Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I’m sure Nature is grateful for you flagging it as needing more examination !   Until then, what is your point about older people and anti-inflammatory medicines? or are you just quoting learned articles at random in the hope that occasionally you’ll either “get lucky” with a comment, or that you’ll gull someone into thinking you actually understand the cytokine / interleukin / inflammasome pathways….. The utility of steroids (dexamethasone) for in-patients needing oxygen has been demonstrated by the RECOVERY trial. I can’t see where this has been analysed on a sub-group basis for older people on anti-inflammatory meds : are you suggesting the trial has “missed a trick”?   What is your feeling on which interleukin needs to be targeted? And should it be upregulated or downregulated?   More to the point (since I don’t expect an answer that shows any degree of understanding, if you answer at all) :   What is your point, rather than just posting journal articles at random!
    • I know what you are saying but the court route so far has almost doubled the claim 
    • Here's my first draft! Let me know what you think so far...cheers!   On behalf of the defendant Statement no.1 20/05/2022   In The County Court At Manchester   Claim Number   HIGHVIEW PARKING LIMITED VS    Witness Statement   I am the defendant in this case. The facts and matters set out in this statement come from my personal knowledge and I believe them to be true.   I was not able to reply to the court documents as I was no longer at the service address at the time the court papers were served. I moved out of the address on the 30th of September 2021   September 31st 2021 - I moved out of my address November 15th 2021 - I left the UK November 25th 2021 - I was served court papers at an address I was no longer living at December 17th 2021 - Judgement by default was issued against me April 1st 2022 - I realised I had a CCJ against me on my credit file and contacted the court for more information April 1st 2022 - I immediately sent the court a N244 request to have the judgement set aside   I received no pre court action dated prior to this date    The Claimant's Witness Statement point 20g about prompt action is incorrect. As soon as I realised I had a CCJ on the 1st of April I applied to have the judgement set aside.   ######### Draft order ######   Between   Claimant xxxxxxxx -and-Defendant xxxxxxx       Draft Order   It is respectfully requested that the Judgement dated xxxxxx claim number xxxxxxxx issued under Part 12 CPR be set aside pursuant to CPR 13.3. a/b.   It is Ordered   The Claim be set aside and the defendant be allowed to defend the claim   Signed    Dated.     DRAFT DEFENCE      (1) the Claimant is suing the wrong person, the Claimant should be suing the driver of the vehicle and has not established keeper liability under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012;  a Notice to Driver should have been delivered within 14 days if the claimant wishes to rely on Keeper liability. Claimant's Witness Statement exhibit 3 clearly shows that their Charge Notice was issued on the 01/09/2017, 27 days after the alleged contravention. DCBL still have no idea whether they are pursuing the keeper or the driver and are disregarding Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 in order to try their luck in the hopes of dishonest financial gain.    The claimant is put to strict proof that it was indeed the defendant who was driving the car at the time.      (2) Locus Standi - the Claimant is not the landowner and I do not believe they have the authority to bring this claim.  A letter - not even from the landowner - saying there is an agreement is not the same as producing an agreement (Claimant's Witness Statement exhibit 1);   The claimant is put to strict proof that they have the consent of the land owner and is asked to produce the actual agreement between themselves and the landowner.      (3) the convoluted "free parking voucher" scheme is an unfair term under the Consumer Rights Act 2019;      (4) I do not believe the Claimant has obtained planning permission for their signs which is a criminal offence and makes it impossible to have formed a contract with the driver;   The claimant is put to strict proof that they have the correct permissions from Manchester Council in order to operate the site as a parking business.      (5) The Claimant is claiming the debt, legal costs and an extra invented sum as an attempt at double recovery which invalidates the whole claim. Their action is expressly forbidden under the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 and ensuing government Code of Practice, as well as previous legislation.    (6) Both the BPA and the IPC do not not have compliant Codes of Conduct. They are in breach of the Law in two ways at least which has been confirmed by the new Private Parking Code of Practice introduced by the Government earlier this year which clarifies the position that has always existed on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 but ignored by most parking companies as well as the BPA and IPC.    (7) Escalation of costs Private Parking Code of Practice s9 states in the most recent publication ‘Private parking charges, discount rates, debt collection fees and appeals charter: further technical consultation’. 36. To reduce harm to motorists, we propose to cap the level of debt recovery fees at the existing industry level £70. In setting this cap, we have taken into consideration the deterrent effect, the amount of court fees and the costs to operators of enforcing parking charges. We will keep the cap under review and will take these factors into consideration when setting it in future.   The parking operator must not levy additional costs over and above the level of a parking charge or parking tariff as originally issued. The claimants WS Exhibit 3 demonstrates the unlawful progression of a £55 charge becoming £135, and escalating to £165 in Exhibit 5, way in excess of what code of practice dictates.   Even back in 2017 the charges were unlawful and on that basis the PCN should have been cancelled as an abuse of process.   Charging of extra debt collection/ administrative costs etc over and above £100. This has always been the case . Schedule 4 s4[5] states "(5)The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(c) or (d) or, as the case may be, 9(2)(d) (less any payments towards the unpaid parking charges which are received after the time so specified).   (8) Most parking companies are breaking the Law by using ANPR cameras that records the entrance and leaving of the car as the "period of Parking" on their Notice to Keeper which is necessary to comply with PoFA 2012. It is obvious that a car is not parked as it is driving within the car looking for a space, then parking in it and then leaving the car park should be not included in the ANPR times. In addition if there are disabled people in the car or children in car seats this can all add to the time. So given that there is a minimum of 10 minutes "consideration time" it is more than probable that the parking period was complied with and that the case should never have been taken to Court. It also means that the keeper's GDPR was breached.
    • cant ever see the point in entering into pointless letter tennis.
  • Our picks

