Claim Form - Please Help Optima Solicitors

[crxvt99]

Hey Beagles! I would massively appreciate some guidance and help on my issues! I have now received a claim form. I have just completed the AOS and now I need help building a defence or change the plea depending on the guidance provided by you brainiacs


How I have got here:


I am currently being chased for outstanding moneys for a vehicle i had on lease from a Hospital Trust. I was an employee of the trust and had a car on a Salary Sacrifice Scheme. There are two outstanding invoices that i am being chased for - early termination and for a month where the company did not pick up the car even though it was dropped off at the location they requested.



Now i thought i had actually dealt with this issues years ago when i was in conversation with a NHS finance department worker and after i had sent him everything i never heard back. and now some years later I am in the same position I was in. unfortunately i do not have any evidence of this.


I disputed the charges because part of the charges being sanctioned on me were when i did not have the vehicle and it had already gone back to the supplier. The other part of the charges i disputed as I was off sick from work and then my contract was terminated without me present as they would not re-arrange. therefore I put the onus on the hospital for the reason i could not complete the term of the car lease making any charges void.


I have had a look at the agreement form I signed back in 02/2011 and under the declaration it says
'I understand that the car will be ordered on my behalf and I shall be bound to the scheme until the contract formally expires or my employment with the employing organisation ceases'

Am I snookered because of this? I genuinely that that meant if i was Sacked accordingley from the Job or left on my own accord.

The information provided by the claimant shows an invoice from 2015 that they have been chasing the debt from, however the car was returned and my contract terminated in June 2012. If that's the case and as the amount of debt is under 2K would I still be potentially able to get the debt Statute barred?


Would appreciate some guidance on this please!


Thank you!

[crxvt99]

can anyone help me out here?? any advice would be appreciated!! Thank you.

[R0b]

Hello

Based on the wording of the declaration you shouldn't owe anything beyond the termination of your contract but it would helpful to see the whole of that agreement (personal info redacted).

We can't help you unless you give us all relevant evidence you have, and that would include the agreement you signed. The alleged debt might not be statute barred if the agreement was signed as a deed or if the contract says that you agree to repay any outstanding sums on demand, which means the 6 year limitation period would begin from when they first demanded the money and not when you actually left their employment.

I think we would also need to see the details of the Particulars of Claim verbatim to understand how or why they are claiming the monies.

What is the date of the claim form and was it issued via money claims online or somewhere else?

[pt2537]

Hello

Based on the wording of the declaration you shouldn't owe anything beyond the termination of your contract but it would helpful to see the whole of that agreement (personal info redacted).

We can't help you unless you give us all relevant evidence you have, and that would include the agreement you signed. The alleged debt might not be statute barred if the agreement was signed as a deed or if the contract says that you agree to repay any outstanding sums on demand, which means the 6 year limitation period would begin from when they first demanded the money and not when you actually left their employment.

I think we would also need to see the details of the Particulars of Claim verbatim to understand how or why they are claiming the monies.

What is the date of the claim form and was it issued via money claims online or somewhere else?

Spot on R0b cant add anything more til we get more info about the case

[crxvt99]

Apologizes for the late reply, So many things going on right now my head is all over the place.

Massive thank you for you help so far.


Please see the original contract and the allegations out forward by Optima legal










Appreciate some advice on whether we can add some additional arguments alongside the potentially defence of status barred. The last contact I had with the NHS was around 2012... however the invoices that have been sent by the NHS to Optima Legal are from 2015. however i have no proof that my last contact with them was in 2012. I have trolled through my emails just can not seem to find anything.

Thank you

[Amethyst]

So they are relying on this part


even though earlier they say only 'estimated mileage'



It sounds like they don't want to argue with the car finance company about mileage charges so just accept whatever knowing they can just pass the cost on to you. Have they provided copies of the breakdown from the finance co ?

R0b - any way to get around that ?

[R0b]

First of all, I think we would need to see what this Trust Policy says as there are several references to it in the agreement. I would imagine the policy says what you can and can't do with the vehicle i.e. business and personal use.

Subject to what the policy says, I would be inclined to argue that on proper construction of clause 13 it says that the employer is entitled to deduct from the employee's salary any of the charges mentioned. I can't see anything in the agreement that goes beyond that, for example, something like "Where deductions are [made/not made] from the employee's net salary, the Trust reserves the right to seek recovery of any unrecovered charges on demand."

It's just littered throughout saying that deductions will be made from your net pay. Therefore, this cannot be a mistake and the intentions of the parties must have been that those sums were deductable from the OP's final salary payment. If the Trust didn't deduct anything then it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that there was nothing outstanding in respect of the car.

I suspect that the Trust might argue that this is not what was intended but, according to the Supreme Court in Arnold v Britton 2015, that's tough luck. Where the ordinary words are clear, the courts will not interfere to allow commercial sense to prevail against the language used in the agreement and the courts should not rewrite a bad bargain. As per Lord Neuberger:

...

Secondly, when it comes to considering the centrally relevant words to be interpreted, I accept that the less clear they are, or, to put it another way, the worse their drafting, the more ready the court can properly be to depart from their natural meaning. That is simply the obverse of the sensible proposition that the clearer the natural meaning the more difficult it is to justify departing from it. However, that does not justify the court embarking on an exercise of searching for, let alone constructing, drafting infelicities in order to facilitate a departure from the natural meaning. If there is a specific error in the drafting, it may often have no relevance to the issue of interpretation which the court has to resolve.

...

Fourthly, while commercial common sense is a very important factor to take into account when interpreting a contract, a court should be very slow to reject the natural meaning of a provision as correct simply because it appears to be a very imprudent term for one of the parties to have agreed, even ignoring the benefit of wisdom of hindsight. The purpose of interpretation is to identify what the parties have agreed, not what the court thinks that they should have agreed.

Depending on when you left the business, in 2012 you could also perhaps argue that the claim is statute barred. You might be to throw on the back of the above points made that the Trust is estopped from claiming the sums because (aside from there being any right under the contract), it failed to deduct any monies from the final payment.

I suppose the question is whether you want to defend the claim. At best you won't get a court hearing until at least 6 months because the courts are always busy. If you have the means, you could save 6 months worth of savings to cover the cost of the sums being claimed and still have your day in court. Even if you did lose you would have to pay the sums within one month of the judgment so I reckon you would have at least 7 months to save up that amount.

I think there is a plausible argument based on the Arnold v Britton case and because references to deductions from your net pay is mentioned in more than one clause e.g. clauses 13 and 14, then it becomes more difficult for the Trust to argue they can recover the amount on demand or by any other means.

Maybe pt2537 has any further suggestions I've not mentioned.

[crxvt99]

Just want to say massive thankyou for the help. After taking all information on board and sending it to the Courts, the Solicitors have now withdrawn the case.

All good for now, Thank you!

[pt2537]

Just want to say massive thankyou for the help. After taking all information on board and sending it to the Courts, the Solicitors have now withdrawn the case.

All good for now, Thank you!

Excellent news. Well done

[R0b]

Well done.

For the benefit of other users of the forum, would you care to share what you sent to the court, personal info redacted?