court claim asking for amount plus 'costs'? **Claim Discontinued**

[Andyorch]

There you go....many thanks Steampowered...so there may be a slight possibility Buel.

[Buel10]

It sounds to me like you have grounds to push them further for the drawings. You could go to court if they still refuse to provide the drawings. The risk is that they may try to counterclaim for the debt they say is owed.

 

Thank you so very much for that. However, regarding them going to court regarding the debt they say is owed, they attempted this but then pulled out at the last minute due to the evidence we (Andy, mainly) supplied?

 

There you go....many thanks Steampowered...so there may be a slight possibility Buel.

 

Thank you Andy, much appreciated!!

 

PS - Andy, your PM box is full...

[Andyorch]

Try now.

[Buel10]

Steampowered, thank you for that, that is interesting.

 

Two things I want to ask, if that's okay:

1. You mention that they may counterclaim for the fees they claim is owed them (only 'interest' and 'fees'), I do not know if you know this but they tried this, issued court papers, then pulled out at the last minute when, after we supplied them with our argument, it became clear that my friend was in the right and had done nothing wrong.

2. Please may I ask for a little help in how to progress with this?

 

Thank you for your help, it is incredibly appreciated, and I mean that too.

[steampowered]

Hi - The way I would try to progress this would be by writing a letter before claim to the roof company, along the following lines:

 

- You entered into a contract with them to purchase roof frame panels and trusses.

- It was a term of the contract that truss panels would be provided. There was nothing in the contract which states that an additional charge may be levied for the drawings.

- Alternatively, the law implied a contract term that the drawings would be provided into the contract. Such a term is strictly necessary to give effect to the reasonable expectations of the parties, because it would be ridiculous to have a contract for roof panels and trusses without the drawings necessary to get planning sign off.

- Alternatively, the law implied a contract term that the goods would be fit for their intended purpose under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and/or Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. Unless the drawings are provided, the roof is not fit for its intended purpose because it is not possible to get planning sign off.

- Therefore, you ask that the drawings are provided immediately.

- If the company does not comply, you intend to apply to court seeking an order that the drawings are provided, which will incur liability for legal costs.

- You expect a response within 14 days, otherwise court proceedings will be issued.

 

Then wait 2 weeks and see what they say. Hopefully they provide the drawings. If not, you would have to decide whether to go ahead and make a court claim.

 

I personally don't know anything about roof trusses. I assume that you are correct to state that (1) the drawings are necessary to get planning sign off and (2) there is no realistic alternative way of getting the drawings from another supplier. Both points (1) and (2) would need to be true for the legal argument I have suggested to be successful. If this got to court, you would need to demonstrate to the judge that those points are true, probably by getting an independent expert to prepare a report.

[king12345]

Hi - The way I would try to progress this would be by writing a letter before claim to the roof company, along the following lines:

 

- You entered into a contract with them to purchase roof frame panels and trusses.

- It was a term of the contract that truss panels would be provided. There was nothing in the contract which states that an additional charge may be levied for the drawings.

- Alternatively, the law implied a contract term that the drawings would be provided into the contract. Such a term is strictly necessary to give effect to the reasonable expectations of the parties, because it would be ridiculous to have a contract for roof panels and trusses without the drawings necessary to get planning sign off.

- Alternatively, the law implied a contract term that the goods would be fit for their intended purpose under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and/or Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. Unless the drawings are provided, the roof is not fit for its intended purpose because it is not possible to get planning sign off.

- Therefore, you ask that the drawings are provided immediately.

- If the company does not comply, you intend to apply to court seeking an order that the drawings are provided, which will incur liability for legal costs.

- You expect a response within 14 days, otherwise court proceedings will be issued.

 

Then wait 2 weeks and see what they say. Hopefully they provide the drawings. If not, you would have to decide whether to go ahead and make a court claim.

 

I personally don't know anything about roof trusses. I assume that you are correct to state that (1) the drawings are necessary to get planning sign off and (2) there is no realistic alternative way of getting the drawings from another supplier. Both points (1) and (2) would need to be true for the legal argument I have suggested to be successful. If this got to court, you would need to demonstrate to the judge that those points are true, probably by getting an independent expert to prepare a report.

 

No steampowered,most roofs are of standard construction and don't require drawings and calculations to be submitted for approval, although it is good practice to do so.

I know many roofers who built and replace roofs by heart.

Building control will inspect the roof, not the drawings and calculations and should they see something they don't like they won't pass it.

At that point the calculations come handy as they prove that the construction is safe and complies to bs.

