Does Small Claims Court have to make it clear if they reject my Amended Particulars of Claim form?

October868

Hello I have an ongoing court claim in the Small Claims Court, a case in which I am the claimant.

• I originally filed my Particulars of Claim form to the court & defendant last year, the defendant did not respond to the claim and so the case was awarded in my favour by default, and I served a Third Party Debt-Order against the defendant.
• The defendant subsequently appealed that order, claiming that she apparently had not believed that the judgement was real/that she believed the letter which the court issued with the judgement was counterfeit.
  She also claimed that she found the Particulars of Claim form which I had submitted ''too difficult to understand''.
• The judge subsequently withdrew the third party debt order, and re-opened the case, additionally ordering that I file an ''Amended Particulars of Claim form''.

I subsequently served the court and the defendant with an Amended Particulars of Claim form, reduced down to a shorter length, with all aspects of the claim stated in a clear, simple, and chronological format, and numerically bullet-pointed to make it even more easy & simple for the defendant to understand.

I also ensured I followed the relevant CPR guidelines such as-
The form being titled ''Amended Particulars of Claim'' (+ dated the document).
Concluded the document with a statement of truth.

However 6 weeks after I submitted this Amended Particulars of Claim form document I recieved a letter from the court which said:
''Upon the court considering the file and noting that the claimant has failed to file an amended Particulars of Claim''
1. Stated that unless I filed an Amended Particulars of Claim within 9 days from that letter's date my claim would be struck-out (so would of been struck-out 2-weeks ago now).


As this letter from the court says I had ''not filed an Amended Particulars of Claim form document'', well I ofcourse was under the impression that this was simply a records-keeping error by the court, resulting in them misplacing my Amended Particulars of Claim form, and thus it not being in my file.
*I had sent it next-day delivery and retained the tracking-number, so had proof they had recieved it.
But so I made that clear to them via email, notifying them of the tracking number, but re-posted the document to them again.


I have not heard anything back from the court myself, however the legal representative for the defendant is claiming that the court was ''unsatisfied'' with my Amended Particulars of Claim form,
and so what the letter which the court to me meant wasn't that they didn't have my Amended Particulars of Claim form document (as the letter clearly implies), but rather that they had recieved my document but were not satisfied with it and thus were not regarding it as/or even calling it an Amended Particulars of Claim form.


This has alarmed/panicked me alot, since if the court had written to me stating that they were unsatisfied with any aspect of my Amended Particulars of Claim form (idealling giving me some form of indictation as to which aspect of it was unsatisfactory in the court's view), I would ofcourse then further amended the document to ensure it was rectified in accordance with whatever the court had specified.
Moreover if the court had been unsatisfied with my Amended Particulars of Claim form, I would expect that they surely had some form of duty to clearly notify me of that? Rather than simply stating/implying that they hadn't recieved the document at all from me.
(As even an ''Unsatisfactory Amended Particulars of Claim form document'', titled as such, would still be an ''Amended Particulars of Claim form document'').


I'm going to telephone the court tomorrow morning to seek clarity & confirmation regarding this matter, but wanted to seek advice as to whether I would have a basis to appeal if that is the case, based on the fact that the court did not notify me that they were unsatisfied with my Amended Particulars of Claim form, instead implied that they had not recieved the document at all?


Thankyou

waamo

If you ring the court you will be on hold for hours. Why not look on MCOL to see the status of the claim?

If it's been struck out you would normally be notified however things do go wrong.

October868

Hello and thanks for your reply.

I made the claim through the new version of the MCOL website (the Gov.uk one), but so when I check on there the latest update it shows was last year (when I requested judgment in default).

There have been 2 hearings since, but that site doesn't update unfortunately.

unholyangel

Clarify with the court why they're asking you to send an amended one.....if the other party has legal representation then how can it be too complicated for them to understand?

waamo

unholyangel wrote: »

Clarify with the court why they're asking you to send an amended one.....if the other party has legal representation then how can it be too complicated for them to understand?

If this is the initial particulars they are supposed to be concise. You expand on them later. A single paragraph is plenty. It should usually be done in a few lines with the total value claimed.

Something along the lines of "Cost of repairs following damage to wall" followed by the amount is enough for say a building issue.

It really should be kept as simple as that. The fact there is bullet points and a chronology suggests it's not simple. You lay those facts out slightly later usually.

October868

Hello and thankyou for all your replies.

The particulars of claim which I have submitted isn't especially 'complex', instead is written in basic simple non-jargon terminology.
But as there were various stages to the 'incident' spread over the court of a few months, and involving various sums of money at each stage, I do ofcourse need to reference the various stages & money involved at each stage, or else my claim would endup being ''insufficient'' I'd expect.


So I simply formatted it as-

Basic short intro to the case.
1. On this date xyz was said, abc happened, and £xxx was paid.
2. On this date abc was said, and £xxx was requested.
3. On this £xxx was paid, xyz was agreed.

Ect


The defendant has written an extremely long, waffley, and to be honest pretty incomprehensible counter claim, of many many pages in length, and with the majority of it simply being extremely serious (criminal) allegations about my/my character, none of which actually have any basis of truth, nor infact any actual relevance whatsoever to this actual matter/money-claim.
*However their counter-claim has been allowed.


My reason for panicking last-night was that the legal representative of the defendant (he's a qualified solicitor, but is not actually representing her, merely supporting her in a non-speaking capacity in the court-room), emailed me/the court directly insinuating that the court had deemed my Amended Particulars of Claim form as being unsatisfactory, and thus that my claim had been stuck-out by the court.

