Do I have a claim/inteerpretation of N24

[johnlk]

Hi, hoping for some advice as not sure where to go from here.
It is the first time I have claimed (never been claimed against too), and up to now have not had any help or professional advice, which might explain how I got into this position.

I have a dispute with a garage who performed poor service on my van, causing it to break down 2 weeks later.
As I was far from home I had to pay out to be towed, recovery costs and train tickets.
I started a claim online against the garage for just under £300, the garage defended saying I ddn't give them a chance to put it right (which I have good reason).

Both the garage and I applied for the mediation service on the Directions form, yet the garage were unavailable on the 2 appointments, so the case was referred to the local court.

I've now received the N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, and it says:


Before District Judge xxxxx sitting at xxxxxx County Court (address)
Upon it appearing that the Claimant's claim consists only of pure economic loss, which is not recoverable under English Law

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. The claim be stayed.
2 If the Claimant applies to lift the stay he must provide written reasons that show he has a cause of action in law.
3. If the stay is not lifted by 25 November 2013 the claim will stand struck out.
4. This Order has been made without notice to the parties. A party affected by this Order may apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed within 7 days of service of this Order on them.
Dated 24 September



My Particulars of Claim as I wrote on the online claim form are as follows:

Expenses incurred directly as a result of Defendent's faulty service.These expenses include:Telephone calls, mobile and landline.Tram, train and cost of change to travel plans.Roadside assistance and recovery costs.3 x Signed-for letters.The defendant changed the clutch on my van. Approximately 2 weeks later the driveshaft bolts worked loose leaving my van, my wife and I stranded in Croydon. I checked the clutch and found it was operational, so then suspected a failed gearbox. I called assistance to ask to come and tow us home. He arrived, but we couldn't be towed because of the noise when the van was moving, so were taken home without it. I then called garages, including the defendants, seeking assistance, joined the RAC, then met them back in Croydon where the fault was found. I was told it was due

to insufficient tightening of the bolts.

So, shall I just let it be struck out as it appears, somehow I don't even have a case?
Or is there a cleverly concocted letter I could draft that would lift the stay and let it proceed?

I've been to the Citizen's advice, and to the court to ask for help in this, but no joy from either, so hoping for some help from you guys.
Thanks in advance.

[Amethyst]

Re: Do I have a claim/inteerpretation of N24

Morning, I think you have worded your claim poorly, and I'm not sure from what you have said if you gave the garage the opportunity to put it right when you discovered it.
Have a read here
http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/c...V0046-1011.txt
You can also have a read of wiki on the pure economic loss aspects and why it's an invalid claim in that respect as things stand.

[johnlk]

Re: Do I have a claim/inteerpretation of N24

Morning, I think you have worded your claim poorly, and I'm not sure from what you have said if you gave the garage the opportunity to put it right when you discovered it.
Have a read here
http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/c...V0046-1011.txt
You can also have a read of wiki on the pure economic loss aspects and why it's an invalid claim in that respect as things stand.

Thanks Amethyst for your reply.
I have read up on "pure economic loss" and the equivalent info of your Trading Standards link but on the AdviceGuide web-site, but only since receiving the N24.
Yes, I should've been more clued up before I started the claim, and definitely worded it better.
The thing is, the "expenses incurred" are what I feel the garage should reimburse, although in law it looks like they are not liable.
So, should I have worded my claim something like: "Compensation for poor service........"?
But then, what price do you afix to that, surely it's the amount you are out of pocket?

So, my question now is: Is the claim unchangeable now?
If the court thought "no case to answer", wouldn't they have just struck it out straight away?
And by having it stayed, is that my chance to elaborate on the claim?

Worth continuing, or should I just stop now?

A bit of a pain as I have tickets, bills, RAC report, photos etc etc.

And as for not giving the garage the opportunity to put things right:
There was a long-standing minor gearbox problem with the van for the past several years (just a crunch going into 5th gear) I had even mentioned this to the garage when they changed the clutch.
When the van broke down, the clutch was tested and shown to be engaging (it was put into gear, and the speedo moved as if we was moving), so the fault was put down to the gearbox totally failing. I didn't feel like it was their fault, not to mention it was a Sunday afternoon and I didn't have their number with me.


From then on it was about how to finish our journey, and to get a tow truck to get us home.
Next day was calling gearbox garages, and then even the Claimant's garage whereas they were informed the van had failed.
The reason for calling them wasn't to ask them to fix the van, it was because the gearbox garage I called needed the gearbox taken out and then sent to them. I asked the Claimant's if they could do that job, to which they said yes.

So, they were informed the next day, but I wasn't pointing the finger.
As the van couldn't be towed back the day it broke down, I had to arrange the RAC to meet us there. They found the problem quickly, and suggested it was highly likely the bolts were tightened inadequately when the clutch was changed, although the report just says "found N/S driveshaft bolts come loose".
That's when I notified the Claimants via email explaining I was holding them accountable.


So, if it ever got that far to the court, maybe the Claimant's defense that I didn't give them the opportunity to put it right, could be explained?

Would a carefully constructed letter to the court be acceptable, or even possible?
And if a letter could help, what would my chances be in the court?

Or again, am I just better off giving up now?
Obviously it's not so much about the money, it's much more about the garage being held accountable for their shoddy work.

[johnlk]

Re: Do I have a claim/inteerpretation of N24

Sorry to resurrect this thread, but I have one hand dangling the court papers over the bin, and my other hand is itching to type a letter to the court.

Should I take it from the lack of replies this is definitely a "bin" case?