Small claims court with a joiner - what can I hope for?

Skag

tightauldgit said:

Skag said:

I thought I'd post an update on this.

I went to court and won the hearing.

I then instructed the bailiffs to go and collect my money. I just received this response from the bailiff.

We have now concluded our pre-enforcement checks on this file and report as follows:

1/ Your judgment is against a none legal entity, see below for an explanation:

What is meant by the defendant is not a legal entity?

Look at the name on your judgment. There are basically three types of legal entity: there is a sole trader i.e., Joe Bloggs trading as XYZ Car Sales, a partnership Joe Bloggs and Simon Smith trading as XYZ Car Sales, and a limited company like XYZ Car Sales Ltd or ABC Ltd trading as XYZ Car Sales. If we get a judgment with just XYZ Car Sales, this is not a legal entity. We will of course attend and try to enforce, but if it is shown to us that XYZ Car Sales is not a correct entity, then we cannot enforce and will walk away because we could be acting unlawfully. We are not allowed by law to give you legal advice as we are not solicitors or legally qualified.

We are aware that the court can vary an order to get the name changed. See  https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part13 Exactly how you go about the procedure we cannot explain to you, so you should seek professional legal advice.

Estimated chances of successful enforcement

Based on the above findings we are able to give a very basic indication of successful enforcement, as to if there is a greater or less than 50% chance of successful enforcement. Please note this is purely an estimate and we cannot give any accurate percentages of any case and we cannot answer any further questions on this.  

A less than a 50% chance of successful enforcement.

As there is a less than 50% chance of success, we now ask you to confirm if you would like to progress the case to obtain the writ at your risk of losing the court fee of £71.

It is of course still possible to gain successful enforcement and we are more than willing to continue to attempt to gain the writ and proceed with enforcement.

On the CCJ, on the defendant field it states the name of the company without the Ltd (as it doesn't have an Ltd on his invoice), and on the defendant, it says the director's name.

However, I remember asking the judge whether I should sue the individual, and she said that it doesn't matter, if you had the job done by his company, you should sue his company.

The judicial system is so broken, it's absurd! So, if I were to sue a bottle of water, would the court allow me to, and would issue a CCJ?

Its very important and the responsibility of the person seeking a judgement against an entity that they are pursuing the right entity and that the details are correct. From what you say you have sued the person and not the company. No idea what the judge has told you but 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' is not the same entity as 'XYZ Car Sales Ltd'. 

Furthermore, I don't think it's as simple as getting an amendment because even if you added the Ltd to 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' it would still be wrong. I don't think you can get an amendment to change the legal entity only to correct a typo or similar. 

So, this means that I can chase the person then, that's good news, since it's the person who delivered the work, and as stated in the invoice, it's not an Ltd, right?

Skag

eskbanker said:

Skag said:

eskbanker said:

Skag said:

On the CCJ, on the defendant field it states the name of the company without the Ltd (as it doesn't have an Ltd on his invoice)

What does the Companies House entry state?

It says company_name Ltd. His invoice doesn't have the Ltd part.

The definitive name of a company is that stated at Companies House, not what's printed on an invoice.  

Skag said:

In my witness statement I sued "Mr X trading as company_name" (without the Ltd).

"Mr X trading as company_name" doesn't make sense, as that styling applies to a sole trader, whereas a limited company (even a one-man version) is a different legal entity from an individual, which is a really important distinction.

Skag said:
The judge said it didn't matter because I still sued his company. This is what baffles me: the judge didn't know who am I suing?

I'm not familiar enough with the process to know if there's any validation of entities being sued, but would have thought that it was your responsibility to establish who you're suing, but the above variations suggest that this wasn't clearly done, and potentially left loopholes that the defendant can escape through.  The judge's comment about suing the company not the individual is accurate, and consistent with what you've been told before, but isn't in itself sufficient, in that you still need to get the company name right....

But, I wanted to sue the person in the first place, as he didn't seem to use his company anywhere. It's him who failed to provide the service, and not his company.

Maybe the bailiff is wrong on this?

powerful_Rogue

Skag said:

tightauldgit said:

Skag said:

I thought I'd post an update on this.

I went to court and won the hearing.

I then instructed the bailiffs to go and collect my money. I just received this response from the bailiff.

