Can defendant in Small-Claims court charge for ''time spent preparing for trial''??

waamo

She has about as much hope of claiming those expenses as I have of going to the moon.

hollydays

Someone else might know more about this, but I suggest checking out to see if they are registered as a solicitor with the law society as I'm not sure it's legal to refer to yourself as a solicitor if you haven't..

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/

Do you have this claim in writing?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

October868 wrote: »

''If I had chosen to place dozens of future orders with them over the future months/years they would of earned £xxx thousands of pounds from those orders, but so they are now claiming that sum of money which they would've made if I had placed future orders''.

If they've written that on the court papers I can't see them being taken very seriously on the day in general.

October868

hollydays wrote: »

Someone else might know more about this, but I suggest checking out to see if they are registered as a solicitor with the law society as I'm not sure it's legal to refer to yourself as a solicitor if you haven't..

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/

Do you have this claim in writing?

Hello the McKenzie friend's name doesn't show in the law society register (although his title states he is non-practising).
He does however have a website for his practise, where it states he specialises in law in the areas of rating, compulsory purchase and property valuation,


But yes I have it in email.
As they emailed me back this evening saying they will only agree to my offer of mutual-withdrawal of claims if I pay a significant compensation to them due to the costs incurred thus far such as loss of income due to having had to spend time writing witness statements... ect

And then I copy & pasted exactly what they stated about their costs increasing if the matter goes to trial.

hollydays

So does he actually use the word " solicitor" or does he say lawyer

waamo

Got a link to his website?

hollydays

Information here

https://www.sra.org.uk/bogus-solicitors
Ring the solicitors regulation authority tommorrow and report back
0370 606 2555

October868

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head wrote: »

If they've written that on the court papers I can't see them being taken very seriously on the day in general.

That literally is the exact core-basis of her claim.

As she already admitted in email that she owes me the money (couldn't exactly deny it as the evidence shows she recieved the payments from me into her bank, but then never produced the videos, and even admitted via email that she had already spent the money designated to pay her co-performers wages on herself, so couldn't repay it to me).

But she then filed a counterclaim now saying that-
''I had mentioned a few times during online chats that if this 1st batch of videos went well, that I would be looking to order 45-50 more videos from her over the future months & years''...
That if I had proceeded to place those future orders she would've been paid £7,500+ by me for them, but so she now is claiming that sum due to the fact that she 'lost out on that money' because I didn't make those future orders from her.
*Moreover it was actually her who suddenly started ignoring all my emails, and then blocked me, thus making it clear she no longer wished to produce any more videos for me | And so she ultimately terminated working for me herself, but then now is claiming that if she hadn't done that, and if I had decided to place future orders, she would've earned £7,500+ (which is her counter-claim sum).


Tragically for me though I have no legal knowledge nor experience, and so when she filed her counterclaim I wasn't aware that I needed to file a written defence to it within 14-days (as the court didn't state that in the letter which they me), and as such her nonsensical claim won a default judgement due to me not filing a defence in time!
(I have however applied to request to have that judgement set-aside, and instead have my defence to her counterclaim heard).

October868

Hello just to update this thread-

I this evening recieved an extremely bizzare (and so deeply concerning) email from the defendant's McKenzie friend.
Due to just how ''personally opinionated'' this email seems to be from their McKenzie friend I feel the need to copy & paste it, as whilst I personally have no legal experience, I do feel that this surely is beyond the limits of what a McKenzie friend is permitted to say in an email to the oposing party (due to their personal views stated in the email)??


''Thank you for your message today, on which I have taken instructions.

You have claimed to have considerable experience in the court system, in which case you should know that he who starts litigation does not always win, and there is a cost of failure to succeed, in that field. You may have browbeaten others into bending to your wishes, but Ms XXX is not among them: she is not, as you like to describe women, as"stupid blonde bimbos", and she sought, and obtained, help.

Correspondence between you confirms the terms of an agreement between you as to work to be done, and the price to be paid for it. Contract once made, is binding, unless it's terms are broken by one of the parties to it.

You reneged on that agreement, received a number of clips (which you kept and exploited) and then sought to change the terms of your agreement, which Ms XXX did not accept. The terms which you are now offering are considerably more generous than those which you agreed with Ms XXX and from which you sought to resile; and your demands, as now shown on your sites, and in the trial bundle, went far beyond anything which Ms XXX and her colleague were prepared to do. In short, you received value for your money on the terms agreed and cannot now expect a refund from her.

She seeks damages from you for breach of contract, and for the loss of income which she has sustained as a result of the false accusations against her of theft, which resulted in her being forced out of (XXX company), and having her social media closed down. You have also followed her to her present TV station, although your attempts, there, to have her removed, have failed, signally.

Whether or not you choose to accept Ms XXX's offer is, of course, entirely a matter for you. What you may have lost (if you have indeed lost anything) is something which you should have considered before issuing your claim and serving it at a P O Box address, and you will be put to strict proof of those losses, should the matter come to trial.

Ms XXX was entitled to defend herself, and succeeded in doing so, while you were required to resubmit your Particulars of Claim in a manner compliant with CPR. She is entitled to recover the cost of so doing, and that cost can only increase should you decide to proceed.

Yours faithfully,


#

I have responded to them making them aware that I find it bizzare that they, as a McKenzie Friend, have sent me such an email.

*Advised them of the fact that I have never claimed to have considerable legal knowledge nor experience (I work in the finance & investment industry).
*Advised them that merely expressing an interest in placing future orders of a product in no way constitues as 'placing an order/nor a legally binding contract.
*Advised them that the contents of any videos which I may of subequently chosen to commission the production of featuring any other independent adults is of no relevance whatsover to the defendant/nor this matter.
*Advised them that whilst I am aware of the various companies which the defendant works for as a self-employed contractor (due to the fact that they are TV channels, which publicse & broadcast into the public domain the fact that she is on their TV channel), that as merely a self-employed contractor any company was ofcourse entitled to opt to not offer her future work (for any reason/or no reason). That I cannot comment on whatever/why ever any company may of chosen to not offer her work, but that no other company was involved in the particulars of my claim/the money which she has dishonestly deprived me of.
*Advised the McKenzie friend that ''time spent by defendants/witnesses in writing statements is not recoverable as a cost in the small-claims court''.

And then requested that any future corespondence which he has with me is limited purely to passing on messages/documents from the defendant, in verbatim.

macman

I am unclear what precisely you are objecting to in that email, but if you consider anything to be defamatory or libellous, then you are of course are liberty to sue them for it.
If you are intending to go to court over the original matter, then you can expect to be cross examined rigorously, so your finding that email 'deeply concerning' indicates to me that perhaps you should take professional advice on this.