Won Judgement Against Mcafee For £1905. They Won't Pay Up. What Next??

[puddock]

I have won a judgement against McAfee ( virus protection people ). They ignored all small calims court papers, so won by default. I am now not sure whether to go through the small claims court or the high court for judgement. The small claims court obviously cannot advise me.

 

They stated that McAfee could simply ignore the judgement, as because they are such a large multinational company they are not too bothered about any adverse infiormation or CCJ's against them. This seems a bit of a rum deal. If I owed monies, I would have to pay up, yet they can seemingly flout the law and ignore all my requests, and the courts as well.

 

So what would be the best and quickest method to collect the monies due. SCC or HC?? Or the balliffs etc.

 

Any advice greatly appreciated.

[Guest ArthurP]

Hi

 

If you have a default judgement already then you have a judgement,(although this can be applied to be set aside by McAfee), so you have already used the SCC.

 

There are several ways to get your money but the SCC will order McAfee to pay you within 28 days of the default judgement.

 

I don't think the HC is appropriate for this but I may be wrong.

[gyzmo]

ideally, if you haven't already, send a letter to McAfee demanidng the money within 7 days (send it by recorded delivery). If it is not paid, then the McAfee can be held in contempt of court. You will then need to apply to the court to have the judgement enforced. The court can send bailiffs round to their offices and remove whatever they need to recover the money.

 

The easiest way to look at this is to imagine all those people in debt who have CCJs against them. If they don't pay, the bailiff comes round. You have your foot in the other shoe, and can do to companies what they would do to you.

 

I personally would enjoy it (only becasue it is a company and not some poor sod who has bugger all to live on).

[Guest ArthurP]

ideally, if you haven't already, send a letter to McAfee demanidng the money within 7 days (send it by recorded delivery).

 

But the OP has a Default Judgement and with that comes a standard 28 day period for them to pay which is set by HMCS. You can't demand the payment 3 weeks earlier, surely?

[puddock]

Many thanks to Gyzmo and ArthurP, but which of you is corrcet? 7 days or 28 days wait?

[buzby]

Do McAffee actually have a legal presence in the UK? As I recall, they were Incorporated in the USA so any court action would have to be served on the corporate HQ. (Unless they had a UK Ltd company you could pursue).

[gyzmo]

ArthurP is right on that one - 28 days (or whatever else it may say on the judgement). My apologies.

[puddock]

Do McAffee actually have a legal presence in the UK? As I recall, they were Incorporated in the USA so any court action would have to be served on the corporate HQ. (Unless they had a UK Ltd company you could pursue).

 

Their UK lwayers supplied me with their London HQ.

 

Also thnaks to Gyzmo.

[buzby]

Sorry, that's not the same thing. A 'headquarters' has no legal significance. You would need a UK Registered Office to file a competent legal claim against the firm. Their solicitors - most probably on a retainer from the Incorporated US entity, would not be making a point of telling you this (as it's not in their client's interests).

[dw190]

ArthurP is right on that one - 28 days (or whatever else it may say on the judgement). My apologies.

 

Judges in the Small Claims normally make orders for payment within 28 days for Judgement by Default.

 

If the Judgement is awarded at a hearing and the Defendant didn't attend or advise the court of non attendance you can ask for the order to be for a payment forthwith.

 

It is still better to wait for 28 days to pass or even up to 90 days but send letters every 28 demanding payment of the Judgementcopying them to the court. That way the Defendant has little chance of getting the Judgement set aside as you have given them plenty of rope.

[puddock]

Sorry, that's not the same thing. A 'headquarters' has no legal significance. You would need a UK Registered Office to file a competent legal claim against the firm. Their solicitors - most probably on a retainer from the Incorporated US entity, would not be making a point of telling you this (as it's not in their client's interests).

 

Name & Registered Office:

MCAFEE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

100 NEW BRIDGE STREET

LONDON

EC4V 6JA

Company No. 02825890

 

The above address supplied by thier lawyers, for service of court papers.

[dw190]

Name & Registered Office:

 

MCAFEE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

100 NEW BRIDGE STREET

LONDON

EC4V 6JA

Company No. 02825890

 

 

The above address supplied by thier lawyers, for service of court papers.

 

Thats where to send the Bailiffs then.

 

If they return with a failed attempt to levy then you could make a Statutory Demand for Payment followed by a Petition to Wind Up.

 

Gets a little expensive but usually works with a viable Company.

[buzby]

That's excellent - however that address looks mighty familiar. (ie it's their 'Registered Office' but used by 10-100 other firms, and they have no other presence (or assets) at New Bridge Street. I got caught out one that way before - thinking my warrant would cover anything at that address, until I found out the offices were a firm of solicitors providing a mail drop and titular Register Office service to their client.