We have now concluded our pre-enforcement checks on this file and report as follows:

1/ Your judgment is against a none legal entity, see below for an explanation:

What is meant by the defendant is not a legal entity?

Look at the name on your judgment. There are basically three types of legal entity: there is a sole trader i.e., Joe Bloggs trading as XYZ Car Sales, a partnership Joe Bloggs and Simon Smith trading as XYZ Car Sales, and a limited company like XYZ Car Sales Ltd or ABC Ltd trading as XYZ Car Sales. If we get a judgment with just XYZ Car Sales, this is not a legal entity. We will of course attend and try to enforce, but if it is shown to us that XYZ Car Sales is not a correct entity, then we cannot enforce and will walk away because we could be acting unlawfully. We are not allowed by law to give you legal advice as we are not solicitors or legally qualified.

We are aware that the court can vary an order to get the name changed. See  https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part13 Exactly how you go about the procedure we cannot explain to you, so you should seek professional legal advice.

Estimated chances of successful enforcement

Based on the above findings we are able to give a very basic indication of successful enforcement, as to if there is a greater or less than 50% chance of successful enforcement. Please note this is purely an estimate and we cannot give any accurate percentages of any case and we cannot answer any further questions on this.  

A less than a 50% chance of successful enforcement.

As there is a less than 50% chance of success, we now ask you to confirm if you would like to progress the case to obtain the writ at your risk of losing the court fee of £71.

It is of course still possible to gain successful enforcement and we are more than willing to continue to attempt to gain the writ and proceed with enforcement.

On the CCJ, on the defendant field it states the name of the company without the Ltd (as it doesn't have an Ltd on his invoice), and on the defendant, it says the director's name.

However, I remember asking the judge whether I should sue the individual, and she said that it doesn't matter, if you had the job done by his company, you should sue his company.

The judicial system is so broken, it's absurd! So, if I were to sue a bottle of water, would the court allow me to, and would issue a CCJ?

Its very important and the responsibility of the person seeking a judgement against an entity that they are pursuing the right entity and that the details are correct. From what you say you have sued the person and not the company. No idea what the judge has told you but 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' is not the same entity as 'XYZ Car Sales Ltd'. 

Furthermore, I don't think it's as simple as getting an amendment because even if you added the Ltd to 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' it would still be wrong. I don't think you can get an amendment to change the legal entity only to correct a typo or similar. 

So, this means that I can chase the person then, that's good news, since it's the person who delivered the work, and as stated in the invoice, it's not an Ltd, right?

No, You need to chase the entity  XYZ Car Sales Ltd (as listed at companies house).

Skag

powerful_Rogue said:

Skag said:

tightauldgit said:

Skag said:

I thought I'd post an update on this.

I went to court and won the hearing.

I then instructed the bailiffs to go and collect my money. I just received this response from the bailiff.

We have now concluded our pre-enforcement checks on this file and report as follows:

1/ Your judgment is against a none legal entity, see below for an explanation:

What is meant by the defendant is not a legal entity?

Look at the name on your judgment. There are basically three types of legal entity: there is a sole trader i.e., Joe Bloggs trading as XYZ Car Sales, a partnership Joe Bloggs and Simon Smith trading as XYZ Car Sales, and a limited company like XYZ Car Sales Ltd or ABC Ltd trading as XYZ Car Sales. If we get a judgment with just XYZ Car Sales, this is not a legal entity. We will of course attend and try to enforce, but if it is shown to us that XYZ Car Sales is not a correct entity, then we cannot enforce and will walk away because we could be acting unlawfully. We are not allowed by law to give you legal advice as we are not solicitors or legally qualified.

We are aware that the court can vary an order to get the name changed. See  https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part13 Exactly how you go about the procedure we cannot explain to you, so you should seek professional legal advice.

Estimated chances of successful enforcement

Based on the above findings we are able to give a very basic indication of successful enforcement, as to if there is a greater or less than 50% chance of successful enforcement. Please note this is purely an estimate and we cannot give any accurate percentages of any case and we cannot answer any further questions on this.  

A less than a 50% chance of successful enforcement.

As there is a less than 50% chance of success, we now ask you to confirm if you would like to progress the case to obtain the writ at your risk of losing the court fee of £71.

