Harassment and small claims help

[Just234]

How does it work with medical records? None of his disabilities are true. He is a very capable man.
He mentions his list of ailments in the POC can I ask for any documents to support these claims?
He is intelligent enough to know that mental health issues keep you out of prison/get lesser sentence so he has worked the system somewhat. However his physical ability is not impaired at all.

[efpom]

Yr post 30
Q1 yes
Q2 yes
Yr post 31
Q
POC list his ailments - does not mention document(s)
Therefore answer is No

Please answer my Q? at my post 2929 - one defendant or two?

I wiill attempt a "bare bones" defence over the weekend or earlier if I have time.

[Just234]

Yes 2 defendants

thanks

[efpom]

As 2 defendants, each will have to file & server a defence.

Make sure you do this

https://legalbeagles.info/library/gu...ledge-a-claim/

What is the date on the claim form? - you have redacted part of that

[efpom]

Bare bones defence

The Claimant has had some form of advice from the solicitor firm Gray & Co. Nevertheless he is a litigant in person. The Defendants, a married couple, are also litigants in person.

The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim do not comply with the CPR rules and Practice Directions. It is not concise, it is diffuse and prolix, and it wholly lacks particularity.

It does not contain a statement of truth.

Also, the paragraphs are not numbered as required.

It is, therefore, extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible, to enter a point-by-point reply to the assertions made by the Claimant.

The court is invited, of its own motion, to strike out the claim.

In the alternative, the court is invited to Order the claimant to resubmit his Particulars of Claim, in a form that does comply with the CPR and associated practice directions.

It is denied that there was any contract between the claimant and either of the defendants.

The assertion of breach of trust is not understood.

The assertion that the defendants committed the tort of conversion is not understood, but as this is a money claim and although the claimant does not use the word “"fraud”" in his Particulars of Claim, it seems that he asserts that the defendants made a fraud on him. The court will know that an assertion of fraud must be specifically pleaded. The Particular of Claim does not do that.

[Just234]

Many thanks for all the above

the claim form is date stamped - date of service 23/01/23

Also you state bare bones - does that mean I can add any of the following?

1. He mentions we met in 2019 - go into more detail of where we met and his criminal course of conduct that he still persisted in doing and ref case and police involvement his subsequent arrest and that he is still under investigation.
2. his solicitors is a criminal lawyer that does not offer pro bono advice on civil litigation.
3. that his history of faking documents can be proven by the documents he gave us in the past showing what he puts on paper cannot be trusted to be real.
4. his fake medical diagnosis - that he embellishes his mental health issues and physical capability was only ever a way to a lesser sentence in court.
5. there have never been any threats of violence towards him. However we have written evidence of his serious level of threats to others which the police have been notified of and he has been arrested for. This is what caused the breakdown of the relationship nothing relating to money at all.

[efpom]

Ferdekalen is a bit adrift on geography.

ref post#36 Answer - No all of that goes in a witness statement.

[Just234]

Ok
RE #36 -and the lack of pre action protocol?
There has been no prior communication regarding money absolutely none. Should that be mentioned here.

———————

it seems strange to me that while this whole case has been brought on absolute fabrication and that we do this dance around procedure and protocol without mentioning that fact that all the documentation he has provided is fake and it’s all a absolute nonsense. He makes a mockery of the court and plays them all like fools.
and he can - this procedure allows him to

——————-

so just so I’ve got clear in my head the procedure from here

1 email CPR 31.14 Request for Documents ✅
2 wait 7 days for receipt of
3 email again if not received
4 If no documents received n244 issued to court asking for more time/enforce this provision/ strike out

5 before day 14 acknowledgment of service filed.
witness statement outlined above filed when ?

6 with regards to the evidence bundle I have received prematurely
At what point do I ask to inspect original documents?

7 and at what point do I file n268 listing fake documents?

[efpom]

File & Serve
A - CPR 31.14 right to inspect documents mentioned in POC straightaway.
B - Acknowledgement of service within 14 days of date on claim form.
C – Defence within 14 days after date you did Acknowledgement of Service –

From then on, the court will issue directions on what you are to do, including when to serve & file witness statements.

