Small Claims Court Secret Recordings

Manxman_in_exile

Ghost23 wrote: »

Thanks everyone. Yes I have them in a shareable format. I’ll get my stuff together, transcribed and off to the Court. Really appreciate your input 👍

I'm inclined to agree with waamo (#8) that you ought to be making the defendant aware of the existence of this recording beforehand. Courts don't like to see one of the parties ambushed in this way.


The court may also exercise their discretion to exclude it.

Ghost23

TBF I stated what was said in my initial claim. They have totally contradicted my statement & implied I’m a liar. On repeated occasions. I didn’t think I could use the recordings, which vindicate me entirely & demonstrate the truth to the Court. I had no intention of ambushing them, just didn’t realise they’d be admissible. I’ll get onto the Court in the morning. Thanks again for the advice though. I just want this done & move on with life.

waamo

Personally I would contact his solicitor before worrying about court. There isn't an immediate rush for the court. Contacting his solicitor with it may yield fast results if they both realise it's a lost cause.

Jumblebumble

waamo wrote: »

Personally I would contact his solicitor before worrying about court. There isn't an immediate rush for the court. Contacting his solicitor with it may yield fast results if they both realise it's a lost cause.

Of course as soon as a solicitor is aware for sure that his client is lying my understanding is the solicitor being an officer of the court is then professionally bound not to lie on behalf of the client
However, merely suspecting that the client is telling porkies is not enough to bar him from acting.

waamo

Jumblebumble wrote: »

Of course as soon as a solicitor is aware for sure that his client is lying my understanding is the solicitor being an officer of the court is then professionally bound not to lie on behalf of the client
However, merely suspecting that the client is telling porkies is not enough to bar him from acting.

You are correct. A solicitors first duty is to the court. His second duty is to his client and to tell them if it's hopeless. This is why going to the solicitor first may be easier.

steampowered

The usual court process is as follows:
1) You submit a claim.
2) The defendant submits a defence.
3) The case is allocated to a specific county court and a track - it sounds like this will be the small claims track.
4) The court will give each party a hearing date and directions as to how and when to submit evidence. Usually this will require the parties to send a copy of the evidence they intend to rely on to the court and to each other party 14 days before the court hearing.

It is a bit pointless sending evidence to the court at this stage. The judge is not going to look at it until you get to a hearing.

If you think this is going to end up in court, there is really no advantage in submitting your evidence early. All you are doing is giving your opponent more time to prepare for the hearing, and a chance to see your evidence before you get to see his.

The only valid reason to provide your evidence to the Defendant's solicitor at this stage would be if you think it would encourage an early settlement.

You could for example write a letter to the Defendant's solicitor headed "without prejudice save as to costs" along the lines of "Please find enclosed evidence which proves that the information given in your client's defence is untrue, which I intend to produce at the appropriate stage in the court process. In light of the above I consider that your client will not be successful at a client hearing. In the interests of saving time I would be prepared to agree to a full and final settlement of £xx, such offer to remain open for acceptance for 14 days only. If the offer is not accepted I intend to proceed to a county court hearing at which I am confidence I will be successful".

Jumblebumble

steampowered wrote: »

The usual court process is as follows:
1) You submit a claim.
2) The defendant submits a defence.
3) The case is allocated to a specific county court and a track - it sounds like this will be the small claims track.
4) The court will give each party a hearing date and directions as to how and when to submit evidence. Usually this will require the parties to send a copy of the evidence they intend to rely on to the court and to each other party 14 days before the court hearing.

It is a bit pointless sending evidence to the court at this stage. The judge is not going to look at it until you get to a hearing.

If you think this is going to end up in court, there is really no advantage in submitting your evidence early. All you are doing is giving your opponent more time to prepare for the hearing, and a chance to see your evidence before you get to see his.

The only valid reason to provide your evidence to the Defendant's solicitor at this stage would be if you think it would encourage an early settlement.

You could for example write a letter to the Defendant's solicitor headed "without prejudice save as to costs" along the lines of "Please find enclosed evidence which proves that the information given in your client's defence is untrue, which I intend to produce at the appropriate stage in the court process. In light of the above I consider that your client will not be successful at a client hearing. In the interests of saving time I would be prepared to agree to a full and final settlement of £xx, such offer to remain open for acceptance for 14 days only. If the offer is not accepted I intend to proceed to a county court hearing at which I am confidence I will be successful".

And he could find that the client uses the "without prejudice" offer against him to say he has admitted guilt
I personally had a district judge do this to me so I know for sure that in a small claims court "without prejudice" does not mean what most people believe it does
I will never make that mistake again

DoaM

Jumblebumble wrote: »

And he could find that the client uses the "without prejudice" offer against him to say he has admitted guilt

Huh? If OP sends such a letter, confirms they have a recording and provides a transcript of it ... how in any way could that be construed as the OP admitting guilt? Edit: Also, the other party would not be able to present such a letter as evidence, except after the judgment when costs were being determined. (Unless they asked to be able to present it and the judge agreed. Even so, based on the facts presented by the OP then any such letter would not be detrimental to the OP).

What happened in your case was based on your circumstances - you can't transpose that to a case with materially different facts.

steampowered

Jumblebumble wrote: »

And he could find that the client uses the "without prejudice" offer against him to say he has admitted guilt
I personally had a district judge do this to me so I know for sure that in a small claims court "without prejudice" does not mean what most people believe it does
I will never make that mistake again

?

There is no such thing as "admitting guilt" in civil claims.

Offering to settle the case does not admit guilt anyway.

You don't have to admit to anything or discuss the merits of the case at all. Just say that you will accept £xxx as full and final settlement to save the hassle of court proceedings.

waamo

I'm inclined to think this should be resolved without going to court. Of course life isn't perfect but if the evidence is pretty overwhelming I think a good attempt at avoiding court is the best path.