Tweet
(My apologies for repeating this but I put it in the wrong place twice)
Hi all, and a happy new year to everyone.
I have unfortunately had to take someone to small claims court for non payment of work done.
The case is due to be heard later this week but I'd very much appreciate some help here.
I sent my evidence to both the defendant and the court a few days within the time directed.
On the very last day of the time limit I received a copy of their evidence/statement.
Their evidence/statement consists largely of a response to most elements of my own evidence, and this, to put it mildly, contains a lot of exaggeration and fabrication.
So, my questions:
1. Will I be able to respond to this evidence at court, since they have been able to respond to mine in their own.
2. There are two people's statements:
The first is from someone who is a director but has little else to do with the company and I have never had any dealings with them. It is basically saying that the other witness is 'honourable' etc and that I have apparently 'caused them to be ill with worry' etc.
The second is from the person that actually runs the business and whom I mainly dealt with (this is the person referred to as honourable etc).
Both these statements start with the line: CJ Act 1967 S9, MC Act 1980 S102, MC Rules 1981 R70
What on earth does this mean and what if any affect if any will this have at the hearing?
I thank you in advance for your help here - I'm lying awake all night at the moment with worry.
Beagull.
Hi all, and a happy new year to everyone.
I have unfortunately had to take someone to small claims court for non payment of work done.
The case is due to be heard later this week but I'd very much appreciate some help here.
I sent my evidence to both the defendant and the court a few days within the time directed.
On the very last day of the time limit I received a copy of their evidence/statement.
Their evidence/statement consists largely of a response to most elements of my own evidence, and this, to put it mildly, contains a lot of exaggeration and fabrication.
So, my questions:
1. Will I be able to respond to this evidence at court, since they have been able to respond to mine in their own.
2. There are two people's statements:
The first is from someone who is a director but has little else to do with the company and I have never had any dealings with them. It is basically saying that the other witness is 'honourable' etc and that I have apparently 'caused them to be ill with worry' etc.
The second is from the person that actually runs the business and whom I mainly dealt with (this is the person referred to as honourable etc).
Both these statements start with the line: CJ Act 1967 S9, MC Act 1980 S102, MC Rules 1981 R70
What on earth does this mean and what if any affect if any will this have at the hearing?
I thank you in advance for your help here - I'm lying awake all night at the moment with worry.
Beagull.
