Using Money Claim Online service against a car salesman?

NeilCr

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Yeah the garage quite clearly are calling his bluff because until court papers come through the door then it's just talk.



He initially text the salesman about the refund who refused. IIRC it was because it's an old car - the excuses i've been given early on in this thread really. He said something on the lines of taking it to trading standards & the salesman/garage response was "well go to trading standards then".



His first letter (the initial request for a refund, before the LBA letter) started out something on the lines of - upon your request via text message, i have consulted trading standards as well as the Consumer Rights Act 2015..." :rotfl:






I think the fear/concern right now is that by filling the N1 form out incorrectly the court could get finicky and dismiss the claim - so my brother loses out.


By incorrectly & finicky i mean....


* the defendants name & address. We'd just put it as it appears on their website & invoice but when you read the N1 notes it suggests you need to add in extra information depending on who you're claiming against. Simple wording such as "- a firm". Could missing out this (what we'd see as insignificant) wording have the claim binned?


* brief description of claim & particulars of claim - to me it's the same question. Could answering one with what should go in the other end up with the claim binned?


He bought the car, within days it was apparent it had major issues. It's been taken to a garage and confirmed. Attempts have been made to resolve this which have failed as the defendant refuses to respond ... and that's basically it. To me that answers both questions. Would filling them out incorrectly lead to it being dismissed because it's not been filled out flawlessly? I don't know how finicky the courts can be (i imagine the answer is very) - hence the delay & why we want to make sure it's filled out correctly.

I think it may depend on the court!

However, my sense is that courts do recognise that these forms are often being completed by "lay people" and do allow some leeway. I've seen a few filled in by a complainant with no legal training at all and they haven't been rejected. I do think your own words are the best way to go - as you have laid out. I guess what could happen is that the court would send them back and get you to try again if there was an error

But, certainly best to have someone with exprerience helping if at all possible.

My main concern was about your brother writing something that he later contradicts in court or did not happen (like speaking to TS).

JustAnotherSaver

NeilCr wrote: »

My main concern was about your brother writing something that he later contradicts in court or did not happen (like speaking to TS).

Ah right i get you. Should he ever heard to turn up in court & do something verbally then yeah that's a concern i have also.


He's already been in court once this year as a witness to something on a friend of his (i wont go in to details there as it's irrelevant). He told me what happened & would have no need to lie to me. He went in to court & answered the questions truthfully but by his own words he got absolutely ripped to shreds by the defence solicitor.



I can't remember exactly what the mix up was now so i'll have to just give you an example - my brother has a way that he speaks, as anyone does, but he just talks & doesn't think too much about it. They're just words right? He doesn't think about the finer details. So he'd say something on the lines of .... "and we just did [XYZ] or something".

The "or something" would be a throwaway remark, it's just the way he'd talk & he actually just means that "we just did [XYZ]" but the solicitor latched on to the "or something" & used it against him, which frustrated my brother because A) It's incredibly irritating when people pick apart fine detail that are meaningless to you. It's pathetic but yes it's their job & they do it well. he was telling the truth & by the time the solicitor was done he was made to look like a liar.





I wish i could remember what the exact detail was because it was actually quite comical tbh because it caused such confusion at the time just because it's the way he phrases things, it's how he talks, he'll use a lot of obvious and not so obvious slang and since he's never been that way he can't talk in solicitor lingo at all.



So yes he's bothered about tripping himself up, not by being dishonest but just by being himself :rotfl:knowing how solicitors operate, how they lay their traps and you (he) walks right in to them.




Back on topic slightly, in these events do you/can you not just send off paperwork to the courts for a judge to rule on it? Or does everyone need to go down and attend in person?