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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 95 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then


Please click the "Report " link


at the bottom of one of the posts.


If you want to post a new story then


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts


I’ve re-posted my thread as suggested by BankFodder. I did not mean to offend or upset anyone. I thought by posting as much detail as possible in my previous thread I was ensuring that the information was there to hand.


I appreciate that this is a free website and I’m very grateful for any help and support that can be provided to help with my situation.

I’ve re posted the key facts and details of my situation, and if there are any questions/further information required then I’m happy to provide it.





I contracted a building company (LTD) to undertake various ground and roof works for my property which I own. I contracted them as they are a large firm and I wanted some comeback if things went wrong etc. How foolish I was. The work has started late, taken multiple weeks to complete and is now is such a poor standard I’m quite embarrassed. Please see below for a timeline.

Work was agreed with Company director (who later I was told only deals with roofing). His brother is the Groundworks director. Four separate contracts for different projects were written up. These contracts are vague and do not have details as to what work will be carried


Work 1 Rear Patio, total £2,650.00. Deposit Paid - £530.00

Work 2 Front Drive total £7,888.00. Deposit Paid - £1,577.60

Work 3 Porch roof total £1,678.00. Deposit Paid - £335.60

Work 4 guttering total £3,456.00. Deposit Paid - £691.20  


The dispute and issues are with Work 1 and Work 2. Work 3 and Work 4 have been paid in full.




·         12/3/21- Company contracted to repair porch roof, guttering and block pave front garden and portion of rear garden. Deposit of £3134 paid and agreed on start date of 26/4/21

·         23/4/21- email sent to company asking when work will commence as no confirmation or information given by company. I was informed that there were delays due to materials. Advised scaffolding will go up on30/4/21 and works will commence 4/5/21.    

·         14/5/21-invoice received for work 3 and 4  

·         17/5/21- invoice paid for roof and guttering £4107

·         1/6/21- work commenced on front drive (works 3). Issues raised as the porch builders left a supporting wooden post on bricks, which was now too short to be installed on the driveway being produced.  

·         2/6/21- chased company director regarding mistake made with post and issues with workmanship

·         7/6/21 received text message that post would be repaired

·         9/7/21 multiple delays to work for front drive (work 2). Arguments between subcontractors regarding delays to material from company. They began to threaten to walk off the job. I rang company director immediately to inform builders have left site. He became hostile so I said I’d contact via email and hung up. Received text stating builders would be returning to collect “tools etc.” - Company director left voicemail stating he would be instructing his solicitors to charge interest on additional work performed and interest on day’s payment is withheld. Additionally stated that as payment has not been made, as per his contract, all the materials belong to him and he will come and remove them all.  

