Small claims court for dog maintenance?

unholyangel

Most salient points have been covered I think - contract requires consideration, unless you're in Scotland. Could potentially be an issue if no financial order was obtained at divorce. Though possibly not as marriage would normally stop the one remarried having a claim on the other (but wouldn't stop the other claiming on the one who is remarried, unless they also remarried). He can claim it was in settlement but unless it was formalised, I think he might out of luck on that front. 

But gifts can be enforceable, if made by deed btw.

Burden will be on ex to prove his claim. OP if it does does get to court, bring up the failure to follow preaction protocol (you said first notification was court email, meaning ex didnt try settle with you without involving the courts) when it comes to costs. 

If ex does still have the WhatsApp convo from 5-6 years ago, indicates ex has not so happily moved on. Either has axe to grind or still has feelings imo. 

Ms_Chocaholic

I do wonder if the dog is still alive; does your ex live close by, have you ever seen him walking the dog? How old was the dog when you separated?

myfairlady

ThumbRemote said:

Ask for proof the insurance was purchased. When he is unable to supply this, counter-claim for a full refund of all the money you paid.

Thank you, I didn't think of that! 

myfairlady

None of it makes much sense to me. I have no idea if the dog is still alive. By my calculations it would be approx 12 now. He moved miles away when he remarried, so it's not like I would know unless I went to their house...which I'm not going to do.

myfairlady

unholyangel said:

Most salient points have been covered I think - contract requires consideration, unless you're in Scotland. Could potentially be an issue if no financial order was obtained at divorce. Though possibly not as marriage would normally stop the one remarried having a claim on the other (but wouldn't stop the other claiming on the one who is remarried, unless they also remarried). He can claim it was in settlement but unless it was formalised, I think he might out of luck on that front. 

But gifts can be enforceable, if made by deed btw.

Burden will be on ex to prove his claim. OP if it does does get to court, bring up the failure to follow preaction protocol (you said first notification was court email, meaning ex didnt try settle with you without involving the courts) when it comes to costs. 

If ex does still have the WhatsApp convo from 5-6 years ago, indicates ex has not so happily moved on. Either has axe to grind or still has feelings imo. 

Thank you. It was simply my way of helping him out. I'll wait for the actual paperwork to come through and will send off my defence. Eugh, i do hope you're not right about him having feelings! That ship sailed years ago! Thanks again for all of your help guys.

Jenni_D

If paperwork hasn't arrived within 5 days from the Issue Date of the claim then you should ring the CCBC to find out what's going on. Make sure you don't miss any deadlines for doing the Acknowledgment of Service (AoS) or filing your Defence. The first post in the thread below is a good guide to the process to be followed when defending a court claim.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108153/template-defence-to-adapt-for-all-parking-cases-where-they-add-false-admin-costs-edited-march-2022/p1

Flight3287462

myfairlady said:

None of it makes much sense to me. I have no idea if the dog is still alive. By my calculations it would be approx 12 now. He moved miles away when he remarried, so it's not like I would know unless I went to their house...which I'm not going to do.

Oh, I would!

Sandtree

unholyangel said:

Most salient points have been covered I think - contract requires consideration, unless you're in Scotland. Could potentially be an issue if no financial order was obtained at divorce. Though possibly not as marriage would normally stop the one remarried having a claim on the other (but wouldn't stop the other claiming on the one who is remarried, unless they also remarried). He can claim it was in settlement but unless it was formalised, I think he might out of luck on that front. 

But gifts can be enforceable, if made by deed btw.

Burden will be on ex to prove his claim. OP if it does does get to court, bring up the failure to follow preaction protocol (you said first notification was court email, meaning ex didnt try settle with you without involving the courts) when it comes to costs. 

If ex does still have the WhatsApp convo from 5-6 years ago, indicates ex has not so happily moved on. Either has axe to grind or still has feelings imo. 

As is so often on forums there are more unanswered questions than answered ones. Even the OP seems a little foggy on the details these days and even if they weren't we are unlikely to get a blow by blow recounting of the full story of their relationship and its breakdown.

For illustration purposes... based on the timeline it seems fairly certain that they got the dog whilst they were together, rather than the OP's Ex bringing it in. Maybe the OP was the one that really wanted it and the Ex just agreed. They split up, Ex says for the OP to take the dog but the OP says work/new home etc it isn't suitable and so the Ex has to take it. Ex says they dont really want the expense of it etc so the OP says they'll contribute if the Ex takes the dog. In which case there is offer, acceptance and consideration so a properly formed contract.

As to keeping texts? Dunno what the norm is but certainly my phone keeps all messages in perpetuity and with online backups they survive phone upgrades. I don't think its because I have a particular axe to grind or that I am not over my last conversation with a recruitment agent but it can be useful to be able to be able to check prior conversations. With storage now in GB its not as if a few bytes for a text is going to dent your storage. 

unholyangel

Sandtree said:

unholyangel said:

Most salient points have been covered I think - contract requires consideration, unless you're in Scotland. Could potentially be an issue if no financial order was obtained at divorce. Though possibly not as marriage would normally stop the one remarried having a claim on the other (but wouldn't stop the other claiming on the one who is remarried, unless they also remarried). He can claim it was in settlement but unless it was formalised, I think he might out of luck on that front. 

