LORD ROOFING AND GROUNDS WORKS LTD Refusing to Repair Poorly Laid Driveway and Using Intimidation to Enforce Payment

[BankFodder]

Quote

Dear XXX

I always made it clear that you are welcome to carry out a visit and to have your own inspection carried out. I am pleased that you are now taking me up on this offer.

You refer to "the" remedial works but as I've said in my most recent correspondence, these will need to be agreed with me and with an independent inspector and subject to supervision because you no longer have my confidence.

I note that you have stated that one of the objectives of your site visit is "to ascertain exactly what was stipulated within the contract".

Also, you refer to "the engineer's recommendations". Can you please clarify which engineer you are referring to.

Yours sincerely

 

This is a very useful letter for your forthcoming set aside application.
It's clear that he accepts that there may well be some issues with the contract and with the work and that means that there is no basis for his bankruptcy demand.
You should definitely reduce his letter to the court and explained that particular point of view.
 

As far as the fact that you have issue the claim is concerned, you don't need to do anything. Just wait and see if he reacts or if not enter a judgement as soon as you are allowed to on about day 15 or 16 or something.

[Chipsticks]

I've made a few changes to the email and added some details. They have already brought this person to inspect the work

 

 

Dear James,

 

On the 30th June Matthew mentioned his head fitter Lee would attend the property to carry out remedial work. On the 15th and 16th June workers arrived at the property in an attempt to rectify the issues with the front and rear paving. On the 16th June, Matthew visited the site and stated the following via email " All the work has now been completed. I visited the site today to view the work done to the front which all looks good now including the wall and additional hauncing to the front of the drive as goodwill. We have also replaced the recessed manhole on the rear patio to ensure a better fit. I trust now you are happy to pay the outstanding balance owed on the account". You have stated numerous times that Matthew is responsible for the groundsworks part of the business. He inspected the work on this date and deemed it acceptable.

I always made it clear that you are welcome to carry out a visit and to have your own inspection carried out. I am pleased that you are now taking me up on this offer.

You refer to "the remedial works" but as I've said in my most recent correspondence, these will need to be agreed with me and with an independent inspector and subject to supervision because you no longer have my confidence.

I note that you have stated that one of the objectives of your site visit is "to ascertain exactly what was stipulated within the contract".

Also, you refer to "the engineer's recommendations". Can you please clarify which engineer you are referring to.

Yours sincerely

 

 

[BankFodder]

Sorry but I'm not sure what you are referring to here and I'm not sure what you are proposing is the final form of the email.

If you be kind enough to put it in quotes then we would understand what we're doing.

 

Quote

Put it in a quote form like this

 

[Chipsticks]

The purple is your existing template. The black is my added details for the email. I hope that's clear

 

Quote

Dear James,

 

On the 30th June Matthew mentioned his head fitter Lee would attend the property to carry out remedial work. On the 15th and 16th June workers arrived at the property in an attempt to rectify the issues with the front and rear paving. On the 16th June, Matthew visited the site and stated the following via email " All the work has now been completed. I visited the site today to view the work done to the front which all looks good now including the wall and additional hauncing to the front of the drive as goodwill. We have also replaced the recessed manhole on the rear patio to ensure a better fit. I trust now you are happy to pay the outstanding balance owed on the account". You have stated numerous times that Matthew is responsible for the groundsworks part of the business. He inspected the work on this date and deemed it acceptable.

I always made it clear that you are welcome to carry out a visit and to have your own inspection carried out. I am pleased that you are now taking me up on this offer.

You refer to "the remedial works" but as I've said in my most recent correspondence, these will need to be agreed with me and with an independent inspector and subject to supervision because you no longer have my confidence.

I note that you have stated that one of the objectives of your site visit is "to ascertain exactly what was stipulated within the contract".

Also, you refer to "the engineer's recommendations". Can you please clarify which engineer you are referring to.

Yours sincerely

[BankFodder]

Okay but I don't understand why you want to include that preamble.

 

[BankFodder]

Once again we are getting a gap in responses here. I'm a bit concerned that you are going to send your version of email – I'd really like to know what you are intending by your preamble which is basically a recital of a load of events which happened back in June.
I don't see that it deals with the most recent message you have received from him.

[Chipsticks]

I've received no response from Lord since the last email (your suggestions in the earlier post). @bankfodder I only make edits and suggestions to try and ensure all the facts are known to the case. I'm trying to take an active role in the proceedings. I'm sure you can understand why I'm not just sending your suggestings without any sort of due process.

 

I've prepared my defence for the statutory demand hearing on 12/10/21 (Tuesday) using your suggestions. I'll update the thread of the outcome as soon as it becomes available.

 

Thanks again for all your help

[BankFodder]

I understand that you want to have input – but having input means that you contribute here to the discussion and when we ask your question and then you disappear for six days so that by the time you come back, your amendments are a fait accompli is quite difficult to deal with.

 

I think that the text that you added was an embellishment that looked amateurish and didn't help your credibility.

 

I have no idea what you mean by "due process" and frankly I think you should run without suggestions unless there is a good reason for making amendments and then as I've already asked, I think at the least it would be polite to explain why you are proposing certain amendments.

Good luck with the hearing of course.

