Received a Notice of Intent to Apply for Adjudication

[Donny462]

Yes, respond to them as per the directions, but reiterate in a covering letter that their breach of court orders has been noted.
Their noncompliance doesn't mean you should not comply

(wrote the above yesterday morning shortly before going out for the day, but omitted to post it.. sorry!)

Thank you so much once again for your help des8 . I hope you had a really nice day out, you deserve it .

[des8]

If papers were served on you on last Thursday and your response is due four days later, you should respond by today

[Donny462]

If papers were served on you on last Thursday and your response is due four days later, you should respond by today

Hi des8

Sorry, I should have said that it actually say 4 working days, tomorrow being the fourth working day.

[Donny462]

Hi des8

The Court have responded to my email re the Claimants non compliance.

Below is what I sent to the Court, and then their response. I am unsure what happens now, as no comment has been made as to whether we are abiding by the dates of the Courts Order of 4th October, or the dates as given by the Claimants Solicitor in her letter received by myself on 28th October, which incidentally, they do not appear to have copied to the Court, so once again, I`m totally confused.

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN.

Re:- Claim Number HT-2021-LDS-000016 *********** and ***********

Further to my Witness Statement dated 20th October 2021, and sent to the Court on the same day, I wish to inform the Court that I was served the Acknowledgement of Service and Claim Pack by hand yesterday, 28th October 2021, which is 24 days after the Court Order of 4th October 2021.

Within the last paragraph of my Witness Statement dated 20th October 2021, I invited the Court to exercise their powers under CPR 3.4 (2) (c) and strike out the Claimants claim for continuing non compliance with Court Orders.

Now, once again, the Claimant is not complying with the Court Order of 4th October 2021 , in that I submitted my Defence as ordered on 20th October 2021, the Claimant should then have submitted his response to my Defence by 27th October 2021. He did not. I therefore again invite the Court to exercise their powers under CPR 3.4 (2) (c) and strike out the Claimants claim for continuing non compliance with Court Orders.

Yesterday I received the attached letter from the Claimants Solicitors. You will see that the Claimants Solicitor is proposing new dates for the serving of evidence. I do not agree to their proposal to amend the dates for serving evidence as I served in accordance with the Court Directions as per the Court Order dated 4th October 2021, and I see no reason why the Claimants Solicitor could not also have abided by the Court Directions detailed in that Order, yet they took a further 24 days to notify myself, and the Court that they would not be complying.

I feel it is wrong for the Claimant to ignore the terms of the Court Orders and to propose new dates after their non compliance with the two previous Court Orders.

I served my Defence on 20th October as per the Court Order, the Claimant would have seen my Defence filed that day, yet are now suggesting I file my Defence by 11th November at 4pm, in the full knowledge that I have already served it on them.

As it currently stands, the Claimant had my Defence for 8 days before preparing and serving me with the Claim Pack and so was at an unfair advantage.

This is the response from the Court:-

Dear Ms ********

Further to your email below, this has been referred through to Her Honour Judge ***** who comments as follows:

"I am afraid that it is not for the court to provide a comment or advice to the Defendant. If she is unsure how to proceed, she should consider taking legal advice. In any event, it is a matter for her to make such formal application to the court as she is advised, or otherwise, thinks is appropriate."

Kind regards

[des8]

Basically the court is not going to use their power to strike out for noncompliance and aren't going to consider it unless you file an application.
This will cost you Ł255, with no certainty of success and the possibility of paying the other sides costs if your application is disputed and fails

[Donny462]

Basically the court is not going to use their power to strike out for noncompliance and aren't going to consider it unless you file an application.
This will cost you Ł255, with no certainty of success and the possibility of paying the other sides costs if your application is disputed and fails

Thank you des8 . I understand that bit, but what I don`t understand is how the Court is just ignoring the Claimants blatant non compliance? It is already looking biased in favour of the Claimant as he is advised in the Court Order, that if I don`t comply, that he should go for judgement for defaulting on my part, without the Claimant having to go the more expensive route of going to a hearing, yet the Claimant can not comply and it`s just ignored, it doesn`t seem very fair to me.

As the Court has ignored the Claimants Solicitors letter stating what dates she wants documents to be served, it looks like I will be following the directions of the Court Order of 4th October, but they will be playing by their own rules.

Oh, and having now finally received the Claim pack, I can see that the Claimant has blatantly misled the Court in saying he was employed for some remedial works that needed doing to the Farmhouse due to subsidence...he makes no mention of the fact that in the first instance he was employed as an expert witness in an arbitration, nor that in the second instance he was employed as our agent to represent us in an arbitration from start to finish. He also makes no mention of the fact it was coal mining subsidence, (which is exempt from adjudication), nor does he state it was as part of my prime domicile , so it`s easy to see why the Court accepted his claim! I shall post his Claim tomorrow for you to have a proper look at, it isnt very long, but is practically all lies.

[Donny462]

des8

This is the Claim Form statement, I thought you might be interested to see it:-

The Claimant provided works to the Defendant commencing in December 2016 in relation to the provision of expert advice regarding the adequacy of remedial works required to the Defendant`s property following subsidence. The Claimant issued invoices to the Defendant which were disputed and remained unpaid. The matter was referred to Adjudication in September 2019. The Adjudicators decision dated 15th October 2019 , ordered the Defendant to pay the Claimant the sum of ***** in respect of the Claimants unpaid fees, and the adjudicators fees and expenses in the sum of *****. The Defendant has failed to pay either sum due. The CLaimant seeks enforcement of the adjudicators decision dated 15th October 2019.

