Not sure if to sue builder as Ltd

madunak19

I had a CCJ issued against a builder, and I inputted his details as a sole trader operating as. So on the CCJ it says 'first name, last name T/A abc builders'

However, I've since found via companies house that the builder is registered as a Ltd company. 

I've looked at the invoices the builder has sent me, and there's no mention of his company being a Ltd, and there's no company number listed anywhere. 

Does that mean I can still sue him in a personal capacity? His full name, and address on the CCJ is still correct. 

Would appreciate only responses with experience in this. 

Thank you!!

Voyager2002

My experience was the opposite...

I sued a kitchen fitter trading as a limited company... at a certain point during the period when he was (not) fitting my kitchen, he issued invoices as a sole trader. The implication was that both the rights and the responsibilities of his limited company had been transferred to his business as a sole trader: he was entitled to the payments due to the company, but equally was obliged as an sole trader to complete the work that he agreed to perform as a limited company. Anyway, the court eventually ruled that since my contract and payment of my deposit had been to the limited company, the individual as a sole trader was protected and so I could only pursue the company, a company that was now insolvent.

I conclude from this that your contract is with a sole trader and so you should be pursuing him as a sole trader: the fact that at some point in the past he operated as a limited company is not relevant to your case.

madunak19

Voyager2002 said:

My experience was the opposite...

I sued a kitchen fitter trading as a limited company... at a certain point during the period when he was (not) fitting my kitchen, he issued invoices as a sole trader. The implication was that both the rights and the responsibilities of his limited company had been transferred to his business as a sole trader: he was entitled to the payments due to the company, but equally was obliged as an sole trader to complete the work that he agreed to perform as a limited company. Anyway, the court eventually ruled that since my contract and payment of my deposit had been to the limited company, the individual as a sole trader was protected and so I could only pursue the company, a company that was now insolvent.

I conclude from this that your contract is with a sole trader and so you should be pursuing him as a sole trader: the fact that at some point in the past he operated as a limited company is not relevant to your case.

When you paid the deposit, did the bank transfer go through to an account which had his full personal name on it? As I've just looked at my payment, and whilst the invoice says 'ABC company Ltd', the payment went through as 'First Name Last Name', sort code, account number. So it looks like it's not going through to an actual business account. 

Not sure if that gives me more right to sue as a sole trader, and not have to set aside my CCJ and redo. 

eskbanker

madunak19 said:

I've looked at the invoices the builder has sent me, and there's no mention of his company being a Ltd...

madunak19 said:
I've just looked at my payment, and whilst the invoice says 'ABC company Ltd'...

Perhaps worth clarifying the apparent contradiction?

user1977

If you haven’t contracted with the limited company then it’s not them you sue. Nothing to stop somebody trading both as a sole trader and having a company.

madunak19

eskbanker said:

madunak19 said:

I've looked at the invoices the builder has sent me, and there's no mention of his company being a Ltd...

madunak19 said:
I've just looked at my payment, and whilst the invoice says 'ABC company Ltd'...

Perhaps worth clarifying the apparent contradiction?

Hi yes, so the invoice when I download it, doesn't have Ltd anywhere. But as the payment was made through a link that the builder set up, the loading page says his 'company name Ltd'. But even that name, isn't the same one that's listed on the incorporation document on companies house. 

madunak19

Just to add further info: Payment was made to the builders personal account. Which to me suggests that even if he had a Ltd company listed on companies house, he wasn't interacting with us as a Ltd company. 

Voyager2002

madunak19 said:

Voyager2002 said:

My experience was the opposite...

I sued a kitchen fitter trading as a limited company... at a certain point during the period when he was (not) fitting my kitchen, he issued invoices as a sole trader. The implication was that both the rights and the responsibilities of his limited company had been transferred to his business as a sole trader: he was entitled to the payments due to the company, but equally was obliged as an sole trader to complete the work that he agreed to perform as a limited company. Anyway, the court eventually ruled that since my contract and payment of my deposit had been to the limited company, the individual as a sole trader was protected and so I could only pursue the company, a company that was now insolvent.

I conclude from this that your contract is with a sole trader and so you should be pursuing him as a sole trader: the fact that at some point in the past he operated as a limited company is not relevant to your case.

When you paid the deposit, did the bank transfer go through to an account which had his full personal name on it? As I've just looked at my payment, and whilst the invoice says 'ABC company Ltd', the payment went through as 'First Name Last Name', sort code, account number. So it looks like it's not going through to an actual business account. 

Not sure if that gives me more right to sue as a sole trader, and not have to set aside my CCJ and redo. 

Possibly you are over-thinking matters? In law, what is important is whether or not you formed a contract (made an agreement) with a sole trader or a limited company. In my case, there was no doubt that at the time I paid the deposit I was dealing with the limited company and that is not something that I tried to argue about in court. In your case you believed that you were engaging your builder as a sole trader, and you had good reason for this belief. I think he would really struggle to persuade the court that your contract was really with his company.Unless he raises this in court it will not be an issue.

madunak19

Voyager2002 said:

madunak19 said:

Voyager2002 said:

My experience was the opposite...

I sued a kitchen fitter trading as a limited company... at a certain point during the period when he was (not) fitting my kitchen, he issued invoices as a sole trader. The implication was that both the rights and the responsibilities of his limited company had been transferred to his business as a sole trader: he was entitled to the payments due to the company, but equally was obliged as an sole trader to complete the work that he agreed to perform as a limited company. Anyway, the court eventually ruled that since my contract and payment of my deposit had been to the limited company, the individual as a sole trader was protected and so I could only pursue the company, a company that was now insolvent.

I conclude from this that your contract is with a sole trader and so you should be pursuing him as a sole trader: the fact that at some point in the past he operated as a limited company is not relevant to your case.

When you paid the deposit, did the bank transfer go through to an account which had his full personal name on it? As I've just looked at my payment, and whilst the invoice says 'ABC company Ltd', the payment went through as 'First Name Last Name', sort code, account number. So it looks like it's not going through to an actual business account. 

Not sure if that gives me more right to sue as a sole trader, and not have to set aside my CCJ and redo. 

Possibly you are over-thinking matters? In law, what is important is whether or not you formed a contract (made an agreement) with a sole trader or a limited company. In my case, there was no doubt that at the time I paid the deposit I was dealing with the limited company and that is not something that I tried to argue about in court. In your case you believed that you were engaging your builder as a sole trader, and you had good reason for this belief. I think he would really struggle to persuade the court that your contract was really with his company.Unless he raises this in court it will not be an issue.

Thank you! 

DullGreyGuy

Doesn't matter who payments go to its who you contracted with that is relevant. When we had building work done they asked we made the payment to the builders merchant but that wouldn't have meant we could then sue Selco if he did a poor quality job.

If you already have a judgement against the builder personally and he didnt defend on the basis of it being the wrong party so just press on with enforcing that judgement rather than spending more money on trying to sue another party.