writ issued but not served?

naz101

hi guys,
Im looking for a bit of advice for a friend so I dont know all the ins and outs.
I know she is involved in a dispute with a neighbour and she has had a writ issued against her but not served? Im not sure if those are the right answers.

She is asking for the writ to be removed as she is worried that it will affect loan applications etc but i have been told by others that its only if the writ is served then it affects things like that?
Its all about fence borders etc...

any ideas?

thanks

sarahg1969

It depends what kind of writ it is.

It's most likely to be a writ of summons (ie the form that starts a claim in the High Court) or a writ of fieri facias, which is an order for recovery of money or goods issued by the court after a judgment has already been granted.

If it's the former, then this will not affect your friend's credit status... yet. However a judgment at a later time will do unless it is paid.

A writ of fi fa means that the court is going to make an order to allow the other person to recover money or goods from your friend, because a judgment has already been ordered against her, which will have already been registered (this happens generally 28 days after the judgment was made if it has not been paid).

If you want better advice, it probably a good idea to get your friend to post up some further information.

In fact, was your friend legally represented? If so, then she should take some legal advice.

That's just a basic gist, by the way. I'm more than happy to be corrected.

mickaveli2001

Perhaps it may be better to ask why the writ is there in the first place? In my experience I've found that writs are used as a last resort after exhaustive efforts at trying to secure any forms of payments from somebody has fallen on deaf ears.

One for example a gentleman at my previous work place "used" to be good friends with a guy who he loaned money to (in the thousands) of a promise of £200 being paid back to him each month for 2 years. Anyway, the first 2 months were fine, but then it became an inconvenience. It interfered with this guys lavish weekend social life, several foreign holidays and designer label clothing and concerts and festivals far too much to sacrifice at least some of those things in order to pay back.

Anyhow, the gentleman from my work offered to lower it to £100 a month, and he got two lots of £50 before excuses started again. He gave him plenty of opportunities and would have been forgiven had he had genuine trouble of repayment but his lifestyle demonstrated the complete opposite. He took him for a ride, and so eventually he took him to court.

Point is, if you're friend "can" pay it, but just doesn't want to give up certain luxuries then it could perhaps be avoided by working something out face to face with this person. Gentleman from my work would have gladly threw in the towel had the guy went up to him and discussed terms, but it's the fact he avoided it while enjoying luxuries

sarahg1969

mickaveli2001 wrote: »

Perhaps it may be better to ask why the writ is there in the first place? In my experience I've found that writs are used as a last resort after exhaustive efforts at trying to secure any forms of payments from somebody has fallen on deaf ears.

One for example a gentleman at my previous work place "used" to be good friends with a guy who he loaned money to (in the thousands) of a promise of £200 being paid back to him each month for 2 years. Anyway, the first 2 months were fine, but then it became an inconvenience. It interfered with this guys lavish weekend social life, several foreign holidays and designer label clothing and concerts and festivals far too much to sacrifice at least some of those things in order to pay back.

Anyhow, the gentleman from my work offered to lower it to £100 a month, and he got two lots of £50 before excuses started again. He gave him plenty of opportunities and would have been forgiven had he had genuine trouble of repayment but his lifestyle demonstrated the complete opposite. He took him for a ride, and so eventually he took him to court.

Point is, if you're friend "can" pay it, but just doesn't want to give up certain luxuries then it could perhaps be avoided by working something out face to face with this person. Gentleman from my work would have gladly threw in the towel had the guy went up to him and discussed terms, but it's the fact he avoided it while enjoying luxuries

To be fair, we don't know if this about a debt. It may be a boundary dispute or something similar.

naz101

apparently its a boundary dispute.
Im not too happy with how she has behaved but she doesnt seem to listen to me.

the neighbours built and extension to the side of the house but built it nehind their boundary. my friend then took over the space they vacated. they seem to think its on their side so its theirs. I think the neighbours werent bothering with it until my friend started complaining that a pipe on their side (but neighbours land really) didnt look nice and tried to break it.

they have tried to talk but my friend didnt really respond. so they have issued a writ?
she is now saying that the writ will affect her but the neighbours refuse to pull it as she hasnt really been co operative with anything so far....

Hmm71

naz101 wrote: »

apparently its a boundary dispute.
Im not too happy with how she has behaved but she doesnt seem to listen to me.

the neighbours built and extension to the side of the house but built it nehind their boundary. my friend then took over the space they vacated. they seem to think its on their side so its theirs. I think the neighbours werent bothering with it until my friend started complaining that a pipe on their side (but neighbours land really) didnt look nice and tried to break it.

they have tried to talk but my friend didnt really respond. so they have issued a writ?
she is now saying that the writ will affect her but the neighbours refuse to pull it as she hasnt really been co operative with anything so far....

From what you've said it sounds like it's all your friend's fault and I don't blame her neighbours for issuing a writ.
However, do you think it's too late for your friend to start being reasonable and communicative? If she goes and talks to her neighbours, calmly and in a co-operative manner perhaps they could come to some arrangement and they might agree to withdraw the writ.

pmduk

Some people reap what they sow. It's worth going to great lengths to avoid neighbour disputes, the only winners are the legal system.

Equaliser123

Issuing of a writ without service may be to preserve limitation. There are no consequences if the writ is not served.

It does, however, need to be served within (I think!) 4 months. That time can be extended if the parties agree.

This allows time to try and resolve the claim before cost implications arise. Once the writ is served, the winner of the legal action is generally entitled to legal costs.

naz101

she went to the neighbours and has tried to be nice but they have said until the boundary is sorted they wont withdraw the writ as they dont trust her to go through with it...

she is now saying if they dont withdraw the writ she refuses to complete the work....oh dear.....dont think she is doing herself any favours.

and as good a friend as she is..I dont think any of this would have happened had she not caused trouble over the pipe....

Hmm71

You sound like a good friend but maybe you just need to step back and let her sort this out herself.

I'm sure you don't need the hassle this close to Christmas .

Just make sympathetic noises at her if she phones you or comes round to have a moan. Don't get yourself too stressed and wound up over her problems.

Equaliser123

naz101 wrote: »

she went to the neighbours and has tried to be nice but they have said until the boundary is sorted they wont withdraw the writ as they dont trust her to go through with it...

.

If they had any sense, they would draw up a settlement agreement which would require them to withdraw the writ within 30 days of carrying out the necessary work and that they will not serve in the meantime.