Trader is defending the claim against them - any advice?

waamo

Like I said if what they have omitted are replies to without prejudice letters then that is what they are supposed to do.

sezzybear

They have only left out two of my emails. The other half a dozen or so, all of which were replies in an email trail to the original without prejudice letter, have been sent by them to the court.

waamo

sezzybear wrote: »

They have only left out two of my emails. The other half a dozen or so, all of which were replies in an email trail to the original without prejudice letter, have been sent by them to the court.

They sound like idiots then. I wouldn't worry too much.

sezzybear

I'm a worrier by nature sadly. I just really want my money back and they aren't being co-operative!

Deastons

sezzybear wrote: »

I have issued a money claim online claim against a trader as they have not sent the items that I ordered some months ago now.

sezzybear wrote: »

2. Items not delivered.
7. No agreement (ordered items not sent to me., nor any money refunded).

Were the items not sent, or not delivered? If they weren't sent, can you prove this? Or if they weren't delivered, can you prove this?!

To answer your question though, we recently took a trader to court. They conveniently left out all the incriminating bits of correspondence, but our evidence obviously showed the bits they missed out, so it was a useless exercise on their part.

If you're absolutely sure you can prove your side and that you're legally in the right, don't back down. I thoroughly enjoyed watching the trader squirm and his solicitor desperately try and justify things with the judge constantly pointing out the law.

sezzybear

To clarify, the items were not sent when I ordered them (and the supplier acknowledges this) and they have not been sent since (the supplier refuses to do so).

cono1717

Wait, so they haven't sent the items and are refusing to give you the money back?! What reasons are they giving for this because to me it sounds like a case they can't win (based on what you have said so far).

Deastons

sezzybear wrote: »

To clarify, the items were not sent when I ordered them (and the supplier acknowledges this) and they have not been sent since (the supplier refuses to do so).

If you've got in writing that the supplier has not sent them and that they're refusing to refund you, I can't see how they could possibly defend your claim.

What is their reason for stealing your money?

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

Let's hang on a minute. They have a solicitor on board and are defending the case. Now it's possible they are thieves, but thieves don't normally operate like this. it's possible they are idiots, but solicitors, however bad, tend to understand basic law. I suspect it's much more likely that they have what they deem a defensible case.

How much money are we talking about?

unholyangel

I don't get this either. Either they couldn't find their !!!! with both hands or theres more to this you haven't told us about yet.

Why was the distance from the suppliers to your home even mentioned?

As for your question, its likely it will now go to hearing. The initial step is only to determine the basis of your claim and whether the other side plan to counterclaim or defend (if they didn't, you'd get a default judgement).