It is of course still possible to gain successful enforcement and we are more than willing to continue to attempt to gain the writ and proceed with enforcement.

On the CCJ, on the defendant field it states the name of the company without the Ltd (as it doesn't have an Ltd on his invoice), and on the defendant, it says the director's name.

However, I remember asking the judge whether I should sue the individual, and she said that it doesn't matter, if you had the job done by his company, you should sue his company.

The judicial system is so broken, it's absurd! So, if I were to sue a bottle of water, would the court allow me to, and would issue a CCJ?

Its very important and the responsibility of the person seeking a judgement against an entity that they are pursuing the right entity and that the details are correct. From what you say you have sued the person and not the company. No idea what the judge has told you but 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' is not the same entity as 'XYZ Car Sales Ltd'. 

Furthermore, I don't think it's as simple as getting an amendment because even if you added the Ltd to 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' it would still be wrong. I don't think you can get an amendment to change the legal entity only to correct a typo or similar. 

So, this means that I can chase the person then, that's good news, since it's the person who delivered the work, and as stated in the invoice, it's not an Ltd, right?

No, You need to chase the entity  XYZ Car Sales Ltd (as listed at companies house).

But why? I don't need to sue the company, he didn't deliver (failed to deliver) the work through his company.

powerful_Rogue

Skag said:

powerful_Rogue said:

Skag said:

tightauldgit said:

Skag said:

I thought I'd post an update on this.

I went to court and won the hearing.

I then instructed the bailiffs to go and collect my money. I just received this response from the bailiff.

We have now concluded our pre-enforcement checks on this file and report as follows:

1/ Your judgment is against a none legal entity, see below for an explanation:

What is meant by the defendant is not a legal entity?

Look at the name on your judgment. There are basically three types of legal entity: there is a sole trader i.e., Joe Bloggs trading as XYZ Car Sales, a partnership Joe Bloggs and Simon Smith trading as XYZ Car Sales, and a limited company like XYZ Car Sales Ltd or ABC Ltd trading as XYZ Car Sales. If we get a judgment with just XYZ Car Sales, this is not a legal entity. We will of course attend and try to enforce, but if it is shown to us that XYZ Car Sales is not a correct entity, then we cannot enforce and will walk away because we could be acting unlawfully. We are not allowed by law to give you legal advice as we are not solicitors or legally qualified.

We are aware that the court can vary an order to get the name changed. See  https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part13 Exactly how you go about the procedure we cannot explain to you, so you should seek professional legal advice.

Estimated chances of successful enforcement

Based on the above findings we are able to give a very basic indication of successful enforcement, as to if there is a greater or less than 50% chance of successful enforcement. Please note this is purely an estimate and we cannot give any accurate percentages of any case and we cannot answer any further questions on this.  

A less than a 50% chance of successful enforcement.

As there is a less than 50% chance of success, we now ask you to confirm if you would like to progress the case to obtain the writ at your risk of losing the court fee of £71.

It is of course still possible to gain successful enforcement and we are more than willing to continue to attempt to gain the writ and proceed with enforcement.

On the CCJ, on the defendant field it states the name of the company without the Ltd (as it doesn't have an Ltd on his invoice), and on the defendant, it says the director's name.

However, I remember asking the judge whether I should sue the individual, and she said that it doesn't matter, if you had the job done by his company, you should sue his company.

The judicial system is so broken, it's absurd! So, if I were to sue a bottle of water, would the court allow me to, and would issue a CCJ?

Its very important and the responsibility of the person seeking a judgement against an entity that they are pursuing the right entity and that the details are correct. From what you say you have sued the person and not the company. No idea what the judge has told you but 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' is not the same entity as 'XYZ Car Sales Ltd'. 

Furthermore, I don't think it's as simple as getting an amendment because even if you added the Ltd to 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' it would still be wrong. I don't think you can get an amendment to change the legal entity only to correct a typo or similar. 

So, this means that I can chase the person then, that's good news, since it's the person who delivered the work, and as stated in the invoice, it's not an Ltd, right?

No, You need to chase the entity  XYZ Car Sales Ltd (as listed at companies house).

But why? I don't need to sue the company, he didn't deliver (failed to deliver) the work through his company.

