Statement of Truth - Fictional Company Director

[mriddle88]

Hi LB

I have a small claim for which the defendant (a small car dealership) has just responded denying everything with a poorly written 2 line reply. The statement of truth is signed by a Director who I'm fairly sure does not exist as we know the company quite well. I've also checked Companies House and there is nobody of that name who has ever been listed as a director.

If this turns out to be a fictional signee are there any implications for myself if I win? For example the ruling could be voided? Or unable to progress as that person cannot be contacted? Or could there be any grounds for an automatic judgment as the response does not have a valid signature from a company director? Should I simply continue as if it isn't a concern or should I flag it up anywhere?

Thanks

[efpom]

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...rt22/pd_part22

If it turns out that the person who signed the statement of truth was not, in fact, at the time of signing it, a director then the defence is invalid and the person who signed it, not being a director, is in contempt of court.

You mention that the person who signed the statement of truth does not appear as a director of the company in the companies house register - you do that in your witness statement.

[Amethyst]

Does the statement of truth identify the signature as being that of a Director ?

[mriddle88]

Yes, a "Sales Director". Though now having read more I'm not so certain on the rules. Can directors exist in a company without Companies House being notified? If so, then this person is probably entitled to sign statement of truth.

[Amethyst]

Sales Director isn't necessarily a company director - it's just a job title - it could say Receptionist as long as the signatory has the authorisation of the company to sign such documents so I think it's a nothingness point I'm afraid.

You'd be better served looking at the defence and whether it complies with PD 16. If it is that dire you could apply to strike it out or file/serve a reply. How did you file the claim ? Moneyclaim online ?

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...6/pd_part16#II

&

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...es/part16#16.5


What were your particulars of claim, what is the defence - and what's the background to the case - oh and did you follow preaction protocols ( make complaint, send letter before action etc ) ?

[mriddle88]

Thanks Amethyst! I'll look in to that.

To keep it as brief as possible I bought a second hand car. Within two days it was clear there was a major engine coolant leak. I took it to a local mechanic who said there was a coolant leak internal to the engine. The dealers took it back for repair, they "repaired" by replacing the coolant cap. Two days later it was evident that coolant level was still dropping just as quickly but this time the dashboard warning message was not displaying. Our local mechanic looked again, he still noticed the leak was present and now identifies a new problem with the car. The coolant level sensor no longer signals when the coolant is low or even completely empty. Very suspicious but we haven't spent money on looking for evidence of tampering yet.

We asked for a refund but were refused and they no longer want to speak with us. Phone calls are hung up, if ever answered. We sent the letter giving 14 days request for a refund still within the 30 days since purchase. Sent recorded delivery and after no written response we put in a small claim through Money Claims new beta online service. We've got a lot of evidence, mechanics reports and submitted a full, detailed timeline of events.

Defendant applied for the 14 day extension to submit a response and on the 13th day (today) submitted their response disputing the entire claim. The defence simply said over a couple of lines how important customer care is to them and that they had offered us several options for resolution (I've yet to see or hear any details of any offer of resolution). That's it.

They have asked to use a mediation service, so I think I'll need to follow that route as I've heard it could look unreasonable to a judge if I refuse? I expect their offer to comprise of them taking the car back for further diagnosis before agreeing any refund. After what happened the first time I did that, when the car was apparently "fixed" but was returned with an extra problem I have zero faith in doing that.

It's the first time I've ever done anything like this so I'm trying to make sure I keep all the i's dotted and t's crossed.