Small Claims Court Action!!!!

bod1467

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

It doesn't need to be found.

No. But evidence of it being SENT need to be found.

Gordon_Hose

With it being an automated system, I don't think that should be too difficult.

If it was me I wouldn't want to reply on that as my evidence! lol

jamie1982

bod1467 wrote: »

No. But evidence of it being SENT need to be found.

Just to clairify,

I rang my supplier about an unrelated matter.

I later discovered my services had been changed and I incurred loses because of this.

I spoke to my supplier who claimed they hadn’t done anything wrong.

The complaint was passed to the ombudsman and my supplier showed the ombudsman an account note saying I’d been advised of the change of service and that a letter had been sent out. As I said earlier, I asked the ombudsman to investigate why my supplier hadn’t supplied the full account notes that related to the period the complaint arose, or why they had not provided as proof a copy of this letter they claim was sent, but the ombudsman chose not to address these concerns and simply make a decision based on the documentation they had in front of them.

I knew my supplier was lying as the changes were NOT mentioned during the call and I DID NOT receive a letter so I issued the sar request. As I have said, the reply I received included a full transcript of the conversation which showed that I was NOT advised of the change of service during this call, and also stated that a copy of the letter or any evidence of it being sent or issued could not be found.

jamie1982

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

With it being an automated system, I don't think that should be too difficult.

If it was me I wouldn't want to reply on that as my evidence! lol

As I’ve said in my previous post, the sar request says they can not find any record of a letter being issued or sent. This basically boils down to a clear breach of contract as the supplier made changes to my services without informing me, the fact that they then lied to the ombudsman to try and get out it only strengthens my case should it make it to court.

Gordon_Hose

Ok, well... good luck. Let us know how you get on.

I suspect they won't turn up and you'll win by default. Then they won't pay and you'll have to go back to court to instruct Bailiffs to secure payment or remove goods.

jamie1982

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

Ok, well... good luck. Let us know how you get on.

I suspect they won't turn up and you'll win by default. Then they won't pay and you'll have to go back to court to instruct Bailiffs to secure payment or remove goods.

That’s sort of what I was expecting, there’s two days left of the summons to go I have haven’t heard anything back yet. Without naming names the supplier is one of the major b/b and phone suppliers, I can understand them simply ignoring the summons but would they be likely to go the whole 9 yards of completely ignoring the courts until collectors turn up?

Gordon_Hose

Yup, with big companies it happens all the time.

I take it there was the name of a physical person on your summons?

Quentin

Depends how much you are claiming.

It may be cheaper for them to ignore and pay up rather than spend time and money entering a defence and attending a hearing (even if they think they would win).

As you will know it's a big jump (with more expense for you) from winning a judgement by default to setting the bailiffs on them.

Quentin

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

Yup, with big companies it happens all the time.

I take it there was the name of a physical person on your summons?

No need to name a "physical person".

Firms can be sued just the same as individuals.

Gordon_Hose

Fair do's. Like I said, good luck.