Then go ahead and continue with what you are doing. Enough people have already explained why, as well as the enforecement officers.

tightauldgit

Skag said:

tightauldgit said:

Skag said:

I thought I'd post an update on this.

I went to court and won the hearing.

I then instructed the bailiffs to go and collect my money. I just received this response from the bailiff.

We have now concluded our pre-enforcement checks on this file and report as follows:

1/ Your judgment is against a none legal entity, see below for an explanation:

What is meant by the defendant is not a legal entity?

Look at the name on your judgment. There are basically three types of legal entity: there is a sole trader i.e., Joe Bloggs trading as XYZ Car Sales, a partnership Joe Bloggs and Simon Smith trading as XYZ Car Sales, and a limited company like XYZ Car Sales Ltd or ABC Ltd trading as XYZ Car Sales. If we get a judgment with just XYZ Car Sales, this is not a legal entity. We will of course attend and try to enforce, but if it is shown to us that XYZ Car Sales is not a correct entity, then we cannot enforce and will walk away because we could be acting unlawfully. We are not allowed by law to give you legal advice as we are not solicitors or legally qualified.

We are aware that the court can vary an order to get the name changed. See  https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part13 Exactly how you go about the procedure we cannot explain to you, so you should seek professional legal advice.

Estimated chances of successful enforcement

Based on the above findings we are able to give a very basic indication of successful enforcement, as to if there is a greater or less than 50% chance of successful enforcement. Please note this is purely an estimate and we cannot give any accurate percentages of any case and we cannot answer any further questions on this.  

A less than a 50% chance of successful enforcement.

As there is a less than 50% chance of success, we now ask you to confirm if you would like to progress the case to obtain the writ at your risk of losing the court fee of £71.

It is of course still possible to gain successful enforcement and we are more than willing to continue to attempt to gain the writ and proceed with enforcement.

On the CCJ, on the defendant field it states the name of the company without the Ltd (as it doesn't have an Ltd on his invoice), and on the defendant, it says the director's name.

However, I remember asking the judge whether I should sue the individual, and she said that it doesn't matter, if you had the job done by his company, you should sue his company.

The judicial system is so broken, it's absurd! So, if I were to sue a bottle of water, would the court allow me to, and would issue a CCJ?

Its very important and the responsibility of the person seeking a judgement against an entity that they are pursuing the right entity and that the details are correct. From what you say you have sued the person and not the company. No idea what the judge has told you but 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' is not the same entity as 'XYZ Car Sales Ltd'. 

Furthermore, I don't think it's as simple as getting an amendment because even if you added the Ltd to 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' it would still be wrong. I don't think you can get an amendment to change the legal entity only to correct a typo or similar. 

So, this means that I can chase the person then, that's good news, since it's the person who delivered the work, and as stated in the invoice, it's not an Ltd, right?

Nope. Because the entity Mr X trading as Y doesn't exist and as you've discovered the bailiffs can't enforce anything against it since the person can quite rightly say ' that's not me' 

You can try to enforce the judgement if the guys not very smart he might not be wise to the entity being named wrongly. If he admits it's him then I think the bailiffs can proceed but if he says it's not him then the bailiffs have to leave empty handed. 

tightauldgit

powerful_Rogue said:

Skag said:

tightauldgit said:

Skag said:

I thought I'd post an update on this.

I went to court and won the hearing.

I then instructed the bailiffs to go and collect my money. I just received this response from the bailiff.

We have now concluded our pre-enforcement checks on this file and report as follows:

1/ Your judgment is against a none legal entity, see below for an explanation:

What is meant by the defendant is not a legal entity?

Look at the name on your judgment. There are basically three types of legal entity: there is a sole trader i.e., Joe Bloggs trading as XYZ Car Sales, a partnership Joe Bloggs and Simon Smith trading as XYZ Car Sales, and a limited company like XYZ Car Sales Ltd or ABC Ltd trading as XYZ Car Sales. If we get a judgment with just XYZ Car Sales, this is not a legal entity. We will of course attend and try to enforce, but if it is shown to us that XYZ Car Sales is not a correct entity, then we cannot enforce and will walk away because we could be acting unlawfully. We are not allowed by law to give you legal advice as we are not solicitors or legally qualified.

We are aware that the court can vary an order to get the name changed. See  https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part13 Exactly how you go about the procedure we cannot explain to you, so you should seek professional legal advice.

