Particulars of Claim - How do I set it out?

[Ms Anonymous]

Hi there,

I am new to this so I do apolgise if this thread is posted in the incorrect forum or if this question may have already been answered.

I am intended on taking a small business to the small claims court. I purchased a car part from them. After two months, the part no longer worked. I attempted to liaise with company but was informed that I am outside of the 30 day warranty period. Under the Consumer Rights Act I advised them that after 30 days I am entitled to a replacement or a refund. I was offered a partial refund to which I rejected but the business were adamant that they part was not faulty. I had two independent mechanics to inspect the part and they confirmed it was faulty. I was also advised that they cannot replace the part as they do not have it in stock even though I have proof of them advertising the same part.

I sent a letter before court action to which they refused to accept. I then sent an email confirming the same.

Does anyone have a template for the POC? Do I include photographs, statements of the mechanics, evidence of the part being sold? Or is it just a brief summary of the issue, law relied on and the damages? I don't want my claim to be dismissed if the POC is not sufficient.

Thank you
Ms Anonymous

[Ms Anonymous]

Also, I have not been able to use my car for about four months now due to the faulty part. I have cancelled insurance and it is declared SORN. Am I able to seek to recover any damages due to the loss of use of vehicle at all?

[des8]

In your claim you can include any losses directly attributable to the faulty part.

It is difficult to draft a poc for another when only partial info is available.
I would suggest you post up your draft PoC so it can be tweaked if necessary.
CPR 16.4: Particulars of claim must include –
(a) a concise statement of the facts on which the claimant relies;

[Ms Anonymous]

des8 can I PM you my draft?

[des8]

des8 can I PM you my draft?

If you wish, but you are better advised to post up on open forum (without any identifying details) so you can obtain a greater spread of advice

[2222]

don't most car parts have a longer warranty than 30 days? Why is this so short?


why did it take so long to fix the car after the part failed?

finally, the shop are claiming that the part is fine and has nothing wrong with it. I take it that the fault is not so obvious that you could bring it to court and the judge could see for himself?

did you pay by credit card?

[Ms Anonymous]

don't most car parts have a longer warranty than 30 days? Why is this so short?


why did it take so long to fix the car after the part failed?

finally, the shop are claiming that the part is fine and has nothing wrong with it. I take it that the fault is not so obvious that you could bring it to court and the judge could see for himself?

did you pay by credit card?

2222 thank you for your message.

I'm not too sure why they only covered a 30 day warranty.

The car is still not fixed. I purchased a new engine and as the engine is faulty, the car cannot be driven. It has been off road for about 4 months now as a result of the faulty engine. As its an engine, its cannot be bought to the courts. It is still within the car.

I paid via cash however the company does not dispute the purchase.

[Ms Anonymous]

1. The Claimant purchased a xxx engine from the Defendant on xxx for the sum of xxx.
2. The engine was described as a low mileage engine covering only xxx miles. The engine was installed by a fully qualified mechanic on xxx. The cost of labour to install the engine amounted to xx.
3. The Claimant used the vehicle for approximately xx miles. The engine started to make a knocking noise. The Claimant took the vehicle to be inspected by two independent garages. The Claimant was advised that the engine was making a knocking noise as a result of the xxxxxx due to high miles.
4. The Claimant contacted the Defendant on xxx. The Claimant notified the Defendant that the engine purchased was faulty as a result of the engine making a knocking noise. The Claimant was first informed that the Claimant is not entitled to a replacement engine as the Defendant does not have a replacement engine available.
5. The Defendant then notified the Claimant that as the Claimant was outside of the 30 day warranty period, a full refund option was not available. The Defendant offered a partial refund of xx although the Defendant refused to accept that the engine was faulty. This offer was rejected.
6. The Claimant wrote to the Defendant via email and recorded delivery on xxx relying on Chapter 2, Section 23 Consumer Rights Act 2015. The Claimant exercised their right to ask for a repair or a replacement. The Defendant refused to replace or repair the faulty engine.
7. The Claimant sent a letter before action dated xxx via recorded delivery. The Defendant refused to accept this letter. The Claimant sent a copy of the letter before court via email dated xxx. The Defendant responded on xxx offering another partial refund of xxx. The Claimant responded on the same day refusing the partial refund.
8. In a further attempt to settle the matter, the Claimant sent the defendant an email dated xx. The Defendant failed to respond. The Claimant has followed the pre-action protocol.
9. The Claimant relies on Chapter 2, Section 9, 10 and 11 Consumer Rights Act 2015: ‘Goods to be of satisfactory quality, goods to be fit for particular purpose and goods to be as described’. The engine purchased from the Defendant was not of satisfactory quality. The engine failed to be fit for a particular purpose and failed to last for a reasonable amount of time. The engine was not as described by the Defendant.
10. The Claimant has suffered a financial loss as a result of the faulty engine. Accordingly, the Claimant claims xxxx

I don't know how to claim the loss of the use of the car due to the faulty engine. Any ideas?

