I just wanted to share something with you, that I fell short on, a few months ago.
I use the AAT letter of engagement. There is a paragraph on the LOE, stating that the directors would be jointly and severally liable for my fees, should the company be unable to meet its debts.
I sent the letter to a one director company, and he signed and dated the letter, as requested. He then didn't pay half of his fees, and, after trying to be nice and helpful to resolve the issue with installments, and getting ignored, I decided I wanted to pursue it, in the small claims court. I knew he would say the company had no funds, as I saw he had drawn everything when doing the accounts, and so instructed the debt agency to send a letter to the director personally, as well as the company.
BUT
the lady told me that because he hadn't printed his name underneath his signature, there was no way of going after him personally.
I couldn't believe it, especially as he was a sole director. So, just a note to anyone who doesn't have "print name" on the LOE - add it!
I would have fallen foul of that one Michelle and I may be tempted to get a second opinion given it's common practice to just initial amendments even on a cheque!
I was gutted Rob. I knew he would pay if he got a personal letter, and I thought I was covered. But, the debt collection agency told me that unless his name is printed as well as signed, I had no comeback. Do you think they may have been wrong? Maybe I should ring MoneyClaim?
I would certainly write to him pointing out that under your terms that he had signed was a personal guarantee and maybe say to help him out you are willing to take payment over 4 equal monthly payments, he is probably under the impression that his signature is binding?
Its old news now. I had called him many times and tried to offer installments, but was getting nowhere. He never responded to the company letter before action, either.
I have more often than not been paid before getting to court by sending a separate, original N1 form and along with with the final letter warning of Small Court proceedings. I've done the same on behalf of clients who had nearly given up.
I recently had a case where one of my clients had signed a personal guarantee to a trade creditor and their company went bust. The trade creditor invoked the personal guarantee and it transpired she had only signed it, not filled in any details and she wasn't aware she had signed a PG, just a trade application. The trade creditor had filled both the name and address in, and got the surname wrong!! We attempted to get it set aside but the Judge stated that the trade creditor had relied on the PG in supplying goods, irrespective that it had a n incorrect name on there.
I had hoped issuing the letter before action to him personally would bring the situation to a close, but then I was told I couldn't send that due to this "print name" issue. I never really thought to threaten it, mainly because I didn't have the means to then go through with it. He ignored the company letter before action, and I really think he would have ignored the personal one too. Wasn't worth it. I'd got 50% upfront so it wasn't all bad. Just annoying that I had really tried to help him settle the bill, yet ended was being ignored - and after the mess I got him out of, and the tax I saved him... GRRRR. He could've given me £10 a month, if he would have just kept the communication going. I guess some people think they are the only ones with bills to pay!
CH wants to strike off, but am hoping HMRC will veto. Maybe then he will get in touch. Though, no doubt he would just go find someone to prepare those.
Hi
Late response...just seen this one.
The courts will take email chains as evidence in many cases so why would a missing 'print name' affect your claim? I've done some Law exams, although it was almost 30 years ago but I'm sure the advice you have been given isn't correct. I would definitely speak to another agency or better still a solicitor if you know one personally (then should get that snippet for free.) As long as he doesn't deny it's his signature then having the printed name doesn't make a jot of difference. Also he if was taking money out rather than paying his creditors then the courts would take a very dim view (as do HMRC and Co House).....he could be struck off as a director, so I say go for it with another agency as the threat should be enough.
But be careful adding names yourself, that's in part how the Banks got caught out with PPI (combined with a whistleblowers actions based on staff ticking boxes they shouldn't have been!)). Easiest way...just send it back, even scanned copies work in law if you have a complete audit trail.
You go girl
__________________
Joanne
Winner of Bookkeeper of the Year 2015, 2016 & 2017
Thoughts are my own/not to be regarded as official advice,which should be sought from a suitably qualified Accountant.
You should check out answers with reference to the legal position
Hi Late response...just seen this one. The courts will take email chains as evidence in many cases so why would a missing 'print name' affect your claim? I've done some Law exams, although it was almost 30 years ago but I'm sure the advice you have been given isn't correct. I would definitely speak to another agency or better still a solicitor if you know one personally (then should get that snippet for free.) As long as he doesn't deny it's his signature then having the printed name doesn't make a jot of difference. Also he if was taking money out rather than paying his creditors then the courts would take a very dim view (as do HMRC and Co House).....he could be struck off as a director, so I say go for it with another agency as the threat should be enough.
But be careful adding names yourself, that's in part how the Banks got caught out with PPI (combined with a whistleblowers actions based on staff ticking boxes they shouldn't have been!)). Easiest way...just send it back, even scanned copies work in law if you have a complete audit trail.
You go girl
I'm sure you're right as well Jo. One of my clients signed a personal guarantee on behalf of a limited which was integrated into a trade credit agreement. The creditor wound company up when it got into difficulties then issued a personal stat demand on client. She (stupidly) had signed a blank form, not realising it was also a personal guarantee, and the creditor filled the rest in, including getting the surname wrong!! We tried to get stat demand set aside but Judge said it didn't matter about name being wrong cos she had signed the guarantee and the creditor relied on that when supplying goods.