 

I'm confident that you will succeed. Make sure you ask for costs. Don't expect that there will come an opportunity at the end for you to make this request – you will have to get it in very quickly. It's unlikely that a judge will ask you whether you want to make this order so you may have to get in quickly before the judge finishes and say that you'd like to raise the question of costs as the attempt that your bankruptcy was so clearly unnecessary and so clearly an attempt to shortcut the interests of justice

[Chipsticks]

Success.

 

Court hearing went extremely well.

 

They did not represent themselves at all.

 

After a brief hearing its gone in my favour. Statutory demand set aside

 

Costs have been awarded £195

 

I'm assuming that this can be used towards my case for the Small Claims application. The judge was not impressed with Lord's conduct and stated that they have been heavy handed

 

Thank you all for your help so far!

Edited October 12, 2021 by Chipsticks

[FTMDave]

Great news - well done!

[BankFodder]

Well done. This is excellent news and also it was a very good opportunity for you to practice and to become a little confident. I would say that the whole thing is a big Win! for you.

Let us know when you get the order – and especially the order relating to costs and we will see about how to enforce it.

Very interesting that the judge said that they were "heavy-handed". I suppose that was said partly because they didn't appear but anyway, that is very useful to know and although not directly relevant to the substantive claim, it will help.

What a waste of court resources and your own time that they started all this procedure and they didn't even bother to turn up.

I suppose the next thing to do is to start waiting for their response to your claim form. Can you remind me of when you issued it please.

Incidentally, I'd be very curious to know what arguments you made particularly to the judge and did the judge comment on the points you made.

[BankFodder]

I also find myself wondering whether any of their other customers has been treated to this heavy-handed approach.
The bankruptcy demands seem to happen so automatically and so quickly that I have a sense that maybe this is not the first time and this could be their standard method of dealing with people who fall out with them over the quality of work or the amount of the bill.

I can imagine that most people who receive this would cave in and pay the money and you may have been the only person who's ever stood up to them.
You might like to comb through the Internet and see if you can find any references to this company and their dealings with their customers.

[Chipsticks]

Thank you for the kind words

 

I read through your earlier suggestion word for word when the Judge asked me for my version of events.

 

I added a section about costs which I read out to the judge. I also answered any additional questions. It was short and to the point.

 

[BankFodder]

Please can you remind us when you issued the claim. You need to be monitoring the money claim website closely after about 15 days – although probably allow some extra days the service – and if they don't acknowledge or defend, you should be ready to apply for judgement at the very moment that the site allows you.

Of course it is most unlikely that they will fail to take any action – but you never know.

I'm sure that they are very seriously on the back foot. It's unlikely they have ever been challenged like this and it seems to me that their bullying tactics are predicated on the belief that you will back down as soon as it gets heavy.

We will see what their defence says – but by and large I would say that you are now back in control. It's up to you now to keep control which means that you engage closely with this discussion and you respond quickly on the basis of the advice we give.

[Chipsticks]

Sorry I missed your last message. I have been checking regularly for updates but I have not received any emails that they have applied for more time or responded

 

I've tried to log into the money claim website but its saying it is temporarily unavailable.

 

I've not received any further update emails from MCOL or from Lord

 

This was the last email I received from the MCOL website

 

"

Your claim against Lord Roofing and Groundworks Ltd was issued on 1 October 2021.

The defendant needs to respond before 20 October 2021.

The defendant can ask for an extra 14 days to respond. If they do you will be notified of the date you need to respond by."

 

 

Edited October 18, 2021 by Chipsticks

[dx100uk]

19 days is the time limit for him to complete the 'Acknowledgement Of Service' to your claim (14+5 days for service)

if he has not done so, you can request judgement.

 

should he have done aos, its a total of 33 days for him to file a defence.

 

 

[BankFodder]

Keep on checking the money claim website from now. Let us know if there are any problems getting into it. However I'm not aware of any difficulties

[Chipsticks]

Still no response from Lord. I was having difficulty accessing it when it was offline over the weekend

 

Managed to log into the account again. It states the following...

 

"Lord Roofing and Groundworks Ltd has until 20 October 2021 to respond. They can request an extra 14 days if they need it."

 

Looks like they're not going to even attempt to defend...interesting

Edited October 19, 2021 by Chipsticks

[BankFodder]

Well get ready to apply for judgement at the first available opportunity.

 

Don't refer to us. Don't hang around – just do it

[Chipsticks]

They have not responded.

 

I have requested a County Court Judgement against them.

 

Can someone confirm that I've done things correctly. I filed the claim against one of the directors (James Moore) and also the company.

 

Thanks

[BankFodder]

It sells ok but please could you post your claim form in pdf format here.

 

Why did you file the claim against the director? Against the company would have been fine

[Chipsticks]

The claim was against the company.

 

I had to put the director down as a point of contact.

[Chipsticks]

Here is the redacted copy of my claim

 

Thanks Bankfodder

242MC258-claim-form-claimant-copy Redacted.pdf

[BankFodder]

Ok. It seems fine. At some point you will be allowed to begin enforcement proceedings. We recommend very strongly that you transfer the matter to the high Court enforcement offices and let them do the enforcement. They are far more vigorous about the way that they enforce.

At some point soon we will start to consider proceedings in respect of the second patio.

 

However, be ready for an application from Lords to set aside the judgement on some spurious ground. Is always possible.

 

[BankFodder]

Any update on this?