·         12/6/21 Invoice received for Work 1- 6310.40

·         14/6/21 Email sent as rear work has not commenced. Building materials left in the street on the pavement and neighbours beginning to get angry. Explained to director that this was not acceptable and that pedestrians could not get past.

·         15/6/21- sent email explaining that there were issues with the workmanship and quality which were unacceptable. Requested that they be rectified. 

·         30/6/21- Groundworks director sent email stating that someone would attend to rectify work. Did not answer any questions or points raised.

·         14/7/21- email received that workers would attend tomorrow to complete remedial work- still did not confirm or accept what remedial work this would be.. Groundworks director sent text message that I was breaching terms and conditions and that someone would attend tomorrow. Another email received that workers will attend for the front and will attend for the rear another day.

·         16/7/21- email received on Friday by groundworks director stating that all the work looks good and that everything which has been done is “goodwill”. Now want full payment.

·         19/7/21- another email from “accounts” requested immediate payment.

·         20/7/21- Email from “accounts”


I’ve attached some pictures showing issues with the workmanship. I hope this is enough information. I’m happy to provide whatever will help my case. I’m also happy to name the company as I’ve got nothing to hide. I’m just concerned it may prejudice my case if it goes to court. I’m happy to be advised as I have very little legal knowledge.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Lord Roofing and Groundworks LTD

One of the leading roofing companies in the North East, with an expert team of roofers...

LORD ROOFING AND GROUNDS WORKS LTD - Free company information from Companies...
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to LORD ROOFING AND GROUNDS WORKS LTD Refusing to Repair Poorly Laid Driveway and Using Intimidation to Enforce Payment

I contracted Lord Roofing and Groundworks to complete four pieces of work on 12/3/21.


1. Rear patio- total £2,650.00. Deposit Paid - £530.00

2. Front drive- total £7,888.00. Deposit Paid - £1,577.60

3. Porch Roof- total £1,678.00. Deposit Paid - £335.60

4. Guttering- total £3,456.00. Deposit Paid - £691.20 


3 and 4 have been fully paid (total £5134)


Front driveway and rear patio have been poorly laid.

Deposits only have been paid (Driveway £1577) (rear patio £530)


The front porch guttering should have fit in with the drive drainage. This has not occurred.

This is unsightly and not functional.


Additional work requested at time of contract was pointing of front brickwork. This was written in contract as "goodwill".


This is now being charged for as a result of dispute being raised. When front drive was being laid, a step was also laid. This is also now being charged for as a result of the dispute.


Contract states both parties should engage in dispute resolution. I have requested this but been ignored.


The company suggested getting an independent Tobermore (block paving manufacturer) representative to inspect.

This has never occurred.


Crux of my dispute is the front and rear patio have been poorly laid. I have mentioned that this does not adhere to British Standard 7533.

This has been ignored.


A few attempts have been made to rectify the worst of the issues (replacing some terribly cut bricks).


The majority of the issues remain and have not been addressed.


There have been constant threats of additional charges and debt collectors if the outstanding amount is not paid.


A new bill of £10809.40 has been sent today (22/7/21) and the debt has been sent to Westbury Collections.


An additional £2378.40 is now being claimed.


Additional charges have been threatened unless immediate payment is made.



Edited by BankFodder
Restructured in order to make it more accessible
Link to post
Share on other sites

An additional £2378 is being claimed for work which was originally agreed as goodwill. Little extra jobs such as pointing of brickwork near the house which Lord had agreed to do as part of the contract for free. A step was not agreed as part of the contract to get to the property. I was informed verbally this was extra and paid £40 in cash for this. Now they are charging for this work because I’ve raised concerns with the workmanship at inflated prices.


