Small Claims Court - Claimant's Legal Fees?

unholyangel

MattMattMattUK said:

unholyangel said:

So, what makes it a vexatious claim and why do you think there isn't a chance in hell they would win?  

The claim, from what they have said here seems to have no merit, they asked someone for an opinion, they did not do any research themselves, they do not have evidence of either what questions they asked, what information they provided, or what opinion was provided in return. The opinion/advice was not regulated and there are not professional guidelines for the transaction or opinion/advice. They have already gone through a complaints procedure with the supplier, they have then gone to the ombudsman, who has again ruled against them, they are now looking to bring a claim on something which has no legal standing, that would be deemed vexatious. 

unholyangel said:

If the OP approached the dealer to suggest a car and, knowing of OP's low miles, they suggested a diesel....it sounds like the goods possibly aren't fit for purpose. 

Used car salesmen are notorious for a reason, but as per my above paragraph we do not know if, nor is there supporting evidence that a conversation about low mileage was even entered into. The car was also road legal and fully functional, functioning as the manufacturer intended, using a vehicle in a sub optimal way does not make it "not fit for purpose".

unholyangel said:

The bar to have more than the fixed costs awarded is very high. Such as making a claim with absolutely no legal basis, that never had any prospect of success and then not showing for the hearing, purely just to cause inconvenience or harm to the other party. You're not going to be penalised just because you misunderstood the law or the merit of your claim. 

The bar to have legal costs awarded is high, but from the information we have here it would appear that there is no legal basis for the case, in which case (reasonable) costs will likely be awarded to the defending party. The claimant has not made clear exactly how much (or even on what basis) they plan to take the action, my guess would be under £10,000 so probably small claims, in which case costs would only be awarded if it is deemed vexatious, however it could also be awarded to another track where costs are awarded by default.

I have taken legal action in the past, I have always had sound legal grounds, full supporting evidence and I was absolutely clear what I wanted to achieve, taking legal action on any other basis is a hiding to nothing. 

Except when you ask for an opinion from the seller, it forms part of the contract.

I also wasn't aware that you had personal knowledge of the OP's circumstances, that the OP hasn't posted on this thread ("they do not have evidence", that it was a used car etc). Care to share your source/s? 

There is legal basis for the claim - not fit for purpose under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. I appreciate that you personally, with your profound knowledge of the facts of the case, may feel such a claim would fail. But failing does not mean it had no legal basis. Just that it didn't satisfy the criteria of that basis (or was counteracted by another position of law). 

Having no legal basis would be me saying you owe me £20000 for reading my posts. Not because there was a contract, not because you were negligent or infringing on IP etc but just because I feel that I should be able to charge you for it. 

wealdroam

unholyangel said:

I also wasn't aware that you had personal knowledge of the OP's circumstances, that the OP hasn't posted on this thread ("they do not have evidence", that it was a used car etc). Care to share your source/s? 

The OP's earlier thread is probably all he knows.

unholyangel

wealdroam said:  unholyangel said:

I also wasn't aware that you had personal knowledge of the OP's circumstances, that the OP hasn't posted on this thread ("they do not have evidence", that it was a used car etc). Care to share your source/s? 

The OP's earlier thread is probably all he knows.

Here's me, thinking I've been too forward in my phrasing to point out the assumptions being made. But apparently, I wasn't forward enough!  

I was trying to give them the opportunity to spot it for themselves since it could just be a innocent mistake. Sometimes if you read a few similar threads, they all blend into one and become less easy to distinguish.