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

davidmcn

macman wrote: »

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.

It can't be defamatory if it's only been sent to the OP.

Manxman_in_exile

OP - I'm not sure I would find that email deeply concerning as, if it is untrue, it's frankly ridiculous.


Just a couple of points:


1. It refers to you "exploiting" the clips and also refers to your "sites". Going back to your original thread (again) are you still sure it's a consumer transaction and not a B2B one?


2. It seems to be implicit in the email that you have attempted to approach the defendant's employer with a view to raising some sort of complaint against her. I'm assuming this isn't true (although you haven't exactly denied it in your response) and there is no evidence of this?


3. Your reply doesn't seem to deny the accusation that you refer to women as "stupid blonde bimbos". I think if it were me I would have challenged that.


This all seems to have got ridiculously out of hand. I suppose it could be seen as quite amusing but it must be a serious matter for you. If you work in the finance and investment sector, can't you get somebody to recommend a lawyer to get legal advice from?


EDIT: None of you come out of this particularly well, and that's without speculation as to the nature of the clips(!).

October868

Hello it's not the 'content' of the email that I find concerning, instead is the fact that it was sent to my by the defendant's McKenzie Friend, and quite clearly is full of the McKenzie's friends personal opinions about me/the matter, which I find concerning.

I don't know what the role/limitations of a McKenzie friend are, but my understanding was that their role is to simply sit silently in the court and offer support/guidance to the person involved in the claim.
However didn't think it would be within their scope to email the other party stating their own views & opinions on the person/matter?

#

And in regards to your questions-

1. I'm not exactly sure how you would even go about 'exploiting' a video clip to be honest?
The videos which the defendant produced for me have never been listed for sale though, instead they have simply remained as private videos on my computer.
I have, a few months after parting company with the defendant, launched my own video-brand & online yes; However that has no relevance whatsoever to either the defendant nor to the particulars of this claim itself, as that is simply a small business which I chose to setup, and which doesn't feature any video performed/or produced by the defendant.
So whilst I am now a commercial business operator yes, at the time when I was involved with the defendant (15+ months ago) I didn't own any business, was simply a consumer at that time.


2. The defendant used to work as a self-employed contractor for various brands (still does).
I didn't contact any of the brands which she worked for to 'tell on her' after she stole my money, as that quite simply wouldn't of been especially beneficial to me, since none of those brands were involved in my dealings with her. So I instead simply filed an Mcol claim against her.
Ultimately though the money which the defendant stole was money which was specifically designated to pay the wages of other individuals (with 2 of those individuals being people who also worked for 1 of the same brands as the defendant), and so when the defendant vanished with all the money, and thus the shoot-day which had been planned for those individuals had to be cancelled as their wages had been taken, ofcourse they wanted to know who had done it.
But so whilst I have in private conversations with people whom I work with ofcourse spoken about what the defendant did, I had no logical reason to contact the brands which she works for to 'tell on her'.


3. In all my correspondence with the defendant I have always remained polite & professional, despite the vile allegations which she has made about me/spread about me such as that I'm a paed*ophile... ect
My only correspondence with her for the past 15+ months even has been via the court-system (so through court statements), and so ofcourse I wouldn't engage in childish name-calling in a court document.
But so whilst/when the defendant has made crude & false allegations about me as part of her claim, I quite simply just don't even dignify them with a response.
A large part of the defendant's evidence bundle has been that she's just scrolled through my social-media for the past 15months, taken screenshots of any negative thing that anyone has ever said to/about me (random people whom have no involvement whatsoever in the particulars of this claim), and then created a collage of these screenshots to try making it look like I'm a 'nasty unpleasant person'.

I personally didn't do the same to her though as I was under the impression that the only thing the judge will care about is the specific facts relating directly to the particulars of the claim?
Not that this was some kind of personality/popularity contest, where you are judged based on how many nice/negative things have been said about you by people (unrelated to the particulars of the claim).

October868

Additionally the reason why I felt that it was very unorthodox/improper for the defendant's McKenzie friend to write me an email stating their own personal views & opinions about me & the case is because they are not meant to even be allowed to ''act as the person's agent outside of court/manage the case outside of court''...
(http://courtwithoutalawyer.co.uk/mckenzie-friends.html)

But their McKenzie friend has been managing the entire case for them outside of court, has been telephoning the court on their behalf, been engaging in email correspondence with the court directly making requests for orders to be made against me/accusing me of failing to file documents of a good enough standard, and now has sent me that email.