No work is outstanding, it is just the workmanship which is the issue. The work was verbally agreed to start on 26/4/21. No start dates or timescales written in contract. With hindsight I can see why. Received final invoices for work on 19/7/21 when Lord have stated all work has been completed.


I have attached redacted PDF files of the contracts and work agreed. I have also attached a copy of their terms and conditions


I have already been requesting further quotes from other tradespeople and companies to rectify the poor workmanship. I’m trying to get as many of these as possible and I’m waiting to hear back from the first one.


I wrote an email response to prevent the bombarding messages I have been receiving. I mentioned the following:


1.         A Tobermore representative was due to attend to inspect the work. Why has this not occurred?


2.         I have received no evidence that the paving was laid according to the correct British Standard 7533. Can you please provide me with evidence of this to alleviate my concerns?


3.         I previously expressed, as per the contract that I would like to resolve this as amicably as possible and I was amenable to dispute resolution. Why have you not responded to this? Why have “debt collectors” been instructed, and are you unwilling to engage with dispute resolution?


4.         Additional pieces of work which were either classed as “goodwill” or written under an existing contract are now being charged for. I did not agree to this and this will not be paid. Additionally, attempts to intimidate me through debt collectors and additional charges will not result in me making payment.


Their own contract clearly states that the work should be in line with the latest guidance and British Standard. I contacted Tobermore some weeks back to request their British Standard and specifications. I wanted to be as objective and specific as possible. I didn’t want to unreasonably expect them to correct work which was acceptable and vice versa.


I’m happy to post their response or I can summarise it for you. I don’t want to overload with information.


Thank you


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct in thinking I have not commissioned a formal report. I had just requested tradespeople to attend and provide a quote highlighting issues which require rectification.


Would a civil engineers report be sufficient and have enough weight? I've been researching some possible options and my impression is that this would be better than a tradespersons report.


I have re-attached the files in the format you have requested


First PDF is all of the relevant contracts (1- guttering and goodwill work (now being charged for), 2- Driveway, 3- Rear patio). Second PDF is of page 1 and 2 of the terms and conditions. The paper is pink, which is why the document is pink.


Thank you.





Lord Roofing & Grounds Works Ltd Drive-Patio-Guttering Contracts.pdf Terms and Conditions page 1 and 2.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your responses. I have some additional information that I feel is helpful. Lord have admitted to me that the work does not conform to the British Standard and that they are under no obligation to do so. This was from their last email:


Me:  I have received no evidence that the paving was laid according to the correct British Standard 7533. Can you please provide me with evidence of this to alleviate my concerns?


Lord: Not anywhere in the terms and conditions of our contract does it state it would be laid to the standard you mentioned. What it does state in section 1 Lord Roofing and Grounds Works will carry out the work with reasonable care and skill and to a reasonable standard. The carried out work was as such, and only small areas were required to be rectified to bring the work to such standard, which it has been and above in our opinion.


The contract states:

10.1 any material or goods we supply will be

·         Of the appropriate British Standard and codes of practice, in force at the date of placing the order; and for for their normal purpose


I had existing large paving slabs in the rear garden which they have just placed the block paving on top of. This is in clear breach of the British Standard and manufacturer guidance for example. The sub base was not prepared and that (in my opinion) is one of the main reasons why the patio is defective and not level.

I have repeatedly requested dispute resolution or the instruction of an independent assessor. I was informed that Tobermore (paving brick manufacturer) would not send out a representative until payment was made in full. This seems untruthful to me.


Contract Paperwork states:

  • ·         Trading standards approved
  • ·         Member of consumer protection association
  • ·         Trustmark.co.uk (I’ve checked their website and this seems to only apply to Velux windows and installation)


I’m in the process of finding someone suitable to give a professional report of the work done. I’m going to try and see if Tobermore will do so and I’ve sent off emails to them.

Thanks BankFodder






Edited by Chipsticks
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news.


The manufacturer of the paving slabs has asked me for more details and will hopefully provide me with more information. They provide a 25 year warranty for the work carried out, providing that it is installed according to their specifications.