But gifts can be enforceable, if made by deed btw.

Burden will be on ex to prove his claim. OP if it does does get to court, bring up the failure to follow preaction protocol (you said first notification was court email, meaning ex didnt try settle with you without involving the courts) when it comes to costs. 

If ex does still have the WhatsApp convo from 5-6 years ago, indicates ex has not so happily moved on. Either has axe to grind or still has feelings imo. 

As is so often on forums there are more unanswered questions than answered ones. Even the OP seems a little foggy on the details these days and even if they weren't we are unlikely to get a blow by blow recounting of the full story of their relationship and its breakdown.

For illustration purposes... based on the timeline it seems fairly certain that they got the dog whilst they were together, rather than the OP's Ex bringing it in. Maybe the OP was the one that really wanted it and the Ex just agreed. They split up, Ex says for the OP to take the dog but the OP says work/new home etc it isn't suitable and so the Ex has to take it. Ex says they dont really want the expense of it etc so the OP says they'll contribute if the Ex takes the dog. In which case there is offer, acceptance and consideration so a properly formed contract.

As to keeping texts? Dunno what the norm is but certainly my phone keeps all messages in perpetuity and with online backups they survive phone upgrades. I don't think its because I have a particular axe to grind or that I am not over my last conversation with a recruitment agent but it can be useful to be able to be able to check prior conversations. With storage now in GB its not as if a few bytes for a text is going to dent your storage. 

As has been explained by others, dogs are no different to any other property. If you don't like the expense of the upkeep of an item of property then you are free to give it away, or even destroy it (and unfortunately, some people do that with dogs rather than rehoming them). 

Plus, if the dog was jointly owned then they'd be jointly liable for its upkeep. Consideration can't be past. So no, a valid contract wouldn't be formed even if what you said was accurate. 

Again, unless it was part of a formal financial settlement then the ex would appear to be SOL. 

Sandtree

unholyangel said:

Sandtree said:

unholyangel said:

Most salient points have been covered I think - contract requires consideration, unless you're in Scotland. Could potentially be an issue if no financial order was obtained at divorce. Though possibly not as marriage would normally stop the one remarried having a claim on the other (but wouldn't stop the other claiming on the one who is remarried, unless they also remarried). He can claim it was in settlement but unless it was formalised, I think he might out of luck on that front. 

But gifts can be enforceable, if made by deed btw.

Burden will be on ex to prove his claim. OP if it does does get to court, bring up the failure to follow preaction protocol (you said first notification was court email, meaning ex didnt try settle with you without involving the courts) when it comes to costs. 

If ex does still have the WhatsApp convo from 5-6 years ago, indicates ex has not so happily moved on. Either has axe to grind or still has feelings imo. 

As is so often on forums there are more unanswered questions than answered ones. Even the OP seems a little foggy on the details these days and even if they weren't we are unlikely to get a blow by blow recounting of the full story of their relationship and its breakdown.

For illustration purposes... based on the timeline it seems fairly certain that they got the dog whilst they were together, rather than the OP's Ex bringing it in. Maybe the OP was the one that really wanted it and the Ex just agreed. They split up, Ex says for the OP to take the dog but the OP says work/new home etc it isn't suitable and so the Ex has to take it. Ex says they dont really want the expense of it etc so the OP says they'll contribute if the Ex takes the dog. In which case there is offer, acceptance and consideration so a properly formed contract.

As to keeping texts? Dunno what the norm is but certainly my phone keeps all messages in perpetuity and with online backups they survive phone upgrades. I don't think its because I have a particular axe to grind or that I am not over my last conversation with a recruitment agent but it can be useful to be able to be able to check prior conversations. With storage now in GB its not as if a few bytes for a text is going to dent your storage. 

As has been explained by others, dogs are no different to any other property. If you don't like the expense of the upkeep of an item of property then you are free to give it away, or even destroy it (and unfortunately, some people do that with dogs rather than rehoming them). 

Plus, if the dog was jointly owned then they'd be jointly liable for its upkeep. Consideration can't be past. So no, a valid contract wouldn't be formed even if what you said was accurate. 

Again, unless it was part of a formal financial settlement then the ex would appear to be SOL. 

Offer - Ex says they'll take the dog in exchange for payments
Acceptance - OP texted to say that's fine
Consideration - OP made monthly payments until recently

Duly formed contract with no retrospective aspect to the consideration

its clearly highly speculative as even the OP cannot remember the background from what they've said and didn't keep a record of it.

It seems the OP cannot remember any duration of payment being agreed so it'll come down to the better record keeping of the Ex or if its not mentioned in the exchanges then what the Judge determines the implied terms were. Small claims where one party has kept information and the other party hasn't are always going to be more of a roll of the dice until disclosures.