Defendant Saying I Served Papers on the Wrong Company? How can I disprove this?

[ppceuro]

Hi everyone!

First post, and hope you can help...

I contracted with the MD of 'A Company Ltd' to build a website. I invoiced this company for the same. There were also some hosting bills, and so I made the invoices out to A Company Ltd.

In the course of me building the website, he incorporated a new company (which the website was for).

In June '20, he changed his mind and decided he wanted to pause on the website. No problem.

I handed it over to him, completed, and gave him instructions on how to remove my payment card from the hosting (I was paying it, as I was the host/developer).

In June this year, he told me that the site is still being billed.... to my card. I don't use that account so I was surprised to see it overdrawn with his fees.

However, since invoicing him for the fees, and him indicating he would pay- he hasn't. He has also been generally obnoxious and difficult.

I served county court papers via MCOL. On 06 Sept he's filed a defence saying I served them on the wrong company.

He then says "this is a debt for XYZ Company". The thing is, this company doesn't exist, and it's the first I have heard of it.

The question is: Am I right to pursue the debt in the name of A Company Ltd - since this is the company that was settling my invoices and who I contracted with in the first place?

[echat11]

Hi PPCEURO

It it's a Limited Company, have you checked companies house for company name / ownership?

I would say 'yes' providing those things check out and they have been settling your invoices. Check that the company is 'Active'.

Await further input from members.

[ppceuro]

Hi PPCEURO

It it's a Limited Company, have you checked companies house for company name / ownership?

I would say 'yes' providing those things check out and they have been settling your invoices. Check that the company is 'Active'.

Await further input from members.

Thanks ECHAT11 - yes, the original company is active and trading (albeit had a name change recently - that's the name I used).

The company he claims owes the debt doesn't exist.

About 6 months into our contract he set up a new company which would take over this website I made... but, still, I didn't contract to that company. And curiously it isn't the name he uses on the paperwork.

[echat11]

Thanks ECHAT11 - yes, the original company is active and trading (albeit had a name change recently - that's the name I used).

The company he claims owes the debt doesn't exist.

About 6 months into our contract he set up a new company which would take over this website I made... but, still, I didn't contract to that company. And curiously it isn't the name he uses on the paperwork.

Is the 'new company' listed at companies house?

[ppceuro]

Is the 'new company' listed at companies house?

Nope..

Sept 2019 - Proposal accepted by Company A. Billed Company A for creating website.
Dec 2019 - He incorporated 'New Company Ltd' which would own the new website
Various hosting fees paid by me in 2020 - invoiced to, and paid by, Company A
June 2021 - new invoice raised to Company A for hosting fees still being paid by me
Aug 2021 - admission and promise to pay
Sept 06 - files a defence to MCOL stating 'served to wrong company. Shouldn't have been Company A, should have been "Company xyz113" (which I have never heard of and is not registered anywhere.)

[echat11]

Nope..

Sept 2019 - Proposal accepted by Company A. Billed Company A for creating website.
Dec 2019 - He incorporated 'New Company Ltd' which would own the new website
Various hosting fees paid by me in 2020 - invoiced to, and paid by, Company A
June 2021 - new invoice raised to Company A for hosting fees still being paid by me
Aug 2021 - admission and promise to pay
Sept 06 - files a defence to MCOL stating 'served to wrong company. Shouldn't have been Company A, should have been "Company xyz113" (which I have never heard of and is not registered anywhere.)

I'm not sure why he would say it's wrong, when it can't be wrong. Strange.

[ppceuro]

I'm not sure why he would say it's wrong, when it can't be wrong. Strange.

Probably because he's a head-case who seems to prefer chaos and 'screwing people over' rather than just run a simple, honest business.
Venting. But true.

This is for a debt of £230 which has already cost me £30. I will re-file - use the 'fake' name he gave, and he'll claim it's actually 'Company C'; then I'll be £90 down.

We parted on good terms- no issues, not a single complaint last June, so I just don't understand it.

"No good turn goes unpunished."

[echat11]

The correct details would be companies house / invoices. The thing is, it's costing him money to defend etc.

[jaguarsuk]

I would advise that you continue with the claim provided that you can show communication was with the company you contracted with (emails or letters) and I would file a Reply to Defence detailing that the company he asserts the contract is with doesn't exist.

I would then send him a Part 18 request with one simple question: Please provide a copy of the certificate of incorporation for 'Company xyz113?'

File the Part 18 questions with the court as well serving them upon him.

When he can't provide a certificate of incorporation and as long as that is his only defence he has put forward I'd apply to strike out his defence and ask for summary judgement on the claim pursuant to CPR 24.2(ii) 'defendant has no real prospect of successfully defending the claim or issue; and.'

The cost of the application will be £255 and you would seek judgement for the claimed amount, court fees, cost of the application and interest calculated at 8% pursuant to the County Court Act 1984 s.69.

As you said you are on good terms it may be worth you writing a cover letter headed 'Without Prejudice Save As To Costs' to explain you are serving him with your 'Reply to Defence,' Part 18 Questions which he is obliged to answer within 14 days and that if he can't provide what you have asked for that you intend to apply to strike out his defence, get summary judgement and that'll mean the cost will go up to £461 without even taking into consideration interest.

Offer him the opportunity to settle the £260 and upon receipt of payment you'll discontinue the claim.

He may see sense, but then if he doesn't you can ask for your costs at court presenting that cover letter as justification in the strike out hearing.