The fact that "Lord" advertise on their website that the Tobermore products come with a 25 year guarantee should support my case, and that they are an approved installer. I would hope if Tobermore state that they will not warranty the work due to it not being installed correctly that would be extra evidence to support my claim?



Edited by Chipsticks
Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate your point about the manufacturer and I agree with your concerns.


I felt that as they were already contacted by Lord then I had little to lose. I'm arranging a professional report by a civil engineer which should be available in the next two weeks. If they state that the work is acceptable then they would have to warranty the work which would seem a foolish thing to do if they agreed it was substandard


Should I inform Lord that I am undertaking this report and give them an opportunity to instruct their own etc? My reluctance at naming them in the beginning was the risk of them following this thread and having an advantage over me. Or is it better to just absorb the cost of the report myself in case they involve someone potentially biased like the manufacturer with whom they have vested business interests?


Also im not quite sure what or if I should correspond with them until the report.


Can they admit this thread in court? I can't see them rectifying the work at present as they've been obstructive from the beginning and reluctant to admit any wrongdoing.


I want to make sure I protect myself as much as possible and forsee as many problems as I can

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im using the mobile site at the moment so must have made an error.


In my previous message I meant, could this thread be used against me in court if Lord have found it or are monitoring it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just received a letter before action from "Westbury collections LTD,". Their paperwork shows the contracts signed and a total claim of £10,809.40


Would all the contracts come under the same claim for small claims court or could each one be defended separately to stay under the £10,000 limit? Im concerned about the liability for legal fees if more than £10,000.


Also, I've been informed the report should be available by Monday next week.


Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've chased the engineer for the report and it will be with me on Monday,


I've created a PDF of the letter before action email I've received. The final page of the document is the additional unquantified charges (goodwill work) they are billing me for as "punishment" for not succumbing to their demands.


Is there anything else I can do in the meantime? As soon as I receive the engineer's report, I'm going to try to obtain three quotes to rectify all the faults highlighted.


To clarify, I've not received any court paperwork. Its the same "collection company" I was threatened with earlier on

Westbury collection LBA 29.7.21.pdf

Edited by Chipsticks
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for getting back to me. I assumed you were busy.


I've got the report and its taken some time for me to redact my personal details out of it, and then re-combine into a new PDF. It seems to have worked out okay.


I've also heard nothing back from Tobermore...Which is exactly as you predicted. At least it shows where their loyalty lies.


It says letter before action, but as you've mentioned there are no formal timescales etc. I'm assuming these are their tried and tested bully tactics to force payment.


I'd be grateful for your thoughts and suggestions on the next steps. I'm going to try and arrange quotations to rectify the work as soon as possible. Its just difficult to get people to attend at the moment

Lord Groundworks Report Redacted 28th July.pdf

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bankfodder


Cost for the report was £355


You are correct that the majority of the work requires completely re-doing. Particularly the back which was not laid on the correct substrate and is not level.


I have not had any quotations yet. The people I have contacted so far, agreed to turn up but have not. There seems to be an excess of work for builders at the moment


The rear garden work I am not happy with at all, and would want it to be corrected completely. I'm not sure at this stage if I would be happy with a reduction or foregoing payment. Especially as there is the further risk of damage to my property (damp etc) and also that all warranties would be void. The front driveway has the potential to be rectified in my view, albeit with significant work required.


You are correct that the rear patio already had concrete laid, which was not a suitable substrate for block pavings and required removal and correct preparation


Before I received this report a few tradespeople attended who promised to provide quotes but then never returned or called back. I assumed they thought they were in the middle of a dispute and didn't want to waste their time providing a quotation. They were quoting off the cuff in the region of £15000


In the earlier contracts I posted, there is additional work which was agreed by the proprietor under the contracts as goodwill. It was added into the contract. I'm not sure why it was itemised as "goodwill" as it came under the total cost in the work. This is now being retrospectively charged for. It was also the reason they were avoiding doing the work properly- as they said it was only goodwill.


