Advice / help neede for Small Claims Court claim / counterclaim

Marktheshark

They are considered a sledgehammer to crack a nut, but when someone is playing the **** like this then it will crack the nut, very quickly and very hard indeed.
Defending a Statutory Demand will cost far more than the claim value, they are not the sort of thing you can risk getting wrong, especially if you own any assets or property.

Carlos0371

Hi Mark. Not sure how much of an expert you are, but I was wondering (if you have the time and inclination) if you wouldn't mind taking a quick look at my counterclaim response (Defence and counterclaim) for me before I send it off?

I could post it here but would rather it wasn't on public display in its entirety?

Thank you so much for your help thus far, but if you can't help then thank you anyway.

Carlos0371

Also, another question:

Can the defendant claim his solicitor's costs back in a Small Claims Court, if his counterclaim is upheld?

I didn't think he could, so I'm wondering why he is going to the trouble to employ a solicitor, unless he doesn't know this?

Unless I'm wrong of course and he can?

wealdroam

Carlos0371 wrote: »

Also, another question:

Can the defendant claim his solicitor's costs back in a Small Claims Court, if his counterclaim is upheld?

I didn't think he could, so I'm wondering why he is going to the trouble to employ a solicitor, unless he doesn't know this?

Unless I'm wrong of course and he can?

Post#2 pretty much answers your question.
Well worth reading the rest of the article linked from that post too.

Carlos0371

HI and thanks for the reply. I did read that post and the article, but it just says "You shouldn't have the other party's lawyer's fees awarded against you".

"Shouldn't" is a bit vague, I just wondered if anyone had any first hand experience of this, and in what circumstances "could" his legal expenses be awarded against me?

I feel like I'm running in treacle with this. I know I'm in the right and the law is supposed to be there to help me but this has been going on for nearly a year and with solicitors now involved and a counterclaim amounting to almost £2000 if I lose, I'm having sleepless nights worrying about this now.

wealdroam

Carlos0371 wrote: »

HI and thanks for the reply. I did read that post and the article, but it just says "You shouldn't have the other party's lawyer's fees awarded against you".

"Shouldn't" is a bit vague, I just wondered if anyone had any first hand experience of this, and in what circumstances "could" his legal expenses be awarded against me?

I feel like I'm running in treacle with this. I know I'm in the right and the law is supposed to be there to help me but this has been going on for nearly a year and with solicitors now involved and a counterclaim amounting to almost £2000 if I lose, I'm having sleepless nights worrying about this now.

Of course it is vague. The law is vague to allow flexibility.
You see this everywhere... "a reasonable time", "without causing significant inconvenience", etc, etc.

For example, if the judge thinks you bought the case frivolously, he can award costs against you.

If you conduct yourself properly, it is unlikely that costs will be awarded against you. ...another vague statement.

steampowered

The detailed rules about costs in the small claims track are set out her: https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27#27.14. There are generally no legal cost awarded in small claims track unless the other side is shown to have 'behaved unreasonably' - this is relatively rare.

You should not serve a statutory demand unless and until the court case is resolved in your favour. Statutory demands are only supposed to be used for uncontested debts. If you serve an SD for a contested debt, and the landlord successfully applies to have that set aside, the default rule is that you will be required to pay all of the landlord's legal costs.


Now you just have to proceed with the case and properly defend the counterclaim.


You should not need to get legal representation for this. You will not be able to recover the costs. It sounds like a straightforward claim and counterclaim to me.

Carlos0371

steampowered wrote: »

You should not serve a statutory demand unless and until the court case is resolved in your favour.

So when we go to Court and (if) I win, then as MarktheShark says, can I can serve this on the defendant outside court? Is it appropriate and a normal course to take?


Again, thanks for your help. This was slow to get a response, but now my faith in this community has been restored, as more people get on board. Thank you all. :beer:

Carlos0371

I've just noticed something, the tenancy agreement between the defendant and my partner is dated 6th August 2006, but at the bottom of the last page (the signature page) the document is copyrighted 2008.

This means the document was signed before it was copyrighted (or printed, or produced, or whatever).

In my view this is a case of fraud, and opens up the landlord to all sorts of questions - particularly as he did not even purchase the house until 8th September 2006............

Should I just politely bring this to his solicitors' notice?

Thoughts?

Edit: I know it brings up all sorts of questions for my partner as well, but at the time she was 8 months pregnant, was in debt with her mortgage, had kicked out her husband, was at risk of losing her home, and really not in any sane frame of mind.

Marktheshark

Carlos0371 wrote: »

I've just noticed something, the tenancy agreement between the defendant and my partner is dated 6th August 2006, but at the bottom of the last page (the signature page) the document is copyrighted 2008.

This means the document was signed before it was copyrighted (or printed, or produced, or whatever).

In my view this is a case of fraud, and opens up the landlord to all sorts of questions - particularly as he did not even purchase the house until 8th September 2006............


Should I just politely bring this to his solicitors' notice?

Thoughts?

Edit: I know it brings up all sorts of questions for my partner as well, but at the time she was 8 months pregnant, was in debt with her mortgage, had kicked out her husband, was at risk of losing her home, and really not in any sane frame of mind.

No keep quiet and bring it up at court, just include it in your bundle of evidence.
Throw it down on the table as first evidence of deception.
Ask them to explain how they managed to sign a document in 2006 that was printed in 2008.

You are at war and you have just discovered a way to beat them, why tip them off ?
They could withdraw the document then and out goes your trump card.
Boy I would pay to watch this one.
Hope he has his toothbrush.