Company said it was ltd in court but not listed on companies house?

lilacclaire

I am currently taking a garage to court over a car I purchased from them and the judge today asked if they were a ltd company and was told yes they were.
I have checked companies house and there is no sign of them, the judge has sent my case to proof (scotland) as it is in my favour yet the garage still refuse to settle.
To be honest I don't think they are ltd, what does this mean in terms of the court, the judge has advised them that as a ltd co that they by law need to have a solicitor represent them, obviously if not ltd then they can represent themselves.

I have to send in any further proof that I have although case is pretty clear cut in law, I was going to send in a copy of the companies house page showing that they do not exist on there. None of there letterheads say ltd nor any adverts.

I assume if they truly are not ltd then I can still pursue the owner personally if the company is wound up?

bris

Have you established what their ltd name they claim to be is? A trading name is not necesserily their company name, i.e, cars are us ltd, trading as my motor group, so they are not one and the same.

They would be foolish to lie to the judge as it will all come out in court.
The other problem you have is them winding up the company before it gets to court, a move the cowboys use on a regular basis.

lilacclaire

Yes thats my fear that they will wind up, but if not a ltd company then it makes it easier for me to recover my money.

So would a ltd co be registered on companies house? Am I safe to assume that it is not ltd (assuming that is their correct name) if they are not listed?

What I think has actually happened in court was that the person did not know and just answered yes they were, he confirmed that the company was owned privately (by one person) and he was the manager. I really think he just did not know what he was talking about (as did the judge, another story)!

MamaMoo_2

Do you know the name of the owner? Run a director check and see what companies he runs.

SuperHan

If not a ltd company, you just sue the people involved, and there's no saying they even have the money to pay you, so they may just have a CCJ issued against them.

To check companies house you would need to know the name of the Ltd company... Do you know this? Or do you just know the trading name as mentioned above. A ltd company can be owned and managed by one person, there's no issue with that, and surely he will know whether he is ltd or not, on account of he will have to file annual returns with companies house if he is, and not if he's not...

lilacclaire

Thanks, I will call and find out if they have a ltd name.

Honestly you would have had to been there, I genuinely believe he has faffed it and they are not limited at all, the judge had to ask him 3 times whether they were ltd and he kept giving roundabout answers (like I said you had to be there) until the judge lost patience and lost his temper a little he hurriedly said yes they were ltd.
I have no doubt they will have the money either personally or in the business, they have a lot of cars.

unholyangel

lilacclaire wrote: »

Thanks, I will call and find out if they have a ltd name.

Honestly you would have had to been there, I genuinely believe he has faffed it and they are not limited at all, the judge had to ask him 3 times whether they were ltd and he kept giving roundabout answers (like I said you had to be there) until the judge lost patience and lost his temper a little he hurriedly said yes they were ltd.
I have no doubt they will have the money either personally or in the business, they have a lot of cars.

Usually you have to make sure you're suing the right entity. I've seen a case that spent the best part of 2 days trying to figure out what type of company it was since the company themselves seemed to have no clue (on invoices etc, referred to themselves as xyz ltd when they're not a ltd company).

lilacclaire

Well they are not ltd, so I don't know how that will go for them in court.
They have offered me the cost of the car back, I was also claiming for loss of earnings, costs of recovering car etc.

I think I will only get this if I proceed to the proof.

Would it seem unreasonable for me to request a further £200 on top of the cost of the car to cover these expenses, not bothering with the loss of earnings or would this be frowned upon. The expenses are documented with receipts in the court docs.

Or just take the money and run?

steampowered

How much are the loss of earnings? I would take the money and run to be honest.

visidigi

steampowered wrote: »

How much are the loss of earnings? I would take the money and run to be honest.

Im not so sure I would now its proven they've lied to a judge!

arcon5

Do a search on the individual as well to see if they have any other outstanding CCJs.... if they do then take the cost of the car, and quickly.