I cannot understand how you can have contract A for example. And in this contract you will do work 1, 2, 3 and 4 for a price of say 10,000. But you itemise work 4 as goodwill, and then retrospectively charge £2000 for work 4 because there is a dispute. My understanding is that it would all come under the 1 contract regardless



Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not constantly referencing the goodwill work. You asked me the following in the earlier post:


“Can you remind me how much of their so-called claim is made up of the work which was intended to be a goodwill gesture?

Have you got this goodwill gesture in writing?”



I’ve detailed the costs in previous posts. They are the following


Work 1 Rear Patio, total £2,650.00. Deposit Paid - £530.00


Work 2 Front Drive total £7,888.00. Deposit Paid - £1,577.60


I’m in the process of obtaining quotes. It’s a busy time for builders and tradespeople and a lot of people aren’t even turning up


I was going to send an email either today or tomorrow showing the report and explaining my concerns with the work. Tobermore have also still not returned the emails. Is it worth contacting them again with the report? Surely they should at least confirm to me that warranty is void without meeting British standards etc?


With respect Bankfodder, I really appreciate your help, but its difficult for me to predict and pre-empt exactly the format and manner in which you require information. This is all very new to me and I'm sorry if I've given too much information at times. It has been at attempt to help, rather than hinder things by being explicit and detailed

Edited by Chipsticks
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

I've got some updates.


I've managed to only get one writted quote (Attached). This is because tradespeople have either refused to quote or didn't turn up. Or turned up and then didn't provide a quote


Additionally, I received a statutory demand from Westbury Collections. I initially ignored it as per the advice on here, but after doing some reading, I'm a little worried that this may be a genuine document. Are they attempting to get me declared bankrupt? I've done some research and this should only apply if a debt is not contested. Is this correct?


I'm quite worried now so help would be much appreciated


DP groundworks quote.pdf Westbury statutory demand.pdf

Edited by Chipsticks
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. Thats really relieved my anxiety.


I was under the impression that it was the following that was "served" on me



Explains the need to act quickly, if you receive a statutory demand from someone who is trying to make you bankrupt.


I'll wait for your response tomorrow.


Thank you

Edited by Chipsticks
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your response.


Its okay Bankfodder, everyone makes mistakes. The document I was served states I have 18 days to make a response. It is now the eigtheenth day today. I'm not sure if non-working days count. I've tried to search online but cannot find any information. The demand was hand delivered which is what the regulations would state. It seems to me they're abusing this process as the debt is contested, and that is clearly known by Lord Roofing.


The two invoices in dispute are

Work 1 Rear Patio, total £2,650.00. Deposit Paid - £530.00

Work 2 Front Drive total £7,888.00. Deposit Paid - £1,577.60


From what I've read, I could still contest it in court at fast track without legal representation and argue that I should not have to pay the other parties legal costs, or I could claim for my own "legal costs" i.e my time and work spent on the case.


I don't quite understand what my best option would be. Can I not claim for "work 1 and "work 2" as two separate court claims. These are independent contracts and independent pieces of work carried out


Andyorch, I'm not sure what you mean "no connection to CCJ/judgement". Is this not an abuse of the statutory agreement?

Edited by Chipsticks
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had misunderstood what you said. Yes that soulds like a good idea to claim for each separately. I imaging they would definitely try to have them combined as one debt.


There are different defects, but to the same extent in Work 1 and Work 2. I feel I should claim for Work 2 first (front drive) as this is the highest value and has the greatest impact on my property as its at the front. Also in terms of strategy, I feel it would make sense to contest the work which has the greatest financial risk first.


I'm really struggling to get quotes for work. Is there any other option? I've contacted numerous contractors and due to high demand for their services many are not interested in quoting or when chased give a poor quality quote like I posted previously

Link to post
Share on other sites

I take your point on pursuing the smaller claim first. I think thats a better choice. I was thinking of using my time wisely and maximising my effort.


I already to have a quote. I attached it to the previous quote. I can assure you I've really been chasing these contractors for a quote for some time. I'm going to try and get more individualised quotes for the front and the back.


I'm just quite concerned about this statutory demand at the moment as from what I understand, this has the potential to make me bankrupt

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've managed to get a much more professional and detailled quote yesterday which itemises the work required to both pieces of work (attached as GG Quote)


 I'm also in the process of having the previous quote amended and to obtain further ones.


