We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Has MSE helped you to save or reclaim money this year? Share your 2025 MoneySaving success stories!
Unsure whether to take builder's company to court, or builder as an individual to court
t1redmonkey
Posts: 949 Forumite
- Basically I signed a building contract with a guy to build an extension for me in November 2019. Let's say the company is PT Construction (that's not the actual name, just making up a fake one for an example). Now from what I can tell, PT Construction did not officially exist on Companies House on the date I signed the contract. It's what the builder was calling his company, but there's no official record of it existing at the time the contract was signed.
- I have looked up the guy on companies house. He set up a LTD company the month after I signed a contract with a completely different name (but it was a construction company). I wasn't aware of this at the time. That company was then dissolved in July 2020.
- He then set up another LTD company in August 2020 that has the exact same name on the contract I signed back in November 2019. This company is still on Companies House.
- I am very confused who to claim against. Technically this guy did not officially have a company on the date I signed a contract. But now does have a company with the name on the contract I signed. Originally I was thinking "Well obviously I take the company to court" but then if it didn't exist at the time the contract was signed, should I be taking him as an individual to court instead since according to Companies House he didn't have a company on the date of the contract? Also miscellaneous point perhaps but payments I have made to him were to his personal bank account as far as I'm aware, not a business bank account.
0
Comments
-
If the contract wasn't in the name of a limited company then I would think it safe to assume that PT Construction is/was just the trading name of him as an individual. It obviously wasn't a contract with one of the limited companies which didn't even exist at the time.1
-
A legal entity that doesn't exist cannot enter into a contract and therefore PT Construction was a trading name of the builder himself. No issues with that, though would have been if he'd called himself PT Construction Limited back then (or Ltd), but the contract should have named him personally as well.
Who you paid and what type of account it was is broadly irrelevant (unless we were talking a S75 claim) as a seller can always tell the buyer to pay someone on their behalf... eg anyone using PayPal is technically paying PayPal themselves in the first instance.1 -
you take him as an individual to court1
-
Ok I'm actually a bit happier now, since I was originally thinking I'd have to claim against the existing Ltd company, and he could just liquidate it to avoid any legal obligations. But now I have double checked my original contract with him, I can see it is just in the name of a company without Ltd in there, so must have just been a trading name of the builder at the time. So I can take him as an individual to court and he can't as easily get out of any judgement (I hope).0
-
He can't 'get out of the judgement' via liquidation, no, but you may still have to use bailiffs to enforce judgement if he doesn't pay up-assuming he has any assets.
Remember, you must send an LBA first before going via the small claims process.No free lunch, and no free laptop
1 -
You sue the individual but you should mention the business name he was using - e.g. "Mr X trading as PT Construction"
The Civil Procedure Rules which govern court proceedings state as follows:2.6 The claim form must be headed with the title of the proceedings, including the full name of each party. The full name means, in each case where it is known:
...
(b) in the case of an individual carrying on business in a name other than his own name, the full unabbreviated name of the individual, together with the title by which he is known, and the full trading name (for example, John Smith ‘trading as’ or ‘T/as’ ‘JS Autos’);
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part16/pd_part16
1 -
@steampowered
Thanks a lot for that document, I will have a look at that in more detail when I come to submit the claim.
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.8K Spending & Discounts
- 246.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 602.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.8K Life & Family
- 260K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards
