Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Court is selected by you if you get an n180 dq form from the court.   Lowell will need to provide signed agreement s for both accounts in their POC to succeed as well as things like notice of assignment and default notices.   If you search here lowell claimform you see they have backed off with better paperwork than you have..those are pants..no ip addresses either i will guess.. Goodluck Lowell!!   Dx
    • I can't read it in detail now, but just skimming over it:   1.  Where is the title?  Didn't we say "Particulars of Counterclaim"?   2.  Where is para 19 and 20?   3.  I think FTMDave suggested putting the individual subtotals and Exhibit numbers against para 18(a) - (d) to make it clearer for the judge?   4.  what is this £3000?    "A receipts in respect of 3 items (a) - see Attachment 1 – Page-4-8 for:   (i) £3,000.00 GTM piling"   Isn't that £3000 already included in 18(a)???????   5.  Why are there two 18(c)?   6.  I don't understand what this means:     A receipts in respect of 3 items (a) - see Attachment 1 – Page-4-8 for:   (i) £3,000.00 GTM piling,                                                      (ii) Rubble truck £387.12                                                     (iii) £250.00 to Mellor the roofer   The two priced quotes in respect of items (b) (1) Cheshire Bespoke Building Limited for £5,190.00,  and (2) Mellor Roofing Specialist. (c) – see Attachments 6 and 7 - are attached in support of this counterclaim   7.  Does the last sentence need a paragraph number as appropriate?   Read #131 et seq again...    
    • Why not ring the contravention unit (sic) of the council first. Find out why this has happened, but I've a funny feeling it will result in you using the appropriate forms in that link.   They might deal with the bailiffs for you, as there appears to be some comms breakdown .
    • My final ticket:      1.      The original Claimant agreed to undertake building work (Project 1) at the original Defendant/now Part 20 Counterclaimant’s property in relation to 3 specific areas of work for an agreed price of £4300.  The work was:   a. To underpin the bay window at the property, b. To replace and repair a previously-removed chimney breast and, c. To install a new beam to the patio door.   2.      It was agreed that Project 1 was to be carried out under the instructions of a structural engineer engaged by the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant and that the Claimant’s work would be as a result of instructions received following the structural engineer's assessment of the property.   3.      Between June and July in 2020 the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant provided the Claimant with a full copy of the structural engineer's report which detailed instructions to the Claimant for the works to be carried out.   4.      It was agreed between the parties that the works would commence on 13 August 2020.   5.      It was agreed between the parties that payments for Project 1 would be made in three instalments. The first payment would be made at the start of the Claimant's work. The second payment would be paid at the halfway point of the Claimant's work. The final payment would be made on completion of the total works.   6.      The Claimant commenced work on 13 August 2020 and the first instalment due was paid.     7.      On 24 August 2020 the Claimant asked the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant to arrange an inspection of his work by the Building Control Inspector.  The Claimant also stated that Project 1 was approaching mid-way and the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant paid the second instalment due.   8.      The Building Inspector arrived to inspect the Claimant’s work but the Claimant was absent.  The inspector was obviously very displeased by the standard of the Claimant's work.  The inspector spoke to the Claimant by telephone, asking him why he was absent and interrogating him about the work he had done.  The inspector then gave him some instructions over the telephone and also left a list of instructions with the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant to be passed on to the builder.  The building inspector then said he would be getting in touch with the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant’s structural engineer with his findings and the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant should hear from the engineer soon.   9.      The Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant passed on the Building Inspector’s instructions to the Claimant who agreed to follow them.   10.  The structural engineer visited and recommended piling to complete the underpinning for Project 1.  The Claimant explained that he could not undertake this work. The structural engineer then suggested an alternative company to the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant to do the necessary work and this company was engaged by the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant to complete the necessary piling at an additional cost to the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant of £3000. (See receipt at Exhbibit-1).   11.  The Claimant asked if the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant needed any more work to be done and, despite the problems encountered on Project 1, the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant agreed on 7 September 2020 to have more work done (Project 2) at an agreed price of £2580 and on similar payment terms to Project 1.   12.  As work commenced on Project 2 and was continued on the remaining work for Project 1, the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant had occasion to make several complaints to the Claimant regarding the standard of his work.   13.   Barely a week after starting on Project 2, the Claimant demanded payment for that work.  After a period of negotiation the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant paid the Claimant £1500 in cash.  Both parties agreed that this left a balance outstanding on Project 2 of £1080.   14.  It later came to the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant’s attention that the Claimant had removed material (including a steel beam) from the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant’s property that the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant suspects either belonged to him or had been paid for by him in connection with Project 1.  When the Claimant challenged admitted he had done this.  The Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant has included the value of this material in his counterclaim detailed below.   15.    On 21 September 2020 the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant highlighted and sent a snagging list to the Claimant (Exhbibit-2).  Over a month later the Claimant sent an employee to attend to this work.  It was not carried out satisfactorily and resulted in an updated snagging list being sent to the claimant (Exhibit -3).  All of this snagging work remains undone by the Claimant.   16.  Apart from the outstanding snagging work referred to in para 16 above, the Claimant also left other work from Projects 1 and 2 uncompleted.  That work which was not completed is listed at ( Exhibit 4.)   17.  During the course of carrying out work on Projects 1 and 2 the Claimant also negligently caused substantial damage to the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant’s property (as itemised in  Exhibit-5) by not executing the work with the skill expected of a reasonable tradesman.   18.  The Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant seeks an order from the court directing the Claimant to pay to the Defendant/Part 20 Counterclaimant the sum of £16,577.12 in respect of:   (a)   the cost of the piling referred to in para 10 above which the Claimant could not undertake and another contractor had to be paid to complete; (b)   the cost of completing work the Claimant had left undone from Projects 1 and 2 referred to in para 16 above; (c)   the cost of remedial work to put right the damage negligently caused by the Claimant and referred to in para 17 above. (d). the cost of the steel beam referred to in para 14 above put down as estimated.   A receipts in respect of 3 items (a) - see Attachment 1 – Page-4-8 for:   (i) £3,000.00 GTM piling,                                                      (ii) Rubble truck £387.12                                                     (iii) £250.00 to Mellor the roofer   The two priced quotes in respect of items (b) (1) Cheshire Bespoke Building Limited for £5,190.00,  and (2) Mellor Roofing Specialist. (c) – see Attachments 6 and 7 - are attached in support of this counterclaim.     The defendant/Part 20 counterclaimant is claiming 8% interest under the County Courts Act 1984 from the 26 October 2020 which was the last day the       STATEMENT OF TRUTH   I believe that the facts stated in this particulars of counterclaim are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.’.    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

