I was under the impression that the key point of the moneyclaim online facility is that it can all be dealt with without a court appearance. Hence it sounds like they are trying scare tactics...
IIRC Moneyclaim online just allows you to file the claim without filling in paper forms and delivering them to your local court. If the defendent files a defence the case is reallocated to a court local to the customer. I don't speak from first hand experience as I have only used the paper system.
^^^^^^^^^
Supplier. When I sued a 2nd hand car dealer in Small Claims Court, the case was heard in the vendors local court.
That's unusal. It is normally the customer that gets the choice. Was there any special circumstances?
I thought it was local to the orginal plaintiff.
I think it suggests (or maybe requires) a mediation stage first, but failing that, you end up in court, I think it's geared to being "friendly" to the small guy representing himself, with a presumption against huge costs, even if you lose
I'm sure there's an element of that, OTOH maybe they're make on offer "on the court steps" ...
The default is that the claim will be heard in the court nearest the defendant. However, if the defendant is a business and the claimant a consumer the case will be allocated to a court near the claimant if they so request.
True, but he wouldn't have accepted it of they hadn't misinformed him; we'l l only offer a credit note, you've opened the box.
I believe the T&Cs have to be available and agreed before the contract; you can't amend them afterwards. If it's your argument that he agreed to anoth er contract by accepting the credit note, putting the T&Cs on the credit no te suggests he hadn't seen them when agreeing to take it.
only offer a credit note, you've opened the box.
can't amend them afterwards. If it's your argument that he agreed to another contract by accepting the credit note, putting the T&Cs on the credit note suggests he hadn't seen them when agreeing to take it.
I see nothing whatsoever about credit notes on their current Store T&C on their website.
There should be a pre-action protocol followed in any case. The court would most likely criticise the plaintiff if they could not show they gave the retailer a reasonable chance to resolve the issue first. Court action is, and should always be, a last resort.
Most likely before that.
he impression that the key point of the moneyclaim online
They have sent me for N180 ... and on that 2 points ... Sect A ... Do you agree to this case being referred to the Small Claims Mediation Service .... any reason I should not tick YES ?
Sect D ... About the hearing At which county court would you prefer the small claims hearing to be head ?
Papers were served at Northampton CC, should I leave it as there or am I better or worse off if I request local CC ?
This claim was submitted via Money Claim on Line
No & if you don't you will look bad.
Which CC will make no difference. Choose the one that's most convenient for you.
It may look bad if you don't.
Request a local court unless you want to travel to Northhampton.
A local CC will may actually be an advantage, as it may make it even more likely that no-one from the company will turn up and the OP will win by default.
SteveW
All Money Claim papers are served through Northampton.
Onto step 2 now ... have submitted the form they wanted (where they issued counter claim of almost 8x value of goods in travel costs.
I have accepted Mediation path ... and also again stated I will accept wither of following:
I am hoping that court will look favourably on the fact that I am being fully reasonable.
Why are you accepting return of the goods if they were not fit for purpose? That's contradictory.
Not sure I would offer to take the goods back since you already rejected them once as being crap...
+1 I think MM might use that against you in court
Update on this ..... Mediation went ahead, not sure why Machine Mart opted for it they refused any compromise or to accept any offer. Machine Mart stated contractually they have provided a Credit note with stated T&C's and have met them. Although Mediator tried to position morally they had not explained time limit, and they could keep a long term customer by making a compromise they refused.
They were not interested that original item was "not fit for purpose"
Now been told if I want it to go before a judge it will be another £25 fee and a further £25 costs if I don't win.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.