However they're not a strict requirement for roof construction.

[Andyorch]

In view of Kings post its time Buel to explore if Building Regs really do require sight of calcs or are they just playing jobs worth and frustrating matters?

 

Andy

[Buel10]

In view of Kings post its time Buel to explore if Building Regs really do require sight of calcs or are they just playing jobs worth and frustrating matters?

 

Andy

 

I'm already on it!! Thank you all, you've been brilliant!!

[Buel10]

Hi all.

An update:

Since I last posted, there has been a lot going on in my friend's family life which has not been great for him, hence there was a delay in him getting back to AC regarding their rather chilidish letter where they stated:

 

He replied on March 3rd with this:

3rd March 2016

Dear Mrs xxxxx,

 

Regarding your letter dated 15th September 2015 - Unfortunately I experienced some personal family issues shortly after receiving it, which has taken up most of my thoughts and time since then. However, I am now in a better position to respond.

You state that your position in not supplying me with the calculations that I require relies on the wording in your Frequently Asked Questions on your website, specifically one’s interpretation on the word ‘can’. This is in direct contradiction to your (AC Roof Trusses’) verbal contract when it was ordered on, or around, July 4th 2014 when you promised that the calculations would be provided on delivery of the goods.

 

You state in your letter that in order to provide me with the calculations, I must pay you £300. You state that this amount is made up of ‘interest’ and ‘court fees’. I feel that I need to clarify the true timeline of events in order to clear this matter up, hopefully once and for all:

 

July 4: I ordered the goods and paid 20% deposit (£1218.56). I was promised work would commence immediately, take two days to complete and that the calculations would be delivered with the goods.

 

Early August: Bob Pritchard had to chase you for a delivery date, this was given as August 22nd.

August 22: No goods delivered.

August 22: I visited you and was told that the goods would “definitely be delivered by the end of next week”, being August 29th.

August 29: No goods delivered.

September 2: Incomplete order (Timber Frame) delivered.

September 8: You claim that the goods were delivered.

September 10: Completed goods/order actually arrived (Driver did not ask for payment nor provide balance invoice or any invoice at all).

September 13: I sent you a letter to requesting invoice (Recorded delivery).

October 2: I sent a second letter to you requesting an invoice (Recorded delivery).

October 2: You issued a court claim.

October 4: I received a letter from you with two invoices, both with the same date.

One had the amount outstanding and the other had the amount outstanding plus interest and court fees. I also received the Court Claim.

October 9: Cheque sent for amount outstanding (minus interest and court fees, sent by Recorded Delivery).

October 10: Cheque cashed.

October 15: Cheque cleared.

 

You will see that I sent you a letter requesting an invoice just three days after the goods were eventually delivered (many weeks late). It was October 4th before I eventually received your invoice and then I sent you the cheque for the outstanding amount just five days after receiving that invoice.

 

Upon receiving the court claim for excess fees and interest, I responded to the claim and provided all the above information, even though my family was going through an extremely stressful time during that period. Eventually, you cancelled the court claim because, I can only assume, you could see that I had done everything asked of me.

The fact that you are now demanding from me the costs that you occurred by bringing the court claim and subsequently cancelling it, I believe is nothing short of extortion or, similarly, blackmail.

 

I am a good, honest, hardworking family man and you are treating me horrendously. As a professional Roof Trusses company, you will be more than aware that I cannot get my building passed off by the local Building Control Department until I receive the calculations. The fact that you are refusing to honour your contract until I reimburse you for a court claim that clearly should not have been brought in the first place is despicable.

 

Recently, I have had to take time off work to contact Citizens Advice, who then passed the matter on to Trading Standards. The advice that Citizens Advice gave me was that I should ask you if you have an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). I am ready and willing to go ahead with this route. I would appreciate your reply regarding this. If you do not have such a scheme then I would ask if you have a trade Ombudsman that I can take this complaint to.

 

 

Ultimately, if you do not have either of these routes for me/us to explore and if you still will not provide me with the calculations that I need, then unfortunately I will have no other option than to hire an independent Structural Engineer to visit my property and assess the Timber Frames and calculate the calculations for me. I am advised that this will cost anywhere between £400 and £850. If I am forced to go this route then I will have no other option but to request that you reimburse me for the cost.

Again, I sincerely hope we can resolve this and both go our separate ways and move on.

 

They did not respond to this letter so he emailed them on 18th March asking if they could respond to his letter.

 

They replied: 'We are in receipt of your letter and will respond once we have read the contents thoroughly'.