[des8]

Try this:
Particulars of claim:

At the material time the defendant was J bloggs t/a xxxx, a trader.
On dd.mm.yyyy the claimant purchased an engine Make & model from
the defendant for £
The defendant was in breach of contract as
the goods were not fit for purpose,nor of satisfctory quality, and were misdescribed.
contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015
The defendant has ignored the notices of rejection
Accordingly the claimant claims
(a)the sum of £XXXXX
(b) additional costs of £XXXX
(c)court costs
(d) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just.

That is sufficient for the defendant to identify what the claim is about.
All the other details will come out in your witness statement later

[Ms Anonymous]

Try this:
Particulars of claim:

At the material time the defendant was J bloggs t/a xxxx, a trader.
On dd.mm.yyyy the claimant purchased an engine Make & model from
the defendant for £
The defendant was in breach of contract as
the goods were not fit for purpose,nor of satisfctory quality, and were misdescribed.
contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015
The defendant has ignored the notices of rejection
Accordingly the claimant claims
(a)the sum of £XXXXX
(b) additional costs of £XXXX
(c)court costs
(d) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just.

That is sufficient for the defendant to identify what the claim is about.
All the other details will come out in your witness statement later

Thank you des8 I wasnt too sure how much detail I would need to go in.

[2222]

2222 thank you for your message.

I'm not too sure why they only covered a 30 day warranty.

The car is still not fixed. I purchased a new engine and as the engine is faulty, the car cannot be driven. It has been off road for about 4 months now as a result of the faulty engine. As its an engine, its cannot be bought to the courts. It is still within the car.

I paid via cash however the company does not dispute the purchase.

Oh, I see now. Some of the firms that sell very cheap recon engines are simply con artists. Before spending money on a court case, I would check very carefully the history of this company at Companies House. Check the directors, and which other companies they are directors for. How many companies have closed. How many directorships they have resigned from. That sort of thing.

It's pretty easy to form a holding company that owns all the capital assets of the business. Then set up a trading company to do the business (very shoddily). After a few months, as the complaints mount, they close that company, strip all the cash out, and start up a new one with a similar name.

I had a run-in with one of these companies, once, but managed to con them into doing the repairs needed without charge. They were not pleased.

Do bear in mind that roughly half of county court judgements go unpaid, so you need to do your homework about the people you are proposing to sue.

Of course, the firm you dealt with may be fine and upstanding. But, somehow, it doesn't sound like it.

The advantage of paying by credit card is that you can get your money back from the card company.

[Ms Anonymous]

Oh, I see now. Some of the firms that sell very cheap recon engines are simply con artists. Before spending money on a court case, I would check very carefully the history of this company at Companies House. Check the directors, and which other companies they are directors for. How many companies have closed. How many directorships they have resigned from. That sort of thing.

It's pretty easy to form a holding company that owns all the capital assets of the business. Then set up a trading company to do the business (very shoddily). After a few months, as the complaints mount, they close that company, strip all the cash out, and start up a new one with a similar name.

I had a run-in with one of these companies, once, but managed to con them into doing the repairs needed without charge. They were not pleased.

Do bear in mind that roughly half of county court judgements go unpaid, so you need to do your homework about the people you are proposing to sue.

Of course, the firm you dealt with may be fine and upstanding. But, somehow, it doesn't sound like it.

The advantage of paying by credit card is that you can get your money back from the card company.

Foolishly I purchased my first engine with this company, it had the exact same problem. I'll be honest, I took my vehicle on the race track and as you do, abused it. The engine was making a knocking noise and I did not bother getting it checked out as I thought it was down to my own error. I did report this to the company who advised me that from the sounds of it, it is down to my own mistake to which I agreed as I didnt think it would be anything to do with the engine.

Now that I purchased the second engine from the same company and it has made the exact same knocking noise and it has been inspected, I know now that the engine is faulty. Two engines having the exact same problem surely cannot be coincidence? I have spent a vast amount of money purchasing two engines in the space of two years, the second one only last a month! I understand there is a 50/50 chance but im hoping the judge will rule in our favour. Can I mention this in my statement as it refers to a previous purchase?

I have already checked companies house and note they are active but their registered address differs to their business address. In October 2017 and June 2018 - compulsory strike-off action has been discountuined - any thoughts?

[2222]

Are these race prepared engines? Perhaps you can give an idea what you paid? Do they take your engine in and give you a refurbished replacement? Also, what do the two mechanics say is wrong, exactly?

in general, if you take a car on the race track, that's going to make it harder to claim. Unless the business was supplying engines for that purpose and knew that's what you wanted. Even then the F1 companies have engines breaking all the time, and you know how much prep work they put in.

[Ms Anonymous]

Yes the engine is race prepared.

First engine £1,500, second engine costed £2,000.

The first engine was taken on the race track but the second had not. Only drove it a few hundred miles and it went and thats driving it around town.

In lay terms the engine was faulty as it was of very high miles which the seller claimed it was not. You would expect the engine to last more than a few hundred miles at least.

No I did not take my old engine in for a refurb.

[des8]

Noted that the trader was a limited company, so amend first line of PoC to reflect that/