MSE in court,,,

cavycrazy_2

mdbarber wrote: »

oh dear insults just ain't the same when you have to explain them,,
ps i'm suing for 86.98 + courts costs etc not 7p

Oh dear, you really need to remember what you have previously written.

yes i made a counter offer it was higher than theirs by 7p and it was rejected on that basis lol,
wonder if i can drop this and get my money back from a newspaper story, i have very good documented evidence

mdbarber

hollydays wrote: »

How did you acquire costs?

its the court fees

cavycrazy wrote: »

Oh dear, you really need to remember what you have previously written.

yes i made a counter offer it was higher than theirs by 7p and it was rejected on that basis lol,
wonder if i can drop this and get my money back from a newspaper story, i have very good documented evidence

no, if you read properly "they rejected the offer on the basis it was 7p higher", my rejection of their offer was not because it was 7p lower but because it contained silly conditions,
any one can edit bits of post out of context to make others look silly so please don't do that again

Sssssss

hey mdbarber, big day tomorrow, keep us posted

jeannieblue

Looking forward to hearing the outcome :j

mdbarber

jeannieblue wrote: »

Looking forward to hearing the outcome :j

Well peeps it looks like we have to wait another four weeks to hear an outcome.
I have been trying to find out whats going on as I have received no formal notification from the courts(ie written).
It seems like their objection to the hearing was the fact they have to travel a long way?, surely the reason for that is that they haven't paid me my money? lol we can wait.
It seems slightly ridiculous that someone can circumvent the law because "it's not convenient" or "we can't afford it"

As someone who hasn't spent much time dealing with civil court's it all seems rather lacking.

Rex_Mundi

mdbarber wrote: »

It seems like their objection to the hearing was the fact they have to travel a long way?,

I don't believe this. It is the defendants right (and normal practice) to have the case heard in a court local to them, not the plaintiffs (your) local court. If anyone has to travel, it is you. If the case hasn't already been transfered to the companies local court, they can easily apply to have this done and it will be granted.

mpython

I agree with Rex-mundi, AFAIK, its the defendents right to elect to have the hearing in a court of their chosing. I recall that about 15 years ago Hoover gave away free flights with a new vacuum cleaner only to find they couldn;t fulfill all the claims. They ended up having hearings at opposite ends of the country to where the plaintiffs lived, many people dropped their cases due to the travel costs.

On the positive side, assuming the OP wins his case (which I still doubt based on the evidence in this and the other thread), he will be able to claim reasonable travel costs on top of his claim.

mdbarber

Well sorry guys but apparently this is not the case, and before you ask i don't know why, the facts are
1 I issued summons on-line which i believe is based thru a court in the midlands
2 When they entered defence it was transferred to my local court
Also it is true, according to the courts office manager, that is the reason apparently

superscaper

mdbarber wrote: »

Well sorry guys but apparently this is not the case, and before you ask i don't know why, the facts are
1 I issued summons on-line which i believe is based thru a court in the midlands
2 When they entered defence it was transferred to my local court
Also it is true, according to the courts office manager, that is the reason apparently

Every case I know of personally has been held in the defendant's home juristication not the plaintiff's. Both for when locally applied and doing it online.

olly300

mdbarber wrote: »

Well sorry guys but apparently this is not the case, and before you ask i don't know why, the facts are
1 I issued summons on-line which i believe is based thru a court in the midlands
2 When they entered defence it was transferred to my local court
Also it is true, according to the courts office manager, that is the reason apparently

Maybe because the defendant actually has an office near where you are based or has decided they want it in your local court.

It does clearly state on court forms and on moneyclaimonline that the case will be transfered to the defendants local court..