Estimated chances of successful enforcement

Based on the above findings we are able to give a very basic indication of successful enforcement, as to if there is a greater or less than 50% chance of successful enforcement. Please note this is purely an estimate and we cannot give any accurate percentages of any case and we cannot answer any further questions on this.  

A less than a 50% chance of successful enforcement.

As there is a less than 50% chance of success, we now ask you to confirm if you would like to progress the case to obtain the writ at your risk of losing the court fee of £71.

It is of course still possible to gain successful enforcement and we are more than willing to continue to attempt to gain the writ and proceed with enforcement.

On the CCJ, on the defendant field it states the name of the company without the Ltd (as it doesn't have an Ltd on his invoice), and on the defendant, it says the director's name.

However, I remember asking the judge whether I should sue the individual, and she said that it doesn't matter, if you had the job done by his company, you should sue his company.

The judicial system is so broken, it's absurd! So, if I were to sue a bottle of water, would the court allow me to, and would issue a CCJ?

Its very important and the responsibility of the person seeking a judgement against an entity that they are pursuing the right entity and that the details are correct. From what you say you have sued the person and not the company. No idea what the judge has told you but 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' is not the same entity as 'XYZ Car Sales Ltd'. 

Furthermore, I don't think it's as simple as getting an amendment because even if you added the Ltd to 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' it would still be wrong. I don't think you can get an amendment to change the legal entity only to correct a typo or similar. 

So, this means that I can chase the person then, that's good news, since it's the person who delivered the work, and as stated in the invoice, it's not an Ltd, right?

No, You need to chase the entity  XYZ Car Sales Ltd (as listed at companies house).

Which may be impossible now as you can't get judgements against two different entities for the same debt I think. 

Skag

tightauldgit said:

Skag said:

tightauldgit said:

Skag said:

I thought I'd post an update on this.

I went to court and won the hearing.

I then instructed the bailiffs to go and collect my money. I just received this response from the bailiff.

We have now concluded our pre-enforcement checks on this file and report as follows:

1/ Your judgment is against a none legal entity, see below for an explanation:

What is meant by the defendant is not a legal entity?

Look at the name on your judgment. There are basically three types of legal entity: there is a sole trader i.e., Joe Bloggs trading as XYZ Car Sales, a partnership Joe Bloggs and Simon Smith trading as XYZ Car Sales, and a limited company like XYZ Car Sales Ltd or ABC Ltd trading as XYZ Car Sales. If we get a judgment with just XYZ Car Sales, this is not a legal entity. We will of course attend and try to enforce, but if it is shown to us that XYZ Car Sales is not a correct entity, then we cannot enforce and will walk away because we could be acting unlawfully. We are not allowed by law to give you legal advice as we are not solicitors or legally qualified.

We are aware that the court can vary an order to get the name changed. See  https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part13 Exactly how you go about the procedure we cannot explain to you, so you should seek professional legal advice.

Estimated chances of successful enforcement

Based on the above findings we are able to give a very basic indication of successful enforcement, as to if there is a greater or less than 50% chance of successful enforcement. Please note this is purely an estimate and we cannot give any accurate percentages of any case and we cannot answer any further questions on this.  

A less than a 50% chance of successful enforcement.

As there is a less than 50% chance of success, we now ask you to confirm if you would like to progress the case to obtain the writ at your risk of losing the court fee of £71.

It is of course still possible to gain successful enforcement and we are more than willing to continue to attempt to gain the writ and proceed with enforcement.

On the CCJ, on the defendant field it states the name of the company without the Ltd (as it doesn't have an Ltd on his invoice), and on the defendant, it says the director's name.

However, I remember asking the judge whether I should sue the individual, and she said that it doesn't matter, if you had the job done by his company, you should sue his company.

The judicial system is so broken, it's absurd! So, if I were to sue a bottle of water, would the court allow me to, and would issue a CCJ?

Its very important and the responsibility of the person seeking a judgement against an entity that they are pursuing the right entity and that the details are correct. From what you say you have sued the person and not the company. No idea what the judge has told you but 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' is not the same entity as 'XYZ Car Sales Ltd'. 

Furthermore, I don't think it's as simple as getting an amendment because even if you added the Ltd to 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' it would still be wrong. I don't think you can get an amendment to change the legal entity only to correct a typo or similar. 

