Workman never supplied carpets after deposit paid for carpets

[Naomi acum]

A flooring contractor undertook some work fitting a wooden floor for us, and agreed to supply carpets. We paid in full for the floor which he fitted as agreed. And a deposit for the carpets of a thousand pounds. To cut a really long story short he never supplied any carpets and the floor lasted a month before buckling and peeling away. As a result we are taking him to the small claims court to recover the money, but are now concerned that because we are suing the individual rather than the company he owns - he may wriggle out of it. His defence is merely that he never received any money from us or entered into any contract! (Even though we paid to the company account via bank transfer. We are feeling pretty desperate so any help greatly appreciated!

[rebel11]

Hi Naomi

 

Welcome to CAG

 

The guys will advise as soon as they are available.

I've added a title for you.

[sequenci]

Hello there,

 

Do you have anything in writing from them at all?

[Naomi acum]

Hello there,

 

Do you have anything in writing from them at all?

 

We never received a written acknowledgement of the works in terms of a formal contract, but there is plenty of e-mail and text correspondence that refers to the works to be carried out. E-mails discussing dates, e-mails where he requests funds are paid, as well as an e-mail saying that he cannot fit carpets before Christmas because they aren't in stock. We also have a letter he has written when he says that he isn't going to rectify the problem because he doesn't think it's his fault, and declaring that he does intend to return part of our carpet deposit when he sees fit. It's now completely extraordinary that he is saying he never received anything - when we have a bank statement to prove it, but I fear he is so dishonest, that any way of getting out of it he will. Especially if somehow we should have put the name of the company rather than the contractor on the claim. Any thoughts very gratefully appreciated.

[Conniff]

A person can't be dissolved to avoid any outcome as a company can. Should you win, and it seems as if you have enough evidence, and he refuses to pay, you can get bailiffs involved to visit his home and take possessions or his car.

If the amount owed is £750 or more, you can file to make him bankrupt.

[rebel11]

http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/n001a-eng.pdf

 

'but I fear he is so dishonest, that any way of getting out of it he will. Especially if somehow we should have put the name of the company rather than the contractor on the claim. Any thoughts very gratefully appreciated.'

[steampowered]

As you paid the company bank account, that would be a reason for him to say you should have sued the company and not him personally. But it is really up to him to raise it as an issue. If he wanted to use this argument he should have said so in his Defence. If he tries to make this point in court, you can explain your side of the story why you think you contracted with the individual and not with a limited company.

 

Personally I'd let the small claims process continue. Usually you are much better off having a CCJ against an individual rather than against a company.

[Naomi acum]

As you paid the company bank account, that would be a reason for him to say you should have sued the company and not him personally. But it is really up to him to raise it as an issue. If he wanted to use this argument he should have said so in his Defence. If he tries to make this point in court, you can explain your side of the story why you think you contracted with the individual and not with a limited company.

 

Personally I'd let the small claims process continue. Usually you are much better off having a CCJ against an individual rather than against a company.

 

Thank you very much. We will proceed in that case. I really appreciate your advice.

[onlynameleft]

As you paid the company bank account, that would be a reason for him to say you should have sued the company and not him personally. But it is really up to him to raise it as an issue. If he wanted to use this argument he should have said so in his Defence. If he tries to make this point in court, you can explain your side of the story why you think you contracted with the individual and not with a limited company.

 

Personally I'd let the small claims process continue. Usually you are much better off having a CCJ against an individual rather than against a company.

 

I think he has raised it by saying he never received any money or entered into a contract. He's saying in effect the contract was with the company, the company received the money. Is there a particulalr reason you are suing him and not the company, e.g. evidence that the contract was with him in his personal capacity?