so do you think i have a case for disclosure? he has passed on debter information to someone who is not party to the debt. like the rules that a bailiff cant discuss your account with someone else who opens the door? all letters were sent to both myself and my husband separately so he has lots of knowledge of what in effect is my debt?
so do you think i have a case for disclosure? he has passed on debter information to someone who is not party to the debt. like the rules that a bailiff cant discuss your account with someone else who opens the door? all letters were sent to both myself and my husband separately so he has lots of knowledge of what in effect is my debt?
I presume your husband was at this photoshoot? If so it would be difficult to claim he didn't know anything about it. I don't think that would fly at all.
but you cant chase someone else for somebodys debt unless they co signed the debt?
You can ask your solicitor but I can't see that flying at all. He attended and was aware what was happening. Unless prices etc were discussed in secret then it would be difficult to go anywhere with it.
Again this wouldn't affect the court claim one bit anyway. A small claim judge would tell you to refer it to the Information commissioner and move on.
im thinking more in terms of my husbands defence response. the forums state you have to refer to every point on the particulars of claim. his whole defence is that its not his debt. would he still have to cover every point? there are 9 points on the letter but they all refer to when he tried to contact us.
You should contact the court to advise them that the claimant is pursuing co-defendants, but one defendant was not party to the contract therefore the claimant is pursuing the wrong party. See what the court say. (As already implied in post #31).
Your husband would provide a Statement of Truth to declare that he is not a party to the contract. A spouse does not automatically become jointly and severally liable in consumer contracts.
Edit: does your husband's name appear on any documentation other than the claim raised by the claimant? No reference to him in any contract docs or discussion emails or texts?
Keep it simple. If the claim names your husband then assert he is not a party to this contract. He has not signed the contract and denies liability for it.
The claimant has named the wrong person and as such the claim should be either amended or rebsubmitted with the correct person named.
His name is on the top of the order form but only i signed it. can it be argued that i signed on his behalf?
Then he would appear to be aware of the contract and by having his pictures taken particpated in it. That is unless he could truthfully say he didn't know his name was on it and genuinely believed it was in your sole name. I'm not convinced the photographer couldn't name him even.
Contracts don't have to be in writing for you to be held to them, it just makes life a lot easier to enforce them.
Replies
I presume your husband was at this photoshoot? If so it would be difficult to claim he didn't know anything about it. I don't think that would fly at all.
You can ask your solicitor but I can't see that flying at all. He attended and was aware what was happening. Unless prices etc were discussed in secret then it would be difficult to go anywhere with it.
Again this wouldn't affect the court claim one bit anyway. A small claim judge would tell you to refer it to the Information commissioner and move on.
Your husband would provide a Statement of Truth to declare that he is not a party to the contract. A spouse does not automatically become jointly and severally liable in consumer contracts.
Edit: does your husband's name appear on any documentation other than the claim raised by the claimant? No reference to him in any contract docs or discussion emails or texts?
The claimant has named the wrong person and as such the claim should be either amended or rebsubmitted with the correct person named.
Then he would appear to be aware of the contract and by having his pictures taken particpated in it. That is unless he could truthfully say he didn't know his name was on it and genuinely believed it was in your sole name. I'm not convinced the photographer couldn't name him even.
Contracts don't have to be in writing for you to be held to them, it just makes life a lot easier to enforce them.