So, this means that I can chase the person then, that's good news, since it's the person who delivered the work, and as stated in the invoice, it's not an Ltd, right?

Nope. Because the entity Mr X trading as Y doesn't exist and as you've discovered the bailiffs can't enforce anything against it since the person can quite rightly say ' that's not me' 

You can try to enforce the judgement if the guys not very smart he might not be wise to the entity being named wrongly. If he admits it's him then I think the bailiffs can proceed but if he says it's not him then the bailiffs have to leave empty handed. 

I'm after the individual though. The fact that he has a trading company could very well be a coincidence.

macman

Surely the difference is that an individual 'trading as' does not create a separate legal entity. A ltd company does.
If you contracted the work with the ltd company but paid to his his personal account or a sole trader account then a degree of ambiguity arises.

tightauldgit

Skag said:

tightauldgit said:

Skag said:

tightauldgit said:

Skag said:

I thought I'd post an update on this.

I went to court and won the hearing.

I then instructed the bailiffs to go and collect my money. I just received this response from the bailiff.

We have now concluded our pre-enforcement checks on this file and report as follows:

1/ Your judgment is against a none legal entity, see below for an explanation:

What is meant by the defendant is not a legal entity?

Look at the name on your judgment. There are basically three types of legal entity: there is a sole trader i.e., Joe Bloggs trading as XYZ Car Sales, a partnership Joe Bloggs and Simon Smith trading as XYZ Car Sales, and a limited company like XYZ Car Sales Ltd or ABC Ltd trading as XYZ Car Sales. If we get a judgment with just XYZ Car Sales, this is not a legal entity. We will of course attend and try to enforce, but if it is shown to us that XYZ Car Sales is not a correct entity, then we cannot enforce and will walk away because we could be acting unlawfully. We are not allowed by law to give you legal advice as we are not solicitors or legally qualified.

We are aware that the court can vary an order to get the name changed. See  https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part13 Exactly how you go about the procedure we cannot explain to you, so you should seek professional legal advice.

Estimated chances of successful enforcement

Based on the above findings we are able to give a very basic indication of successful enforcement, as to if there is a greater or less than 50% chance of successful enforcement. Please note this is purely an estimate and we cannot give any accurate percentages of any case and we cannot answer any further questions on this.  

A less than a 50% chance of successful enforcement.

As there is a less than 50% chance of success, we now ask you to confirm if you would like to progress the case to obtain the writ at your risk of losing the court fee of £71.

It is of course still possible to gain successful enforcement and we are more than willing to continue to attempt to gain the writ and proceed with enforcement.

On the CCJ, on the defendant field it states the name of the company without the Ltd (as it doesn't have an Ltd on his invoice), and on the defendant, it says the director's name.

However, I remember asking the judge whether I should sue the individual, and she said that it doesn't matter, if you had the job done by his company, you should sue his company.

The judicial system is so broken, it's absurd! So, if I were to sue a bottle of water, would the court allow me to, and would issue a CCJ?

Its very important and the responsibility of the person seeking a judgement against an entity that they are pursuing the right entity and that the details are correct. From what you say you have sued the person and not the company. No idea what the judge has told you but 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' is not the same entity as 'XYZ Car Sales Ltd'. 

Furthermore, I don't think it's as simple as getting an amendment because even if you added the Ltd to 'Mr X trading as XYZ Car Sales' it would still be wrong. I don't think you can get an amendment to change the legal entity only to correct a typo or similar. 

So, this means that I can chase the person then, that's good news, since it's the person who delivered the work, and as stated in the invoice, it's not an Ltd, right?

Nope. Because the entity Mr X trading as Y doesn't exist and as you've discovered the bailiffs can't enforce anything against it since the person can quite rightly say ' that's not me' 

You can try to enforce the judgement if the guys not very smart he might not be wise to the entity being named wrongly. If he admits it's him then I think the bailiffs can proceed but if he says it's not him then the bailiffs have to leave empty handed. 

I'm after the individual though. The fact that he has a trading company could very well be a coincidence.

If the invoice you paid is from the company then you had no contract with the individual. For the size of the debt here you really should have taken some legal advice I think. Doing it yourself may well have cost you.