PDA

View Full Version : MCOL changing claim by adding claimants



Eddie
25-10-2009, 15:48 PM
I have made a MCOL regarding tenancy deposit. However, I have just realised that I have made the claim in my own name, and have not included that of my partner, as I do not remember seeing anything regarding a second claimant on the online form. My partner is a joint signatory to the TA. I am now concerned that the claim may be thrown out on formal grounds. Are my concerns justified? My partner and I are married, hence should we not be treated as a joint household? Less relevant, but perhaps not entirely off the point, the rent was paid by means of a house rent allowance that I, and not my partner, was entitled to. Nevertheless, it was paid monthly from our joint account. Do I need to modifiy the claim? Is it possible to do so? Many thanks.

davidjohnbutton
25-10-2009, 16:08 PM
No, you are ok if either one of you has the same authority to act for the other and if you are partners the court will not look into why the claim is in your own name only. If it does arise, just point out to the judge that there is not the facility to add more than one claimant under PCOL

There is of course the facility to add more than one defendant under PCOL.

Eddie
25-10-2009, 16:32 PM
Thanks! THis is a money claim and I just could not find any part of the form that deals with joint claimants, although there is provision for naming co-defendants. Am I wrong?

westminster
25-10-2009, 17:02 PM
No, you are ok if either one of you has the same authority to act for the other and if you are partners the court will not look into why the claim is in your own name only. If it does arise, just point out to the judge that there is not the facility to add more than one claimant under PCOL

There is of course the facility to add more than one defendant under PCOL.
Do you mean PCOL or MCOL? Or would it make no difference to your answer?

westminster
25-10-2009, 17:19 PM
I'm not sure about this.

See this - a report of a deposit claim case which was thrown out by the judge because it was "improperly brought by only one of the joint tenants".
http://landlordlaw.blogspot.com/2009/08/case-throws-up-injustices-in-tenancy.html

I don't know if being married entitles you to claim on your partner's behalf in these circumstances. You are also individuals otherwise it would make no difference if one or both married partners signed a tenancy agreement.

The fact that your partner isn't named on the claim surely leaves open the possibility that your partner could independently decide to issue another claim against the LL, which would obviously be wrong.

Eddie
25-10-2009, 17:21 PM
Yes, my concern is that the judge might see it exactly like that. And it was after reading the article that you've sent me the link to that I started worrying about this.

Esio Trot
25-10-2009, 19:16 PM
I have made a MCOL regarding tenancy deposit.
A further word of warning if your tenancy deposit claim concerns failure to protect and the 3x deposit legislation. These claims have been allocated to the Part 8 route, and thus are not appropriate to MCOL.

If it concerns a deposit outside of the tenancy deposit legislation (e.g. not a AST or a deposit paid on an AST before 6 April 2007 and holding over since) then you are okay.

Eddie
25-10-2009, 19:47 PM
Yes, it's a non-Housing Act Tenancy

Eddie
25-10-2009, 19:47 PM
Doesn't solve the problem of sole claimant for joint tenants though.

davidjohnbutton
25-10-2009, 21:46 PM
My answer is true so far as I am aware having used MCOL and PCOL - I think the judge was incorrect to kick out the claim on the basis of only 1 claimant named on the claim but said judge then went on to say why the claim would fail and those were the real reasons for striking out the claim.

A claim under MCOL can be subsequently track allocated under part 8 by order of the judge.

Eddie
26-10-2009, 08:46 AM
Apart from the financial implications, would it be advisable to withdraw this claim, add my partner's name to the particulars of the claim and file a fresh claim?

westminster
26-10-2009, 11:44 AM
Apart from the financial implications, would it be advisable to withdraw this claim, add my partner's name to the particulars of the claim and file a fresh claim?

What financial implications? This is a straightforward small claim.

I can't find the answer to the original question. All it says in my book on small claims procedure is that if there is more than one claimant, they must be named as a co-claimant. To me it makes logical sense that joint tenants must claim as co-claimants otherwise one tenant could claim and pocket another tenant's share of the deposit. Being married might override this logic, but I don't know the definitive answer.

You don't have to withdraw the claim, you can apply to the court to amend it. This would be the safest way forward - I mean, DJB may well be right but you can't go wrong if you add your partner as a claimant.

I'm fairly sure it's form N244 for this but check with the court first or Money Claim Online helpline may be able to assist.

Eddie
26-10-2009, 12:45 PM
Thanks. I meant, starting a fresh claim would obviously be more expensive than amending the original claim. My only problem with ameding claim is that once one uses N244 to modify the claim, it is no longer an online, but a manual claim and proceeds accordingly (according to MCOL instructions + got the info from the court telephone service), which of course is extremely time-consuming. I wonder whether it would not be possible, at a later stage when presumably we have to send documents on to the court, to also add a signed statement from my partner waiving all further claims that could arise out of this particular dispute. + copy of marriage certificate of course!

Eddie
26-10-2009, 13:14 PM
I have just been advised by the Legal Advice Centre that, at the time of sending in our papers (TA etc), my partner as joint tenant should send a written agreement concurring with the claim.