So he replied with the contents of the letter for clarity.

Yesterday he emailed them this:

'Dear Mrs xxx,

Further to my email sent on 18th March, please can I ask if you can now respond to my letter that you received on 6th March?

 

Additionally, in your letter dated 24th June 2015, you state that 'Whilst the cost of the calculations for the timber frame is included in the quotation, the cost for the roof truss calculations are not'. Therefore, please may I ask that you send me the timber frame calculations. Either by post or email would be perfectly fine.

 

I hope to hear from you soon on this.'

 

Whilst doing this, my friend has been in touch with Trading Standards and explained the situation to them.

 

They replied with this:

 

In relation to ‘unfair business practices’, again it is down to proof. Obviously from your point of view you consider their practices to be unfair as you are referring to what was agreed in the verbal contract. I think the company changing its reason for the extra money is dubious but could probably be explained away if it went to court.

 

In court AC Roof Trusses could argue a completely different story to yours and say that it was explained to you at the start that payment was required on delivery and that you acted unfairly by refusing to pay on delivery, instead you withheld your payment. They could argue that the recorded delivery letters you sent to them were simple requests for the calculations and not requests for the invoice as you claim. They could argue that you tried to hold them to ransom as you withheld your payment and refused to pay them until you had the calculations.

 

As you can see, these disagreements can get very messy and very often you may find all sorts of accusations start flying around. This is the trouble with verbal contracts, there is no proof of what was said and when. I have seen disputes like these go on for a very long time and very often end up very bitter with both parties refusing to back down or give an inch to resolve the problem.

 

Have you thought of writing to them offering to go 50/50 on the fee’s they are requesting in exchange for the calculations? Perhaps a change in stance from both sides could bring a conclusion that is agreeable to both sides?

 

 

Perhaps a calm meeting with the manager in person could bring about a solution, if you explain that you want to continue trading with them in the future and you don’t want this episode to tarnish your relationship, a mutually agreeable conclusion could be worked out.

 

 

I’m sure they would rather not lose a customer if it could be helped, the same as you would rather not lose a supplier or indeed pay more than needed for the calculations.

Unfortunately without rock solid proof it is difficult for anyone to ‘take action’. This includes yourself, AC Roof Trusses, Trading Standards and any other trade association or ombudsman service.

 

I do appreciate how you feel about the situation and I am sorry I cannot do more to help resolve the dispute. All I can suggest is that in the future, make sure you get everything in writing from the start. Even if this is by email, a detailed quote outlining everything really is worth it.

 

I should explain that when the Trading Standards reply states 'I think the company changing its reason for the extra money is dubious but could probably be explained away if it went to court.', he means that AC sent my friend one invoice showing a total of £300 for the cost of the calculations:

 

However, they have also sent the letter, below, showing that the £300 is not just for the calculations, but also incorporates the interest and court fees (that they lost when they withdrew their claim):

 

 

Also, where the Trading Standards officer states 'In court AC Roof Trusses could argue a completely different story to yours and say that it was explained to you at the start that payment was required on delivery and that you acted unfairly by refusing to pay on delivery, instead you withheld your payment.', I should explain that AC delivered the goods without telling my friend, hence they delivered them whilst he was at work so could not have been there to pay for the goods, even if this was the so-called 'agreement'.

 

Something else which may or may not be of relevance:

AC, in contradiction to their claim that payment should have been made on delievery, have quoted in their letters two different methods of how they believe payments should have been made.

In one letter they state 'The invoice was originally sent to site with the delivery where our driver was advised to bring the invoice back to our office and you would call in the following day to pay the balance'.

In another letter they state 'The contract clearly stated that the balance was due prior to delivery'

They don't seem to be sure of which was was their preferred method?

 

Finally, I have just found this letter which probably explains exactly why the trouble all started in the first place:

 

It seems that they received the order from my friend's cousin (they name him in the un-edited version), took the the emailed confirmation of the sizes required from his cousin.and took instructions from his cousin regarding method of payment.

 

So what I suggest has happened from their side is that they took the order and method of payment from someone other than my friend, didn't notify my friend of the date of delivery, then despite receiving a request for invoice from my friend just three days after the delivery date, and then again just over two weeks later (both sent by recorded delivery), they finally sent the invoice along with a small claims court claim demanding interest and court fees from him.

 

To me, this seems like they got their wires crossed over who to contact and then rushed to issue the court claim.

 

I hope I have helped explain where my friend is now. Any advice on what to do now sure would be appreciated.