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


Recommended Posts

The CCJ and enforcement is done via physical mail.

 

Once I made the application online it said I would receive post and further instructions/information.

 

I'm still waiting for that to arrive. I'll update as soon as that occurs

 

Have a nice weekend. Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

via the high court i hope?

 

dx

  • I agree 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes can you please let us know what you have done here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the stage where I'm at. There was no option for high court

 

I'm waiting for the paperwork

 

 

Dear xxxxxxx,

Claim number: xxxxxxxxxx

You requested a County Court Judgment (CCJ) against Lord Roofing and Groundworks Ltd.

When we’ve processed your request we’ll post a copy of the judgment to you and to Lord Roofing and Groundworks Ltd.

Edited by Chipsticks
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay. This is not enforcement. This is simply the judgement.

I think we were all worried that you were going to simply instruct county court bailiffs which would be a big mistake.

You must have the judgement transferred up to the High Court for enforcement for High Court enforcement officers.

It costs you about £70 for the transfer up fee and this will be reimbursed by the defendants. All fees enforcement will be borne by the defendants.

You need to find a High Court enforcement website – they are all private companies – and have a look at the transfer up services that they offer.

One thing to make sure is that in the event of a failure of enforcement, that you will not have to pay any fee. This is the normal nowadays – but you should doublecheck it.

Have a look at this list of High Court Enforcement Officers

 

WWW.HCEOA.ORG.UK

Do you need advice on recovering a debt? Instruct a High Court Enforcement Officer with High Court Enforcement Officer Association.

 

Check their websites carefully and if necessary phone them and discuss and the most important thing is that if there is a failure of enforcement, you will not pay the fee.

Start doing the research on this. It's very fast and this is the only very effective way of enforcement.

 

We are not making any recommendations or referrals here. We don't know any of these people and we don't get any commissions or anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the advice BankFodder.

 

The nearest High Court Enforcers are in Middlesbrough

 

WWW.ALBERTCHAMBERS.CO.UK

Welcome to the website of Albert Chambers, incorporating Storey & Fellows Sheriff's Officers and Liddles Detective Agency. Providing services for...

 

I'm emailing them now to find out their fees etc.

 

I'll keep you updated

 

Thanks

 

I've found another company called Highcourtsolutions. There are not many in the North East area.

 

I dont quite understand the way the fees work. Will this be a high court writ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the fee is £66 to transfer up to high court

just contact them, they will do it all for you

simply state you wish to enforce a CCJ judgement you have

the only remit is the CCJ must be for greater than £600

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read this thread 

 

To understand why you should not use county court bailiffs whenever possible but you should transfer up.

This is a story of somebody who we are helping and who was in an excellent position and then they decided to go it alone and instruct bailiffs instead of the sheriffs.

Enjoy.

Edited by BankFodder
Sorry, I've referred to the wrong thread
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 14/09/2021 at 09:22, BankFodder said:

Well done.

Instruct county court bailiffs as soon as you possibly can – then standby for the fun!

 

4 hours ago, BankFodder said:

To understand why you should not use county court bailiffs whenever possible but you should transfer up.