But this morning I telephoned the court, who confirmed that-

• They had successfully recieved my Amended Particulars of Claim document 3 weeks ago.
• That there is nothing on their system showing that my claim has been struck-out or anything of the like.
• And that a hearing date has been set for in a few months time.

So I feel far more settled and less anxious now. :j

DoaM

So you have it in writing that the other party has behaved unreasonably? (In trying to deceive you/the court regarding the status of the claim).

Or did they write to you/the court inviting the judge to strike out the claim? (For the reasons stated).

The former may allow you to request the judge to allow additional costs (should you win) due to unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to CPR 24(g); the latter is just a normal part of process - they obviously felt it was worth a go. (You could still try to argue unreasonable behaviour though).

October868

DoaM wrote: »

So you have it in writing that the other party has behaved unreasonably? (In trying to deceive you/the court regarding the status of the claim).

Or did they write to you/the court inviting the judge to strike out the claim? (For the reasons stated).

The former may allow you to request the judge to allow additional costs (should you win) due to unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to CPR 24(g); the latter is just a normal part of process - they obviously felt it was worth a go. (You could still try to argue unreasonable behaviour though).

Hello, but no they (the legal representative of the defendant) 'told me' that the court had deemed my Amended Particulars of Claim unsatisfactory, and so my claim had been struck-out by the court.


I have below copy & pasted exactly what they wrote in the email to me-

''I am fully aware that you filed and served what you thought were compliant amended Particulars of Claim, in May. I am also aware, however, of the order of xxx June, which shows, clearly, that the Court was not satisfied that what you had filed was compliant with CPR, and directed that you file compliant amended Particulars by xxx July, or your claim would be struck out. As far as we are aware, you did not file a compliant pleading, and so your claim fell to be struck out''.

+

''From what you say you resubmitted on xxx July (though not to the Defendant) the documents submitted in May. According to the order of xxx June, those documents did not comply with CPR - an assessment with which I concur''.

waamo

October868 wrote: »

Hello, but no they (the legal representative of the defendant) 'told me' that the court had deemed my Amended Particulars of Claim unsatisfactory, and so my claim had been struck-out by the court.


I have below copy & pasted exactly what they wrote in the email to me-

''I am fully aware that you filed and served what you thought were compliant amended Particulars of Claim, in May. I am also aware, however, of the order of xxx June, which shows, clearly, that the Court was not satisfied that what you had filed was compliant with CPR, and directed that you file compliant amended Particulars by xxx July, or your claim would be struck out. As far as we are aware, you did not file a compliant pleading, and so your claim fell to be struck out''.

+

''From what you say you resubmitted on xxx July (though not to the Defendant) the documents submitted in May. According to the order of xxx June, those documents did not comply with CPR - an assessment with which I concur''.

If that was from a professional solicitor i would definitely show that to the court. IMHO that oversteps the line.

I would also complain to the SRA about the blatant attempt to mislead you.

October868

waamo wrote: »

If that was from a professional solicitor i would definitely show that to the court. IMHO that oversteps the line.

I would also complain to the SRA about the blatant attempt to mislead you.

Thankyou I will follow your advice and show that in court to the judge.

This man's role to the defendant is as their ''McKenzie Friend''.
He is a professional solicitor by profession, albeit semi-retired now I believe/non-practising.


Their entire defend/counter-claim is basically just ridicuous & absurd anyways! *_*

As the simple basic facts are I commissioned the defendant to do/produce some 'digital' work for me, they requested a sum of a few thousand for that work, and so I paid them the full sum inadvance.
They however only produced half the agreed quantity of work, but then decided to stop.

When I asked for my money back they said they had already spent it and so would have to pay me via monthly installments.
I accepted this, but requested to know the date when they would make the 1st repayment.
They ignored the message/however stated that if I did use (sell) any of the content which they had produced (despite it having been produced on the specific clear basis that it was for commercial sale by me) that they would 'sue me'.
They then blocked me so I couldn't contact them anymore.

I informed them I would take the matter to court, and then filed the claim accordingly.


Since then they have repeatedly made false allegations that I'm a pa-edophile (not linked to the work :: just that I am one in general in my personal life apparently),
That they didn't respond to the original court order/judgement because they believed the letters sent by the court were fake forgeries produced by me,
Claimed that I owe them thousands of pounds more in 'lost earnings' because ''if they had continued to work for me for multiple future months/years, they would of gotten lots of work from me which I had mentioned would be potentially be available if once the company launched it did well & made a profit, but so I now apparently owe them all the thousands of pounds that they would've be paid if they had done all that hypotehtical potential work over the future years''.
*Despite them having chosen to block me & cease working for me, stating in writing (like everything else mentioned above is too) that they 'refuse to work for me anymore'.


That literally is their entire defence (and counter-claim too), that they admit they endedup with a 4-figure surplus of money belonging to me, for work which they did not carry out | But because IF they had continued to be offered loads work by me on a monthly basis for multiple future years, they would of earnt a 5-figure sum from that work ..... And so because that 5-figure sum is higher than the 4-figure surplus, it in their view cancels out all the money they owe me, plus means I owe them multiple thousands of pounds extra.

*_*

waamo

He's not acting as a solicitor then if he's a McKenzie friend. He isn't allowed to charge them either.

I suspect he's practicing but pretending he isn't.