[puddock]

That's excellent - however that address looks mighty familiar. (ie it's their 'Registered Office' but used by 10-100 other firms, and they have no other presence (or assets) at New Bridge Street. I got caught out one that way before - thinking my warrant would cover anything at that address, until I found out the offices were a firm of solicitors providing a mail drop and titular Register Office service to their client.

 

Interesting! The Mcafee solicitors supplied that address for service of court papers. So if they supply the incorrect address, surley it is on their head be it.

 

I am following information supplied. So I will try the baliffs, and see what happens. Surley the court would not be amused at Mcafee supplying procrastinatory wrong information to me?

[dw190]

Interesting! The Mcafee solicitors supplied that address for service of court papers. So if they supply the incorrect address, surley it is on their head be it.

 

I am following information supplied. So I will try the baliffs, and see what happens. Surley the court would not be amused at Mcafee supplying procrastinatory wrong information to me?

 

They have not provided wrong information if it is the Registered Office and their solicitors who will be authorised to accept service of documents.

 

Companies House web site is down at the moment so I can't check.

 

Have a look here later:

 

http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/toolsToHelp/findCompanyInfo.shtml

[buzby]

As dw190 points out, you don;t have to have any assets at the registered office - so DON'T instruct any Warrant of Execution at their address until you KNOW they have assets at it. The solicitors have done nothing wrong, it's just the games they get up to.

 

If you discovered that the firms had an office in an Industrial Estate, you send the bailiffs THERE, armed with the warrant - the address of execution does not have to be the same as that of service!

[puddock]

Thanks buzby. But how do I locate their UK address for the baliffs?

[midge61]

Hi

Don't know if this helps I got it from mcfee main website

United Kingdom

 

OFFICES 227 Bath Road Slough Berkshire SL1 5PP United Kingdom Website: www.mcafee.com

[dw190]

Hi

Don't know if this helps I got it from mcfee main website

United Kingdom

 

OFFICES 227 Bath Road Slough Berkshire SL1 5PP United Kingdom Website: www.mcafee.com

 

 

Looks like they may have a call centre there with plenty of expensive computors.

 

Anyone in that area who can confirm any assetts at this address.

[puddock]

I was just today filling in my warrant of execution against Mcafee. I phoned the court who have now told me that Mcafee requested a set aside??

 

Seemingly, without receipt of the papers yet. Mcafee are stating the court action should now be heard in Ireland. Although it was their solicitor who told me to serve all court papers to a London registered business address.

 

I await receipt of the courts papers. What I am unsire of is:- What is a set aside? Is my judgement still secure or can Macafee who have ignored all court papers to date, giving me judgement by default, still try to defend the case? Is my judgement now in jepordy?

[dw190]

I was just today filling in my warrant of execution against Mcafee. I phoned the court who have now told me that Mcafee requested a set aside??

 

Seemingly, without receipt of the papers yet. Mcafee are stating the court action should now be heard in Ireland. Although it was their solicitor who told me to serve all court papers to a London registered business address.

 

I await receipt of the courts papers. What I am unsire of is:- What is a set aside? Is my judgement still secure or can Macafee who have ignored all court papers to date, giving me judgement by default, still try to defend the case? Is my judgement now in jepordy?

 

There should now be a hearing to hear the application to Set Aside.

 

I'm unsure as to if they can get the matter transferred to Ireland. If they have been served at an address in England on the advice of their solicitors I cannot see a Judge making an order to transfer.

 

You will receive a copy of their application which you object to and request a hearing at your local CC. You are an individual and they are an organisation, this helps the individual when determining where the case is heard.

[puddock]

Many thnaks dw190.

Do you know if my judgement by default is now in jeapordy, or is it still safe?

[patdavies]

I'm unsure as to if they can get the matter transferred to Ireland. If they have been served at an address in England on the advice of their solicitors I cannot see a Judge making an order to transfer.

 

I can't see a Judge allowing it to be transferred outside the jurisdiction of the English courts system

[buzby]

It means any judgement your received is unenforceable until the second case either validates or rejects the previous outcome. When the second case is held - and as far as I am aware you can actually reject their application to have the case moved to a different legal jurisdiction - and remind the judge of their agents request to serve in the UK and ignoring of all official papers served on them.

[puddock]

Thanks Busby. So it now looks as though my judgement by default is in doubt until this next hearing. Although Mcafee have ignored all court papers to date, thus judgement by default to me. The other day the judge seemingly examined the papers on Mcafees request to set aside and came down in their favour to set aside. Thus the future hearing. If my case is so strong why did the judge decide on set aside?