Small Claims Help

[aip08]

Hello,
I wondered if any kind members more enlightened than I with regards to the small claims court might kindly help with a couple of questions.

I'm sorry for the vagueness of my questions, but clearly I can't spell it all out.

We're taking a customer to court who didn't pay their bills. This is we think quite straightforward.

They've counterclaimed. Their claim is a load of cobblers.

In my laymans mind I understand it that the counterclaim has to be for direct losses.

So for example, it should be: before they used us their turnover was £x, and now it's less than £x, so their losses are the difference.

However, they haven't provided any sales figures. Which is very odd if they have indeed suffered loss.

Instead they've said: Before they used us they used another company to provide the same service and over 12 months spent £Y with them.

Since they didn't pay our bills and fell out with us they've used the same company again and spent £Z with them.

In between they spent £P money on advertising.

Their claim for losses are those fees above i.e. £Z+£Y+£P.

Surely they're normal business expenses, not losses?

Am I understanding this correctly, and can the judge just strike that counterclaim out for that reason - well that and that they have provided no evidence just statements like "I believe they might have," "I think it's possible they could have," etc.

I.e. a load of hearsay.

Secondly, the defendant in their initial allocation questionnaire, I guess to justify the size of the counterclaim, claimed they'd spent £S money with their previous company.

They obviously signed this as a statement of truth.

Now they've submitted a proper counterclaim it's clear they have spent nowhere near that amount of money at all.

Does the fact they've submitted it as truth count against them when it's clearly untrue?

Thanks in advance for any help.

 

[Steve Sellers]

They, just like you can only claim for actual loss.

As regards hearsay - hearsay evidence is admissible, but the courts can attach whatever weight they want to it (eg they may take it with a pinch of salt they may not, depends on the view they take).

If there are discrepancies in their pleas and statements etc, then this is for you to bring before the attention of the judge at the hearing.

 

[aip08]

Thanks Steve.

So if the counterclaim is claiming purely for business costs and there are no actual losses in there, will that counterclaim be allowed to continue?

 

[arcon5]

In a court case between a motorist and a parking management company, they tried to claim their losses was £x and worked this out based on the attendants wage, their premises etc etc - the judge dismissed this claiming these was not 'losses' caused by the motorist, merely the cost of doing business.

I suspect yours will be the same principle. But I guess you should be focussing more effort on whether their claims have any substance.

(Will find a link to case referred to as its bookmarked at home)

 

[DavidAshdown]

A case, whether initial claim or counterclaim, won't be thrown out without a hearing. You will need to give evidence in support of your claim and defence. However, a judge will normally take a dim view if he/she thinks the counterclaim does not have legs and is wasting court time.

 

[aip08]

Thanks Arcon & Chuckles,
I really don't think their claim has any substance at all, and i think that's partly indicated by their trying to claim things that aren't really relevant instead of listing actual losses - because I don't think there are any.

There is no evidence just wild assumptions like "I think they might have done X, and if they did X then they probably did Y, and that might have caused Z to happen". They have submitted no actual evidence because there is none, we haven't done anything wrong.

I think the counterclaim has been submitted to try to subdue us into not pursuing our claim, or just complicating the process, or creating as much hassle for us as possible in terms of having to spend inordinate amounts of time responding to it, since the counterclaim is for substantially more than the invoice we want paying for.

 

[Steve Sellers]

I think the counterclaim has been submitted to try to subdue us into not pursuing our claim, or just complicating the process, or creating as much hassle for us as possible in terms of having to spend inordinate amounts of time responding to it, since the counterclaim is for substantially more than the invoice we want paying for.

This is often the case. Especially when the respondents are defending the claim themselves. If it is as weak as you say it is then you should be pointing out to the court and the respondent early doors that they have no reasonable prospects in regards to their counter claim. It would be wise to put this in writing to the respondents before the hearing and warn them that if they proceed with a misconceived claim they you will seek an order for costs against them.

i would say that you need specific advice over the merits of their claim before doing so though.

 

[bwglaw]

I would consider an application for summary judgment if the counterclaim has no real prospect of success. As advised, you do need advice as to the merits of the claim before proceeding with an application for summary judgment. This kind of application would allow the applicant to apply for costs.

 

[DavidAshdown]

Not forgetting they would have had to pay a fee for their counterclaim. Are you sure there is no merit at all in it ? Make sure you haven't missed anything, then just ensure you have all evidence to support your own claim in place.

 

[jules12345]

as above..!

Regards
Jules