 

It would seem to me that my friend has three routes to go:

 

 

1. Explain to them that they have admitted in their letter that they took the order from someone other than my friend, hence delivered the job without informing my friend (hence him not being there), then rushed in to issuing a court claim against my friend (who in the meantime had twice requested the invoice) and are now witholding the calculations that he needs until he pays them the court fees that they lost by withdrawing their claim.
   
2. Make one final request for the calculations in a LBA and warn them again that he will be forced to go to a structural engineer to obtain the calculations and then go back to them to reimburse him for the costs, estimated to be between £400 and £850
   
3. Explain to them that they have issued one invoice for £250 for, apparently, the costs of the calculations. They have also explained that the figure is actually made up of the cost of the calculations, the interest of £20.31 and the court fees owed of £185, so this must mean that the calculations only cost £44.69 and send a cheque for that amount.
   

Please help if you can.

 

Thank you in advance.

[citizenB]

I will try and find someone who can help.. !

[Buel10]

Thank you. It's needed!

[Conniff]

I don't see the companies name here, perhaps it should be shown.

 

As he is using the FAQs as part of his argument, that makes them part of the contract and that wording would seem to be deliberately designed to deceive and mislead.

Edited March 26, 2016 by Conniff

[steampowered]

Did you have the chance to look into the issue of whether Building Standards could pass the roof without the calculations, as suggested by King12345? If you don't actually need the calculations then that deals with the issue.

 

If you really do need the calculations, the only options I can see are (1) paying a surveyor (and take them to court for the cost) or (2) pay the money they are asking. You could always ask if they would compromise but doing that would still leave you out of pocket.

 

I doubt they would release the calculations on receipt of a cheque for £44 - they'd probably just cash the cheque and demand more.

[Buel10]

Hi.

Last year a silly company jumped the gun and issued a small claims court claim against my friend for £5079. My friend quite rightly disputed this, provided his evidence, but the company held off withdrawing their claim until right at the last minute.

Please can someone give me a vague idea how much extra this would have cost them, if anything?

Thank you,

B

[martin2006]

Depending at what stage they withdrew use the following to work it out

 

https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/court-fees

[BazzaS]

Depending at what stage they withdrew use the following to work it out

 

https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/court-fees

 

Which covers the court fee.

 

OP, One can only guess at their legal costs and time spent.

If this was withdrawn post allocation questionnaire... Did your friend apply for their costs to be paid by the withdrawing claimant?

 

Costs are limited in the small claims track, but aren't zero ....

[dx100uk]

threads merged for history

 

 

dx

[Andyorch]

Issuance of the court claim £ x

 

Solicitor fee £ Nil

 

Hearing fee £ X (assuming they ever paid it ?)

 

Regards

Andy

[Buel10]

Hello all.

 

The company who my friend was in dispute with

(who were holding back on giving my friend the building calculations that they owed him until he paid the costs that they lost when they issued an MCOL claim....and then withdrew it)

 

 

have a new person in charge of the dispute and she has emailed to say that they will provide the calculations for the same amount but the amount is for them to 'appoint a structural engineer to carry out both sets of calculations'.

 

They have written in a previous letter that they will not provide the calculations until my friend pays the amount that they lost out on by bringing the MCOL claim.

 

My question is

- my friend is going to have to send them a cheque for the amount as he desperately needs the calculations,

 

 

so is it imperative that he includes a letter stating that he plans to claim the amount back from them once he gets the calculations or does it not matter?

[Buel10]

Hello all.

 

The company who my friend was in dispute with

(who were holding back on giving my friend the building calculations that they owed him until he paid the costs that they lost when they issued an MCOL claim....and then withdrew it)

 

 

have a new person in charge of the dispute and she has emailed to say that they will provide the calculations for the same amount but the amount is for them to 'appoint a structural engineer to carry out both sets of calculations'.

 

They have written in a previous letter that they will not provide the calculations until my friend pays the amount that they lost out on by bringing the MCOL claim.

 

My question is

- my friend is going to have to send them a cheque for the amount as he desperately needs the calculations,

 

 

so is it imperative that he includes a letter stating that he plans to claim the amount back from them once he gets the calculations or does it not matter?

[Andyorch]

I have sent a response to your PM Buel.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Andyorch]

Topic open.

[Buel10]

Hi again all.

Thinking of looking in to this again - is there a time limit on when you can file a MCOL against someone? This was, I think, back in 2017 but I now have a slight bit of time and want to get back on it.

[Andyorch]

6 years as per the Statute of limitations.

 

Andy