I've reattached the engineer's report. All of the issues relating to the smaller claim (the rear patio) are from page 15 onwards. I've re attached the report here.


I'm in the process of sorting the statutory demand. As its the weekend I understand that as long as it is sent today then its still within time (as the final day fell on a weekend)

Lord Groundworks Report Redacted 28th July.pdf GG quote.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't too sure how much information to put into the court application. I've made it brief as I would expect this should be struck out.


I am also going to have the IAA form hand delivered to the court tomorrow. This is what I've written for the reasons:


The [matters on which the Applicant(s) relies (rely)] [OR grounds upon which the Applicant(s) claim(s) to be entitled to this relief] [are as follows:

(a)    Applicant was contracted to undertake building work as per a written contract. Applicant has not fulfilled terms of contract and is breach of Consumer Rights act 2015.

(b)   Contract states that mediation should be undertaken in the event of a dispute, which has been refused.

(c)    Debt is contested and therefore Statutory Demand is abuse of process. Debt should be pursued via the Small Claims Track. Applicant requests this demand be struck out.


Thank you for the help

Edited by Chipsticks
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just received an email back from the Court after I submitted the form I filled out


"Good morning


If this is an application to set aside a statutory order that has been served on you, please find the link which will give you all of the advice you need for your form.  Three copies of the application, statutory demand and witness statement need to be at the Court within 18 days of the statutory demand being served upon you.


It appears as though  you are the respondent and not the person who is applying for the statutory demand to be set aside.  If the Company is the applicant, they are unable to apply in this way but it does explain how the Company makes an application in the link below.  If it is the Company making the application, they will need to make this in their local County Court.






Can @Andyorchor anyone help me with this? Am I correct in understanding that the company has served the notice incorrectly. I don't quite understand whats going on here


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appear to have mixed up the applicant and respondent sections. I thought I was responding to the initial statutory demand. I've amended it. The whole process seems unecessarily complicated and drawn out.


The guidance documents state that I do not need to provide a witness statement if not required but the court has replied saying I do. I would have thought what I have written is sufficient?


The Applicant(s) seek(s) the following relief [OR order OR directions]:

(a)    Debt is contested and therefore Statutory Demand is abuse of process. Debt should be pursued via the Small Claims Track

(b)   Applicant requests this demand be struck out

The [matters on which the Applicant(s) relies (rely)] [OR grounds upon which the Applicant(s) claim(s) to be entitled to this relief] [are as follows:

(a)    Applicant was contracted to undertake building work as per a written contract. Applicant has not fulfilled terms of contract and is breach of Consumer Rights act 2015.

(b)   Contract states that mediation should be undertaken in the event of a dispute, which has been refused

(c)    Debt is contested and therefore Statutory Demand is abuse of process. Debt should be pursued via the Small Claims Track


I'm going to re-submit back to the court. Any thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the reponses. I've received the following from the "collection" company



Dear xxxxx


Our agents have confirmed that a Statutory Demand was served upon you personally at your address of xx on Monday 23rd August 2021 at 18.41 hours in respect of the outstanding balance owed to our above named client.


As you will note from the contents of the Statutory Demand, you have 21 days from the date of service upon you to “compound to the creditors satisfaction” and either pay this debt balance in full or make repayment proposals that are agreeable to our client and adhered to by yourself.


These 21 days will elapse on Monday 13th September 2021 and at this point our client will be in a position to issue Bankruptcy proceedings against you for the recovery for the full outstanding balance if no response or offer of payment is forthcoming.


I will be taking instructions from my client next week in regards to this and to avoid this course of action you are required to contact me on my direct line telephone number without delay.  Please note that


Once proceedings have been issued the debt balance will increase significantly and it will be out of our hands to agree to any form of settlement as the full balance plus recoverable costs of the Petition will be required in full before the hearing to prevent a Bankruptcy Order being made against you.


I look forward to hearing from you as a matter of urgency and on or before the date stipulated above.


Kind regards,



Senior Account Manager | Westbury Collections Ltd

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...