Small claim against large hotel chain

Equaliser123

Takecareofthepennies wrote: »

Are you actually a solicitor? :think:
.

Yes. And suing people is a complicated business.

somethingcorporate

Yes, he is

bgger, crossed posts

Takecareofthepennies

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Yes. And suing people is a complicated business.

Well that clarifies that then.

I shall await the OP's return to this thread.

baker85

Yes, HQ advised that it was the hotel we had to go to directly as the manager was the owner and HQ could not get involved even thought the hotel is part of the chain.

baker85

*though not thought!

Equaliser123

baker85 wrote: »

Yes, HQ advised that it was the hotel we had to go to directly as the manager was the owner and HQ could not get involved even thought the hotel is part of the chain.

So who was the entity you sued? Where did you get the formal details - corporate title, registered office address, registration number, etc - from? HQ?

baker85

We sued the hotel directly. We got details from the website, correspondence and HQ.

Equaliser123

baker85 wrote: »

We sued the hotel directly. We got details from the website, correspondence and HQ.

A limited company?

arcon5

What's confusing is op says she already had the address and got the name of the manager from correspondence. So it's not clear whether op issued proceedings in the name of the company or in the name of the manager.

If op only issued against the manager and not the company for which the hotel operated under then sending bailiffs there will be pointless as the assets on site don't belong to the manager.

The invoice should have included the companies legal name and registration number, hopefully these was used as part of the claim.

baker85

It was issued in the name of the company and hotel name, not the manager.