PART 2]Court case Lost by claimant,who has no assets.Can they take his parents house?

Danny_G

Taken from a previous post made last year:

katesheet wrote: »

If a claimant will be going to court, and has been challenged by the defendant in their defence,

and the worse case scenario the claimant loses the case, he will be liable to pay for the defendants costs too (admin costs, solicitor costs, additional witness costs etc)

But if the doesn't work, or has no assets (no savings), no property, then what is likely to happen?

The claimant has No property, but if their 1 remaining parent (who is 1 remaining widow) has a house in their name, (as their spouse passed away)
but on the deceased parents Will, this claimant is named as an executor,

Now, if the amount of money to be recouped by the defendant (from the claimant) is large

Then does this legally mean that the defendant (after the defendant wins the case) can take this house (as the claimant has no assets),
then can the defendant claim to take the house to recoup their costs?

Or the claimant is shielded form the defendant to take that property?
(ie,is the house safe?)

Note- they are listed as one executor of that will of their deceased parent, whose widow lives in that property alone.


(Can we not get into the detail of the claim please, it is touching, and please advise on the 'taking away' of the property - from a legal point of view, is the house safe? Or it can be taken?
-This is quite a touching emotional situation and question so thank you for your assistance )

Thank you all.

Hello all, I have a similar question to the above question which was asked months ago.


Lets assume the details are the same as above,

A claim has been made, and the claim has been made in this claimants name alone (nobody else, no other family member)

and the claimant has a parent, whom has a house. The claimant also has 3 brothers all above 21 years old.

Now, on the claim form that the child has made
(the Particulars of claim) they add this statement:

This claim is being made:

• on behalf of the estate
  

• on behalf of the dependents

Estate = people included in the will, which are the parent, and the 4 sons (claimant and 3 brothers)


(and as I mentioned above, the claim form name is Only in that single claimant childs' name)


This child has no assets, no property, no money etc


Now lets say the worse case scenario the case gets lost by the claimant and as the defendant wins, they chase the costs incurred from the claimant

The question
then could they chase the incurred costs from the parents? or put a charge on the parents house property?

or can they equivalently legally get this incurred money from any of the other 3 brothers?

...on the basis that this following bold statement has been included in the claim form (Particulars of claim):



This claim is being made:

• on behalf of the estate
  

• on behalf of the dependents

---

Ie, Has adding that above bold statement in the claim form made the parent and/or remaining brothers legally liable to pay any of the dependents incurred costs, should the case be lost by the claimant ?


or they are safe, and the defendant cannot legally chase any incurred costs from the parent or brothers?


Also this is also quite a touching emotional situation (I don't want to get into the details of the claim, due to it being a touching subject)
so thanks for your help, answers to this question will be appreciated.


and what specific area of law is this ?

bris

No one else is liable for a persons debt (unless they went guarantor of course), if they have nothing you get nothing.


Reading it again to try and make sense of it, you state the claim is being made on behalf of the estate (all the people in the will) that would therefor be open to challenge and could mean all being equally liable for the costs.
The courts aren't stupid, you cant get a patsy to sue for everyone then expect no consequences.


You need proper legal advice, this is a opinion forum based on educated views, it's no substitute for proper legal advice.

HappyMJ

Parents are never liable for any debts incurred by their adult children.

Hermione_Granger

HappyMJ wrote: »

Parents are never liable for any debts incurred by their adult children.

A parent can be liable for a debt incurred by one of their offspring if as mentioned by bris, they were acting as a guarantor for a loan or if assets were transferred to the parent in order to attempt to avoid payment of a court order resulting from a debt.

tomtontom

Why are you posting under a different username katesheet?

Poppie68

She asked the exact same question July 2015, was given correct advice by many who took there time to answer...
It seems though whoever the claimant is wanting to keep an eye on the widowed parent to grab the money owed when they pass away apparently they want to check the parents status every 4 months.... Very unsavoury!

naedanger

Danny_G wrote: »

Now, on the claim form that the child has made
(the Particulars of claim) they add this statement:

This claim is being made:

• on behalf of the estate
  

• on behalf of the dependents

Estate = people included in the will, which are the parent, and the 4 sons (claimant and 3 brothers)

I don't understand the bit in bold. Is the person who is making this statement entitled to do so, or are they lying?

If the claimant does have authority to make the claim on behalf of the estate and other dependents then I think (but am not certain) these parties will be liable for costs if the case is lost. But this assumes these parties gave their permission for the claimant to pursue the case on their behalf. (Note that if the case is lost and costs allocated to the estate and the estate is insufficient to pay those costs then any remaining liability would not pass to those named in the will. But the executor might be personally liable in certain circumstances.)

If the claimant does not have the authority to make the claim on the behalf of these others then any part of the claim that relates to those other parties will I assume get thrown out, and I expect the claimant will have to pay all costs.

Galeeno

The defendant can try to recover their fees in a way they feel they can get them back, but whether by law they can explore that avenue is a different thing.

bris

You also have to take into consideration they may not even be able to bring a case to court if they have no funds available to pay costs.


The courts look for bonds to be lodged with the courts for this very reason, to stop people thinking they can just make a claim with no assets to cover losses.

Galeeno

bris wrote: »

You also have to take into consideration they may not even be able to bring a case to court if they have no funds available to pay costs.


The courts look for bonds to be lodged with the courts for this very reason, to stop people thinking they can just make a claim with no assets to cover losses.

Do you mean if a claim has started and is in process, with the claimant having no money or assets,
then while the claim is in process the court judge can also make an order to cancel this whole claim, just on the basis that this judge feels that the claimant has no funds?