Tweet
Hello all, would really appreciate any advice, thanks!
My wife made an online money claim. The defendant asked for more time but then did not submit a defence, so were invited to request a CCJ and did so. However, the defendant filed a separate claim against my wife, which is not exactly a counterclaim, more a defence against our claim.
So we have to reply to the second claim, which is asking for the same money back (our money, which the other party currently has), plus both sets of claim fees. It seems to me that the defendant has misunderstood the process. Also, I read online that a defendant can generally only lodge a counterclaim at the same time as submitting a defence to the original claim.
My first question is: how is the system likely to deal with this? Will they realise these two cases are the same dispute and link them together, reopening our claim, or will they grant our CCJ and then consider the other claim separately?
Secondly, any advice on our response/next steps? Full story:
We went to buy a used iPhone advertised for £650 on Facebook. We were invited to inspect it in the seller's front garden. It was on the 'Hello' screen, ready to be set up after a factory reset, so we were unable to test most functions. My wife paid by bank transfer and we took the phone, on the understanding that we would test it thoroughly at home.
At home we started setting it up, but several things didn't seem right, which from online research strongly suggest the phone is counterfeit.
My wife sent a message to the seller asking to return it for a refund. Seller refused. We returned to her house and asked her in person. She again refused.
We approached CAB. They said in a private sale, we can only demand a refund if the item's condition doesn't match the original ad. We thought that an ad stating 'iPhone 15' when the item is a fake should qualify. We wrote a formal letter asking for a refund. The seller received it but did not reply.
We thought it worth trying an online money claim, though I felt there are some weaknesses in our case:
1. We failed to screenshot the ad before the seller deleted it, so we don't have evidence of the wording. However, the Facebook Messenger chat is headed 'iPhone 15' and the seller, in her 'counterclaim', appears to accept that she was advertising/selling a genuine iPhone.
2. We cannot prove that the phone we have is the one she sold us.
3. I'm certain it's a fake iPhone but I don't know how much evidence we need to convince a court. We don't have an expert witness, for instance.
So we made the claim. As stated, the seller did not submit a defence but made a separate claim against us, even though the disputed £650 is still in the seller's possession.
The seller's claim says:
My wife made an online money claim. The defendant asked for more time but then did not submit a defence, so were invited to request a CCJ and did so. However, the defendant filed a separate claim against my wife, which is not exactly a counterclaim, more a defence against our claim.
So we have to reply to the second claim, which is asking for the same money back (our money, which the other party currently has), plus both sets of claim fees. It seems to me that the defendant has misunderstood the process. Also, I read online that a defendant can generally only lodge a counterclaim at the same time as submitting a defence to the original claim.
My first question is: how is the system likely to deal with this? Will they realise these two cases are the same dispute and link them together, reopening our claim, or will they grant our CCJ and then consider the other claim separately?
Secondly, any advice on our response/next steps? Full story:
We went to buy a used iPhone advertised for £650 on Facebook. We were invited to inspect it in the seller's front garden. It was on the 'Hello' screen, ready to be set up after a factory reset, so we were unable to test most functions. My wife paid by bank transfer and we took the phone, on the understanding that we would test it thoroughly at home.
At home we started setting it up, but several things didn't seem right, which from online research strongly suggest the phone is counterfeit.
My wife sent a message to the seller asking to return it for a refund. Seller refused. We returned to her house and asked her in person. She again refused.
We approached CAB. They said in a private sale, we can only demand a refund if the item's condition doesn't match the original ad. We thought that an ad stating 'iPhone 15' when the item is a fake should qualify. We wrote a formal letter asking for a refund. The seller received it but did not reply.
We thought it worth trying an online money claim, though I felt there are some weaknesses in our case:
1. We failed to screenshot the ad before the seller deleted it, so we don't have evidence of the wording. However, the Facebook Messenger chat is headed 'iPhone 15' and the seller, in her 'counterclaim', appears to accept that she was advertising/selling a genuine iPhone.
2. We cannot prove that the phone we have is the one she sold us.
3. I'm certain it's a fake iPhone but I don't know how much evidence we need to convince a court. We don't have an expert witness, for instance.
So we made the claim. As stated, the seller did not submit a defence but made a separate claim against us, even though the disputed £650 is still in the seller's possession.
The seller's claim says:
- She asked us in the Facebook chat to check if the phone was original when we went to her house. [In the chat she actually said only 'you can check the IMEI number'.]
- “I told her I always like the item being checked before payment.” [She did not say this.]
- She complains about us “banging” on her door. [There's no doorbell, so we had to knock.]
- She complains that I threatened to call the police [I said we were considering going to the police].
- “I told XXX that I cannot accept a phone that has been taken away and then brought back after several hours because I don't know if she is bringing a fake phone to me.” [She did not say any of this. She refused to accept the phone back without giving a reason, and did not at any point suggest that the phone we were showing her was not the one she sold her.]
