this is a company that the claimant set up for someone i know. Therefore I wouldn't have knowingly signed the agreement as it wasnt for a company that had anything to do with me!

 

Going back to their claim, there are numerous invoices made out to other ltd companies that were in my directorship, yet there is no personal guarantee in place, neither a real one or an alleged one. Therefore surely this cannot be claimed against my person?

I have admitted a £500 liability for work that was agreed, however, the ltd company that they said they were closing for me and advising is still registered at companies house and there has been an objector to the closure from a creditor so this now has to go down another route which will cost me in excess of £3000 to resolve, therefore the work billed was not as agreed or indeed appropriate for this case and i feel very badly advised and missinformed

 

I also want advice please on the fact that their were 3 directors on this alleged personal guarantee and the fact that they are only claiming against my person is that it is a very personal issue against myself and therefore they are not handling this in a professional or appropriate manner.

 

I am more than willing to go to court to not only defend this claim but in addition to this to ensure that the actions of this company are highlighted and i intend to make a professional misconduct claim against this firm

 

Any advice would be appreciated but i am well up for the fight!!!

[DonkeyB]

Interesting. But at least a part 36 offer could now be issued...