This is a story of somebody who we are helping and who was in an excellent position and then they decided to go it alone and instruct bailiffs instead of the sheriffs.


Which is it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, in that case I have referred to the wrong thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any update on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting for the paperwork from the court. They sent me this email yesterday

 

"

 
 

Dear xxxx,

Claim number: xxxxx

 

This email explains what you can do if you received a letter confirming a County Court Judgment (CCJ) was issued against Lord Roofing and Groundworks Ltd.

 

Find out the actions you can take to get the money after a CCJ has been issued: https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/enforce-a-judgment

 

If you did not get a letter, your request is still pending and a letter will arrive soon.

 

Remember – you’re not guaranteed to get paid just because the defendant has a CCJ."

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Further Update

 

I've received both the judgement for the statutory demand and also the claim for the rear patio. It is the court issued paperwork which states if the defendant does not pay their credit rating etc. will be affected due to a default county court judgement.

 

I'm in the process of instructing high court bailiffs.

 

I've also received an email from the court stating the information below. They have used excuses that they were ill etc. in previous correspondence, so I'm wondering if they're going to contest this on that basis again

 

"Claim number: xxxxxxxx

Lord Roofing and Groundworks Ltd has changed or removed some contact details.

Sign in to your account to see their current details:"

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

Well for the moment don't be diverted. Keep on instructing High Court enforcement officers. You should be able to complete that tomorrow I would have thought.

I think we had better start planning your claim in respect of the other patio.

Maybe you can just summarise once again what it is and what it's worth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose that you had also better check their change of contact details. Have you checked that they haven't changed their name or phoenixed themselves in some way?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have added an email address to the online claim. Why they would do this post judgement seems odd..

 

They have been very sneaky and dishonest up to this point, so I immediately thought this was something suspicion when I received

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea why they put it. I'm sure you're right that there is a reason – but you should simply proceed. If you notice changes that make sure that you have the changes logged so that you can show how they have developed historically.

Let's start going for the second patio claim

Link to post
Share on other sites

I already made a template and Ill start drafting the particulars again. I should be able to get this sent off tomorrow as most of the work I can copy and paste from the previous one.

 

I'll keep the thread updated

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope you aren't seriously saying that you intend to file your particulars of claim straightaway?!!

This next claim needs careful preparation – in exactly the same way that we tried to prepare the previous one. We have to know the value of the claim, make sure that we've got everything together.
Then we have to send a letter of claim which I suggest that you draft and post here before it is sent off.

From what you posted above, I understand that you think that you're going to prepare a particulars of claim and father claim straightaway.

I do hope not

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Bankfodder,

 

Apologies for the delay

 

I've arranged for the High Court Bailiffs to enforce the debt. That should begin Monday (Tomorrow)

 

I was going to use the same wording etc. for the front patio (larger claim) as the circumstances are totally the same. What is it that would need to be discussed? I uploaded a redacted version of my previous claim in an earlier post. I'm happy to follow your directions. I've not submitted anything as of yet

 

Do you just want the total value of the claim? The quote I received for rectifying the front drive (largest work undertaken) was £12500. I was going to make the claim for £10,000 to ensure it remains within the small claim track

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hadn't understood that even just part of the claim – the front patio was more than the small claims limit.

I had understood that the two came together were more than the small claims limit and this is why we were dividing them into two.

Of course there is nothing stopping you going off on your own – but I think it's much better that we do things together carefully. It's always worth doublechecking especially when we get to this kind of value.
Also there is something rather strange about their lack of reaction.

I think it will probably be worth seeing what happens when the enforcement occurs – or at least there is an attempted enforcement.

Have you checked their limited liability status?

Maybe you could go through the figures of this second claim please.

What is the contract price?
How much deposit did you pay towards this?
What is the cost of remedying the defects?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But it seems to me that there is a non sequitur here.

What I understand here is that £12,500 puts you in a position where you have a front patio in the condition that you expected it to be after the work had it been successfully completed by Lords.
You would anyway have expected to be out of pocket by £7888 for the work.

But you haven't paid for the work. Therefore if you sue for £12,500 you are effectively getting your front patio for nothing.


You can only sue for £12,500 - £7888 + £1577.60 p = £6189 give or take a few pence.

You can't include the £7888 in your claim if you haven't paid it to them.

 

Comment please
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the delay

 

Latest update for the high court enforcement company

 

"We can advise that the application for the Writ has been sent to the Court, and we will notify you as soon as we are in receipt of the sealed documents."

 

The quotes I have received are to rectify all the issues that are outstanding. I don't understand what you mean in the previous post. Why can't I sue for more than the cost of the initial work.

 

Should I not be entitled to claim the full amount (£12,500) minus the materials they have supplied, minus their labour charges.

 

You're more experienced in this than me, so I'll defer to you. For the previous claim, I claimed for the full cost of the remedial work, minus the deposit. I would imagine if I am indeed incorrect, had it gone to a hearing the judge would have realised this.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...