Sadly their role is not regulated though, otherwise I would complain about their conduct.

waamo

October868 wrote: »

Additionally the reason why I felt that it was very unorthodox/improper for the defendant's McKenzie friend to write me an email stating their own personal views & opinions about me & the case is because they are not meant to even be allowed to ''act as the person's agent outside of court/manage the case outside of court''...
(http://courtwithoutalawyer.co.uk/mckenzie-friends.html)

But their McKenzie friend has been managing the entire case for them outside of court, has been telephoning the court on their behalf, been engaging in email correspondence with the court directly making requests for orders to be made against me/accusing me of failing to file documents of a good enough standard, and now has sent me that email.


Sadly their role is not regulated though, otherwise I would complain about their conduct.

I would contact the SRA and ask their view as to whether he is carrying out activities that he shouldn't. He does seem to be straying into something a solicitor should be doing.

October868

Hello just to update again-

The defendant's McKenzie friend responded to my email claiming that they didn't state their own personal views in that previous email, and then stated that if I email/or even CC the defendant into any future emails though that they will file a 'non-molestation order' against me.

They then have gone onto claim that the damages which they are claiming are due to the ''loss of income which the defendant incurred during the period when she ceased working as a self-employed contractor for brand A, until she commenced work as a self-employed contractor with brand B''.
They have gone on to state that even though I didn't directly contact brand A and say ''the defendant has stolen my money...'', that 'things which I said to other individuals who also worked for that brand got circulated around, and resulted in the defendant being driven out'.


I personally have no academic legal knowledge, but so if anyone on here could assist me with letting me know exactly what 'legal defence' I need to make in regards to this, that would be greatly appreciated??

As my understanding is that if someone worked for a company as an in-house employee, negative information about that person was reported to the company by an external source/whistleblower, and the company sacked that person due to that...
The employee would surely need to first file an employment-tribunal claim for unfair-dismissal, win that claim, and only then could they seek to take legal action against 'the source' of that information?

In this case though the defendant was merely a self-employed contractor (on a zero-hours contract I assume).
She has never stated that she was 'dismissed' by the brand, although if someone is self-employed I would assume the company wouldn't need to 'dismiss you' if they no longer wanted you to work for them, instead they could simply opt to 'not offer you work | without needing to state any reason', instead she has always just used the wording 'she was driven out' of her job there.
She has not filed any document showing any form of employment contract from that brand, nor any letter showing that she was dismissed/nor any letter at all from that brand to be honest.


My line of defence has always simply been that I don't work for/nor represent that brand so cannot comment or even speculate as to why she may of ceased working for them/why they may not of offered her work during a certain period of time.
(As for all I know she may of fallen out with a manager there for any personal reason and so left due to that/May of had family-life issues going on which meant she wasn't available to work much during those 8-weeks/May of simply not been required by the brand due to them having other individuals who they wanted to offer the work-slots to instead... ect)

But if/as she is claiming that she was 'driven out/forced out' of her job there because I told people who work with me/were friends of mine what she did, and word about that got circulated around to her managers, resulting in them not wanting to offer her more work....
What defence/legislation should I use please??

BoGoF

Surely it's the time you got proper paid for advice. You just seem to be digging a bigger hole for yourself.

waamo

BoGoF wrote: »

Surely it's the time you got proper paid for advice. You just seem to be digging a bigger hole fir yourself.

Indeed. Always remember the first rule of holes. Go and see a solicitor.

October868

BoGoF wrote: »

Surely it's the time you got proper paid for advice. You just seem to be digging a bigger hole fir yourself.

Hello what action have I done which has 'dug a bigger hole for myself' please?

And in regards to me hiring a solicitor, I quite simply cannot afford to spend hundreds (let alone thousands of pounds) on hiring a solicitor sadly.

waamo

October868 wrote: »

Hello what action have I done which has 'dug a bigger hole for myself' please?

And in regards to me hiring a solicitor, I quite simply cannot afford to spend hundreds (let alone thousands of pounds) on hiring a solicitor sadly.

Given this case is about several thousands of pounds I don't think you can afford not to.