The Claimant has deliberately mis-led the Court, he has not stated that he was an Expert in an arbitration to determine whether or not my property has suffered from Coal Mining Subsidence, nor does he then say he acted as our agent in a further arbitration for Coal Mining Subsidence, in fact, the majority of his work was when acting for us as our agent in the second Coal Mining arbitration - he notably leaves out that it was subsidence caused by Coal Mining, he has also left out that he acted in arbitrations for us, nor has he stated it was regarding our prime domicile.

Could you please tell me if I am able to actually put that the Claimant deliberately mis-led the Court?

Additionally, the Claimants Solicitor has now written to me stating that it is her Clients wish to settle this matter without the need for Court Action , I think her Client has been less than truthful with her too.

[des8]

One should not accuse the other party of lying or trying deliberately mislead the court.
They are either mistaken, or failed to understand. A judge will suss out what is actually happening.

One should always look as if one is trying to settle out of court.
Any negotiations should be marked as "without prejudice save as to costs", so see what she is looking to settle at.
It can't hurt

[Donny462]

One should not accuse the other party of lying or trying deliberately mislead the court.
They are either mistaken, or failed to understand. A judge will suss out what is actually happening.

One should always look as if one is trying to settle out of court.
Any negotiations should be marked as "without prejudice save as to costs", so see what she is looking to settle at.
It can't hurt

Ahh right, ok, thank you, that makes sense .

If I write to the Solicitor to ask what she is looking to settle at, do I have to copy the judge in that correspondence can you tell me please?

[des8]

You do not inform the court about negotiations without prejudice.
The "without prejudice" rule allows parties to negotiate without being at risk of having those communications produced and disclosed and used against them later in court, thereby potentially undermining their case in the event that a settlement is not reached

[Donny462]

You do not inform the court about negotiations without prejudice.
The "without prejudice" rule allows parties to negotiate without being at risk of having those communications produced and disclosed and used against them later in court, thereby potentially undermining their case in the event that a settlement is not reached

Brilliant! Thank you so much. That was my worry, that any negotiations may be used against me in Court, but now I know they cannot be disclosed, that makes me much happier. Thank you again .

[Donny462]

Hi des8

I've been able to book an appt with a solicitor now for 26th November.

In the meantime, as you know, I lodged a complaint with the RICS about this man bringing an adjudication against me via RICS. They have now written back to me as follows:-

Dear Miss ********
Thank you for the information you have provided about Mr ***** **** from ***** **** ******* Services.
Having checked our database, we write to inform you that this firm and member is not regulated by RICS and therefore we are unable to assist you with your matter or investigate the concerns that you have raised.
RICS’ disciplinary processes only consider information, concerns and complaints about the professional conduct and / or competence of members and regulated firms. Unfortunately, as the firm and member are not regulated by the RICS we have no jurisdiction over them.
RICS Regulated firms are required to display the RICS logo and designation “Regulated by RICS” on their website and other public facing documentation so that they can be identified. If you have evidence that the firm is holding out to be regulated by RICS, then please do provide this so that enquiries can be made with the firm.
At this stage, we would suggest that you seek independent legal advice who may be able to advise further.
This matter is therefore now closed.
Kind Regards,

Can you please tell me how this man was able to bring this adjudication against me using the RICS when neither he or his firm are accredited to the RICS? In the letters after his name it says RICS Dip. Adj. What does that mean please? Is what he has done lawful?

Also, as you suggested, I wrote to his solicitor and asked what terms he would be prepared to settle on. The solicitor has written to me twice now saying she is still discussing this with her client and she has now said she will get back to me the beginning of the coming week.....oh and once again she missed the Court Orders cut off date for her clients responses to my defence! It should have been in on Weds by 4pm and it was sent Friday at 5.50pm , she said she'd written and told the Court of her changed dates and times, but once again she didn't copy me in the correspondence? It seems to me that she is doing as she likes and the Court is allowing her to disregard its instructions ?

[des8]

The "RICS Dip.Adj." just means the guy has passed an RCIS course in adjudication.
Whether or not he is entitled to use the letters after his name without being registered with RICS I don't know.
For example a person who has passed the qualifying examinations of the Chartered Insurance Institute (CII) is not allowed to use the initials ACII or FCII after his name unless he is a member of the CII
Suggest you refer it back to RCIS and ask.

Before you see your solicitor I suggest you make notes about the essential points you wish to ask about, so you 1) don't waste expensive time! & 2) don't forget anything.
In that meeting you can bring up the matter of the opposing solicitor not copying you in on court communications.

[Donny462]

The "RICS Dip.Adj." just means the guy has passed an RCIS course in adjudication.
Whether or not he is entitled to use the letters after his name without being registered with RICS I don't know.
For example a person who has passed the qualifying examinations of the Chartered Insurance Institute (CII) is not allowed to use the initials ACII or FCII after his name unless he is a member of the CII
Suggest you refer it back to RCIS and ask.

Before you see your solicitor I suggest you make notes about the essential points you wish to ask about, so you 1) don't waste expensive time! & 2) don't forget anything.
In that meeting you can bring up the matter of the opposing solicitor not copying you in on court communications.

Hi des8


I referred the matter back to the RICS and they basically said that the RICS adjudication system was set up to assist the Public in solving disputes, you do not have to be a member to use it....this guy has cleverly used it to his advantage so as not to incur high costs in achieving the ability to apply for a Summary Judgement against me.

Are you able to recommend a good solicitor in my area who could deal with this on my behalf please? The solicitor I was hoping to use cannot now take on my case due to him being needed elsewhere. I have things going on in my personal life at the moment which mean I cannot give this all of the time it deserves as I am currently spending most of my time at hospital, so really need someone in my corner.

[des8]

Sorry, but I am not in a position to recommend any solicitor.
Have you asked the solicitor you intended to instruct, if he can give you an introduction to one?
Or else you can try the Law society search website: https://solicitors.lawsociety.org.uk/