Who issues a claim- Court or claimant?

[Vauban]

Sorry Ford... I missed that, but all has been posted on here before... it's been going on for ages. This is a claim against a neighbour who interfered with the sale of my house by making threats to the purchasers, causing the sale to collapse.

We were a long way into the conveyancing and about to exchange. I am bringing a case of tort of interference and malicious falsehood. I am not claiming the full loss £375k, but have asked for an unspecified amount in excess of £25k by way of compensation, to be decided by the court.

I am waaay out of my depth with this multitrack thing as it seems to be designed for those who are legally trained... I'm stuck at the first hurdle and can't even deal with the DQ!

 

TB

 

I haven't read all of the posts in this thread, but just a word of caution about multitrack claims: unlike the small claims track, you are exposed to the other side's legal costs if you lose. So if they engage a lawyer and win, there's a good chance you'll be paying their fees.

 

I've no idea whether your neighbour's behaviour creates a claim for you in law, but I wouldn't imagine that it is straightforward. So if you're feeling out of your depth, I really would recommend getting proper legal help. And if you can't afford that, consider the merits of continuing down this track.

 

Small claims would be much safer - and LiPs tend to get an easier time, I understand. But I think the claim limit is £10k, which is less than half of your claim, so won't fly.

[Vauban]

"It's £25k for small track, then?"

 

No, the limit for small claims is £10,000, as I wrote in my post above. So if your claim exceeds this, you are going to be exposed to the other side’s legal costs if you lose. Indeed, having started a legal claim you are potentially already liable for their legal costs, even if you discontinue.

 

You will need to explain how you account for losses of £25k. Your economic loss cannot by £375k, if you still own the house. And if you had a mortgage, then the house wasn’t yours in any case. You are still at liberty to resell it. Even if you can demonstrate that the defendant has caused you a loss, you need to be really clear about how much they have actually cost you – bearing in mind you could sell the house subsequently to an alternative buyer. So how much did you really lose by the sale falling through on this one occasion?

 

Unless you can substantiate them with clear evidence (perhaps you can), then making allegations about police corruption or an estate agent taking bribes are not only irrelevant to your claim but also risk damaging your credibility. So keep to the facts that you can demonstrate as true.

 

But my basic point remains that, if you are not able to complete a Directions Questionnaire, then you are definitely going to struggle to manage the rest of this case yourself, despite the help of good people here. Without getting paid legal help or discontinuing the claim, you are risking losing a lot of money indeed if you are on the multi-track. Are you sure your actual losses are not less than £10k, which would allow you to proceed on the small claims track? (I’m still not certain you would have a case, but at least the risks of paying the other side’s legal fees will be minimal.)

[Vauban]

This is relevant... the actions of the Defendant were intentional as he threatened the purchasers, saying if they didn't buy the land adjoining my property (for an extemely extortionate sum), he would pursue them in the courts for damage caused to his land by my septic tank, which he said was leaking (a malicious falsehood)...

 

Causing loss by unlawful means: acts against a third party counted as unlawful means only if they were actionable by that third party if he had suffered loss; that unlawful means consisted of acts intended to cause loss to the claimant by interfering with the freedom of a third party in a way which was unlawful as against that third party and which was intended to cause loss to the claimant...

 

The problem I have is proving it, as he denies it all and my witnesses are reluctant to privide evidence.

 

TB

 

I think this is all very difficult, and can only reiterate the need for legal advice. Having a neighbour aggressively proposition a potential buyer with stories of leaking septic tanks may not come even close legally to the notion of frustrating a contract through unlawful means - I really have no idea, and there will be very few people on here who could give you a clear view.

 

You could post up your particulars of claim and the defence received and maybe those of a more legal bent can give you a quick steer?

[Vauban]

I'm thinking that if I can steer this towards mediation, that would be preferable to going to trial... TB

 

As you still haven't posted up either your original Particulars of Claim or their Defence in response it is hard to say. But if their Defencelargely consists of an absolute and categorical denial of the incident, then mediation is unlikely to be appropriate.

 

I'm afraid I still worry that your case is weak in law, even if the facts as you describe them are largely accepted by the Court. But I am not a lawyer, so I have no qualification to opine with authority!

 

Can you post up the documents requested, which might help to get a better informed view?