It is up to you what you put in your defence. Work it up & post a draft on here.

On N268 – it is premature.

CPR32.19
2) A notice to prove a document must be served –

(a) by the latest date for serving witness statements; or

(b) within 7 days of disclosure of the document, whichever is later.[my emphasis]

Suggest you file with court by email.

See
https://www.find-court-tribunal.serv...s-centre-ccmcc
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/em...ance%23canfile

[Just234]

Re A CPR 31.14 right to inspect documents mentioned in POC straightaway.
I want to inspect the documents he has provided as evidence these are not referenced in the POC - the bank statement/ fake letters etc


just wanted to say I really appreciate the time you have taken to reply and help me
I hope I did not offend when I said about adding to the defence, it all seems alien to me how these processes work. I trust your judgment.

[efpom]

Thank you for the appreciation - judgment without the "e" is reserved for judges!

I understand that this is all very bewildering for you. You are forced to play a game without knowing the rules. You are not alone!

The rules do not permit a party's inspection of documents not mentioned in the POC or in a witness statement. Nevertheless the documents you refer to, exist. The time may come when those documents are officially in play, but they are not in play at the moment.

Regarding bank transfers of money asserted by the claimant to have been transferred from a bank account of his to a bank account under your control, you are entitled to make inquiry about that via your bank

it is simple to match those via the line entry on the payer's statement to the line entry on the receiver's statement. If there is no match i.e. the transfer does not exist on your bank statement but does exist on the claimant's, then you are entitled to provide a copy of the claimant's statement to your bank and ask it to make inquiry of the payer's bank about what has happened. You would be entitled to evidence the result of that inquiry in your witness statement irrespective of whether the claimant's bank statements are officially in play.

[efpom]

When drafting up your defence, please bear in mind the following:
If you “deny” something, you are effectively saying you have a positive case to put forward to answer the claimant’s assertions - you are required to give reasons for the denial.
If you “don’t admit” something in your defence you require the claimant to prove it.
See CPR 16.5

You know far more about the case than I, or any other contributor could.

Q? Do you have a positive case? i.e. can you prove that the claimant's assertions are a pack of lies, based among other things, on your assertion that the bundle of documents sent to you are forgeries?

[efpom]

"I always try to consult professionals before making any big moves"

You will save a fortune by consulting a map!

[Just234]

Not all payments are to a bank account though they are cash withdrawals.

It is paramount I prove the whole document is fake. I need to prove the lengths he has gone to to create this lie.
it looks fake, there are small errors that jump out like adding DD for overdrawn when it’s only a zero balance showing he has edited the document somehow.
the format looks like something from 10 year ago
I’m not with this particular bank so cannot compare but my bank is a formatted document, this isn’t

[efpom]

"It is paramount I prove the whole document is fake. I need to prove the lengths he has gone to to create this lie"

With respect - my answer is "No, you don't!"

It is for the claimant to prove his case.

I think you may have misunderstood my post #42

The question is - Will you be in a position to prove your assertions that the documents are fake by the time of filing your defence?

If you are not in that position by that date, then rather that using the phrase "it is denied" you should use the phrase "it is not admitted".

If the proofs arrive later, those can be exhibited in your witness statement.

I understand your desire to prove that the claimant's case is a pack of lies, but without corroboration from e.g. the claimant's bank, your opinion is simply an assertion that the the claimant's bank statements are fake.

However, you are under no obligation to prove that when making your defence if you use the phrase "it is not admitted" However, if you use the phrase "It is denied", you are telling the court that you have a positive defence, i.e. you can, and will, prove that positive defence at trial.

Further, In SPI North Ltd v Swiss Post International (UK) Ltd and another [2019] EWCA Civ 7, the Court of Appeal held that CPR 16.5(1)(b) does NOT place an obligation on defendants to make inquiry of third parties before they are "unable" to admit or deny a particular allegation in the defence.