• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Default Judgement - zero response - What's happening?

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Default Judgement - zero response - What's happening?

    Hello everyone! I'll try and keep this brief so excuse the bullet points - was looking for some

    * I'm the Director of a Ltd company

    * We made a claim against a decent sized company (£m's in the bank) via a solicitor - we submitted loads of evidence, emails, terms of business, phone calls. We also emailed them with an opportunity to resolve the issue by explaining their position and were potentially happy to come to an amicable resolution if they explained their understanding of the situation, or bring forward information that we may not have been privy to.

    * They defendant company only responded (aggressively) to our initial letter/email, an email stating that they will file a counter-claim and the Director told my solicitor to F-off on the phone about 5 months ago in response to our invoice and letter before claim.

    * They ignored all other correspondence, in the mean time we recently obtained a default judgement - the CCJ is showing up on the registry

    * Next step is to instruct High Court collections if we do not hear from them




    Their silence is making me nervous/anxious - so I guess my questions are:

    1 - What could they be playing at? In terms of "tactics" - Surely letting it get this far is a terrible idea in terms of their business, credit rating, reputation etc?

    2 - They initially responded that they had a strong defence. Surely if their defence was so strong they would have responded by now to nip it in the bud?

    3 - Do they still have a chance to set aside/ defend the claim or generally be obstructive, even though the default judgement has been passed? I would have thought the court would look at their conduct poorly (Refusal to clarify their position, aggressive approach, non communication etc)

    4 - We know that they filed their accounts very recently - would this be helpful to negate any circumstances of "we did not receive any of your letters/Director was out of the country"


    Ultimately, I guess what I am looking to figure out is what are my chances of getting the cash!

    Any help, advice or anecdotes would be amazing - not looking for ultimate answers or magic solutions. Just more of an idea of where we stand as the defendant's non response is really confusing and disorientating!

    HankAaron

  • #2
    Even though you have a Default Judgment there is no guarantee you will get paid. You could go ahead with enforcement but again they may think they have grounds to apply for Set Aside.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by ploddertom View Post
      Even though you have a Default Judgment there is no guarantee you will get paid. You could go ahead with enforcement but again they may think they have grounds to apply for Set Aside.
      Yeah, totally appreciate the risk of that happening. I guess where i'm a bit confused is what would be possible grounds to set aside, given that:

      1 - We know they received our correspondence because they replied to the initial letter before claim and we know the director is still at the registered address because they filed their accounts.

      2- Our case is pretty tight from a legal standpoint so though there may be "reasonable" chance to defend the case, wouldn't it be looked upon unfavourably that they have essentially wasted the courts' time by refusing to file a defence prior to now and ignoring our attempts to resolve amicably?

      As a novice to this, it feels like if there are no mitigating circumstances such as serious illness or proof that they moved offices etc, then once the judgement is made, it should just stand. Feels a bit unfair from my POV as we have done things by the book, been reasonable, not aggressive and sweary etc?

      Comment


      • #4
        If there is even a slight doubt cast then the Court have no option but to grant a Hearing for Set Aside which may be granted as a temporary measure pending a fuller Hearing. You should be given the chance to see their grounds and make comment where needed. They could fall down on not doing it promptly enough but that is more reserved for those who do not receive any documentation from the Court. How long is it since you obtained Judgment? If only within the last month then I would be tempted to leave it for another couple of weeks or so before going for enforcement - this will help disprove the promptness. Otherwise go for enforcement and if using a HCEO then you only have to pay approx £66 upfront and if it proves to be abortive you are limited in further costs.

        As for choosing a HCEO then remember biggest is not always best and in particular I would avoid those who represent multiple different companies.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ploddertom View Post
          If there is even a slight doubt cast then the Court have no option but to grant a Hearing for Set Aside which may be granted as a temporary measure pending a fuller Hearing. You should be given the chance to see their grounds and make comment where needed. They could fall down on not doing it promptly enough but that is more reserved for those who do not receive any documentation from the Court. How long is it since you obtained Judgment? If only within the last month then I would be tempted to leave it for another couple of weeks or so before going for enforcement - this will help disprove the promptness. Otherwise go for enforcement and if using a HCEO then you only have to pay approx £66 upfront and if it proves to be abortive you are limited in further costs.

          As for choosing a HCEO then remember biggest is not always best and in particular I would avoid those who represent multiple different companies.
          Yeah, it's only been about 2 weeks. So what could be their motivation? I assume an active, trading company (recently received investment and had good press) would not want that CCJ on their record for 6 years. I would understand it if it was a small ltd company that has nothing to lose i.e. cashflow problems, winding up the company anyway etc.

          Comment


          • #6
            They are maybe hoping you are all mouth and no action and it will just go away. Some large companies have several CCJs against them without any serious issues getting credit.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ploddertom View Post
              They are maybe hoping you are all mouth and no action and it will just go away. Some large companies have several CCJs against them without any serious issues getting credit.
              Oh really? So larger companies frequently just "Swallow" CCJ's and never end up paying up? Doesn't that completely defeat the point of the whole process?

              Comment

              View our Terms and Conditions

              LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

              If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


              If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
              Working...
              X