Owed money

lovesavingmoney

My husband did work back in Nov for a company, and all but 1 invoice got paid.

Numerous texts, calls, emails all ignored, so in March went down the small claims court. 3 days after issuing, the guy sends hubby an e-mailed invoice claiming his work was bad, and it was x amount to rectify it. Once hubby had paid that (about 3 times what he owed hubby!) he'd pay the outstanding invoice.

The guy acknowledged claim, giving him an extra 2 weeks to defend himself, but then doesn't, so we get automatic judgement, requesting immediate payment.

2 weeks later, still not paid, so we pay for the £70 warrant for court bailiffs to attend.

Today, we get notice he's decided to liquidate the company. In all honesty, I knew he would, as I'd already seen back in Jan, he'd set up a new company (same business).

My issue.... 3 other family members work for the company. The company has still been fully trading up until at least last week. They've been invoicing the company (as contractors), but I've been told the last payment, last week, was sent from the new company.

Also, they moved workshops in january, and took all the tools, materials etc to this new workshop, but on the letter today, he's still got it as trading at the old workshop address - where there is nothing! So if anyone goes there, it looks like he hasn't got any assets, but they're all at the new place. They had at least 3 huge jobs, and 1 was massive!! (the one my family got paid for doing last week).

After going bankrupt ourselves years ago, I know the receivers scrutinise to make sure we haven't made payments just before bankruptcy, as a preferential creditor, but clearly the director has, as he's paid them from his new company, although invoices are to the old company...

I would bet my life too, that he's paid the major suppliers, as he'll need them to keep new business going.

Not overly bothered about the money any more, as it was only £250 from 6 months ago, it's more the principal of the guy being an absolute **** now! :mad:

And slightly peed off we paid another £70 to the court on Tues, when this letter from the liquidation company was sent..... :mad:

patman99

I think the mistake was not naming the owner as co-defendent alongside his company. That way, the Sherriffs could take his personal belongings to cover the debt.

I know this sounds a bit dodgy, but if the jobs being done by the other family members are not fixed-price, could they not increase their prices by, say, 1% and then pass this extra money on to your oh ?.

agrinnall

Is it a limited company? If so you may be able to object.

https://www.gov.uk/object-to-a-limited-company-being-struck-off

footyguy

lovesavingmoney wrote: »

My husband did work back in Nov for a company, and all but 1 invoice got paid.

Numerous texts, calls, emails all ignored, so in March went down the small claims court. 3 days after issuing, the guy sends hubby an e-mailed invoice claiming his work was bad, and it was x amount to rectify it. Once hubby had paid that (about 3 times what he owed hubby!) he'd pay the outstanding invoice.

The guy acknowledged claim, giving him an extra 2 weeks to defend himself, but then doesn't, so we get automatic judgement, requesting immediate payment.

2 weeks later, still not paid, so we pay for the £70 warrant for court bailiffs to attend.

Today, we get notice he's decided to liquidate the company. In all honesty, I knew he would, as I'd already seen back in Jan, he'd set up a new company (same business).

My issue.... 3 other family members work for the company. The company has still been fully trading up until at least last week. They've been invoicing the company (as contractors), but I've been told the last payment, last week, was sent from the new company.

Also, they moved workshops in january, and took all the tools, materials etc to this new workshop, but on the letter today, he's still got it as trading at the old workshop address - where there is nothing! So if anyone goes there, it looks like he hasn't got any assets, but they're all at the new place. They had at least 3 huge jobs, and 1 was massive!! (the one my family got paid for doing last week).

After going bankrupt ourselves years ago, I know the receivers scrutinise to make sure we haven't made payments just before bankruptcy, as a preferential creditor, but clearly the director has, as he's paid them from his new company, although invoices are to the old company...

I would bet my life too, that he's paid the major suppliers, as he'll need them to keep new business going.

Not overly bothered about the money any more, as it was only £250 from 6 months ago, it's more the principal of the guy being an absolute **** now! :mad:

And slightly peed off we paid another £70 to the court on Tues, when this letter from the liquidation company was sent..... :mad:

This appears a very strange way to have proceeded to me.

First of all, this is the employment board, so why is your husband issuing invoices? Sounds like this thread would be better on the small biz board.

Secondly, as your husband was claiming £x, and the customer counter claiming £3x, then surely the simplest way to have resolved this issue in the circumstances you describe was to come to a mutually agreeable full & final settlement of both compliants by your husband paying the customer £2x.

Perhaps a lesson learned?

Or maybe the fact the customer insisted on receiving £3x meant your husband did not really understand the settlement being proposed by the dissatisfied customer, hence why they are not paying the £x your husband is continuing to pursue.

If you knew the customer was likely to liquidate his business at the first sight of and financial trouble, why did you not warn your husband of the risk associated with extending credit to them ... or if you did warn about, why did your husband ignore the warning and give the customer so much money (when he himself thought he was owed 1/3 of that amount)???

Finally, as a creditor, your husband could object to the voluntary winding up of the customer. But ultimately, which should have been considered (a) before extending credit to the customer (b) before giving the customer £3x when your husband thought he was himself owed £x, and (c) thowing more good money at this matter for court fees, your husband should have assessed the ability of the customer to pay. You can't get blood out of a stone, not even via court action.

Savvy_Sue

footyguy wrote: »

First of all, this is the employment board, so why is your husband issuing invoices? Sounds like this thread would be better on the small biz board.

I agree, and sending a PM to Fran or jobbingmusician would get it moved there, where similar questions can be found.

footyguy wrote: »

Secondly, as your husband was claiming £x, and the customer counter claiming £3x, then surely the simplest way to have resolved this issue in the circumstances you describe was to come to a mutually agreeable full & final settlement of both compliants by your husband paying the customer £2x.

That is not how I read the original. I've amended it to show how I understood it ...

lovesavingmoney wrote: »

Numerous texts, calls, emails all ignored, so in March went down the small claims court. 3 days after issuing, the guy sends hubby an e-mailed invoice claiming his work was bad, and it was x amount to rectify it. [STRIKE] Once [/STRIKE] IF hubby [STRIKE]had [/STRIKE]paid that (about 3 times what he owed hubby!) [STRIKE]he'd[/STRIKE] THEN HE WOULD pay the outstanding invoice.

Might be helpful if the OP confirmed which understanding is right.

But objecting to the winding up may be the only way to go now.

footyguy

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

...That is not how I read the original. I've amended it to show how I understood it ...

Sorry Sue, despite the alternative wording you have proposed, I'm still not quite sure (and so perhaps the OP isn't either) in interpreting the alternative meaning you have of the OP.

Are you suggesting that the invoice sent for approximately £3x was from a third party, and that the OP's husband was to settle that (on behalf of the customer) before the customer would pay the OP's husband's invoice?

If so, I still think it would have been better for the OP's husband to have paid the customer £2x in full and final settlement of the dispute between them two (and leave the customer to then settle the bill with the third party)

For the OP's husband to pay a third party debt (in full or in part) was only going to complicate matters.

Or have I still not understood correctly the interpreation you have put on things?


(What's more, reading the OP again, it appears the OP's husband had already secured judgement, albeit in default, against the customer. Any out of court settlement at that stage would not remove the judgement. Once judgement is passed, the only way for the customer to remove that judgement would be to successfully appeal it in court. Or paying it within permitted time would result in a similar effect. I wouldn't, at that stage, have paid the unsuccessful defendant anything.)