# owed money by plc/ltd company



## c00lbond (6 Apr 2009)

well basically im owed several thousand euro by a car dealership after i was given a cheque from them which bounced,on the cheque it states the company name then "ltd",so basically its a private company limited by shares,im just wondering if i would have a strong case against the company even though they only have limited liability? I have been told that i would have a good chance in court on the grounds of fraud because of a dishonoured cheque,but i have also been told that the case will be thrown out because the company only have limited liability ,please help,any advice greatly appreciated


----------



## mercman (6 Apr 2009)

Limited liability is a form of saving for the Directors. Have you gone back to them and asked for cash payment ?? If it goes to court it will take about 2 years minimum to be heard. At this point in time, the company will be well gone and your money with it. Not much point in looking for solutions here. Try going back to them and demanding a payment and not in another cheque.


----------



## c00lbond (6 Apr 2009)

I have asked them on many occasions and they always make up some excuse and its getting harder and harder to get in touch with them,they rarely answer the phone anymore,whenever  i visit the premises a member of staff usually tells me the director is not available and he will pass on the message,what i was really wondering is whether or not I have a valid claim on the grounds of a dishonoured cheque from a plc or will my case be thrown out??
Thanks for the response


----------



## mf1 (6 Apr 2009)

On the face of it you have a perfectly valid claim against the company. Your difficulty is that it is likely that they are in financial difficulties ( hence the dishonoured cheque) and that if they do not pay now by way of cash or draft ( extremely unlikely) that if you start proceedings, they may have ceased trading by the time you obtain a judgment. 

Your action is against ( a) whoever owes you the money and (b) whoever is on the cheque. 

The limited liability issue is not one that really matters - their liabilty is not limited - but more likely their ability to pay. 

mf


----------



## mercman (6 Apr 2009)

I doubt if it is a 'plc' which is a public limited company. It is probably an ordinary limited company and unless you make a fuss you might as well say goodbye to your money. If you sold them a car try getting it back, as you would be better off with thge car parked in your driveway rather than a dud cheque on your living room table.


----------



## c00lbond (6 Apr 2009)

mf1 said:


> On the face of it you have a perfectly valid claim against the company. Your difficulty is that it is likely that they are in financial difficulties ( hence the dishonoured cheque) and that if they do not pay now by way of cash or draft ( extremely unlikely) that if you start proceedings, they may have ceased trading by the time you obtain a judgment.
> 
> Your action is against ( a) whoever owes you the money and (b) whoever is on the cheque.
> 
> ...


thanks for clarifying the situation with me,so basically its not a matter of their liability to pay,but more so their ability to pay given the state of the car market


----------



## c00lbond (6 Apr 2009)

sorry, I made a mistake in the title I thought plc was private limited company,not a public limited company,they are a private company limited by shares ,my bad,my legal jargon is fairly poor,but another query,if they ceased trading and went bankrupt would I be albe to claim some of their assets e.g a car off them??


----------



## Graham_07 (6 Apr 2009)

c00lbond said:


> sorry, I made a mistake in the title I thought plc was private limited company,not a public limited company,they are a private company limited by shares ,my bad,my legal jargon is fairly poor,but another query,if they ceased trading and went bankrupt would I be albe to claim some of their assets e.g a car off them??


 
You would stand in line with any other creditors behind any secured and preferential creditors. In all probability, given what you've said already, it is unlikely that you would get anything.


----------



## mercman (6 Apr 2009)

Where and who are they ?? You may as well make others aware.


----------



## FKH (6 Apr 2009)

How did you end up being given a cheque? Your other option may be to agree to take a car instead.


----------



## mf1 (6 Apr 2009)

mercman said:


> Where and who are they ?? You may as well make others aware.



Now now. You know very well that this board is against the idea of name and shame for the very simple reason that that can ( quite rightly)  be seen as defamatory. Anyone who wants to name and shame can put their name on their own website, name and shame to their hearts content and take their own consequences - not hanging out the owner of this website to potential personal responsibility.

mf


----------



## Jack2008 (7 Apr 2009)

Not 100% sure of this, legal people on this site will be able to give you more accurate information. I think it is illegal to write a cheque when the funds are not there to meet the payment and that you can report it the guards? Maybe a visit from them might jolt them into paying you?


----------



## c00lbond (7 Apr 2009)

hi one final query ,how long would a case like this usually take to get to court,one poster said minimum2 years,surely its not really that long??in Dublin btw
Thanks


----------



## Kate10 (7 Apr 2009)

Hi coolbond,

It's not that long for a summary proceeding (procedure suitable for recovering some debts only) - maybe 6 months depending on how things go.  You should see a solicitor to take advice on the particular details of your case.  I wouldn't let it go until I had looked into the company in a little more detail.

Best of luck,

Kate.


----------



## c00lbond (7 Apr 2009)

Thanks kate,I had a feeling 2 years was an excessive time to wait,I actually spoke to my solicitor and he said because they only have limited liability I dont really have a good case  against them(i still have the original cheque issued and signed  by them). ....me thinks I need to find a better solicitor


----------



## mercman (7 Apr 2009)

A different solicitor does not necessarily mean you will win the case. Limited Liability is what it states - limited. Have you tried to get another car ??


----------



## c00lbond (7 Apr 2009)

mercman said:


> A different solicitor does not necessarily mean you will win the case. Limited Liability is what it states - limited. Have you tried to get another car ??


 im actually in the process of trying to get a car now off him,its a last ditch effort to find a solution to this situation before i take him to court but he doesnt seem very interested in my proposal,but i'll see how it goes anyways


----------



## bond-007 (12 Apr 2009)

How much roughly are we talking here? Under or over 6350 euro?


----------



## c00lbond (13 Apr 2009)

bond-007 said:


> How much roughly are we talking here? Under or over 6350 euro?


3360 to be precise


----------



## lawdable (18 Apr 2009)

Limited liability has the effect that you cannot sue the individual who wrote the cheque, but you are perfectly entitled to sue the company in question.

You would sue on the back of the cheque, and since it would be for a liquidated sum the process would not take long at all.

As the case would be in the District Court the cost of this should not be too much.

There would also be a good chance that the initial letter from your solicitor demanding payment within 7 days would cause them to pay you to avoid the expense of having to deal with a court appearance, interest and judgment.


----------



## c00lbond (21 Apr 2009)

lawdable said:


> Limited liability has the effect that you cannot sue the individual who wrote the cheque, but you are perfectly entitled to sue the company in question.
> 
> You would sue on the back of the cheque, and since it would be for a liquidated sum the process would not take long at all.
> 
> ...


unfortunately there was no response to the initial letter my solicitor sent to him ,and the company was in his name and the owner presented me the cheque (e'g) joe smith of joe smith motors presented me the cheque which stated joe smith motors ltd on it,so would i basically be suing the company and not the individual?and im wondering if he has any valid argument/defence against me or  could there be any good reason for me to lose the case


----------



## bond-007 (21 Apr 2009)

You have to sue Joe Smith Ltd and not Joe Smith the person. If you sue the person he has an absolute defence in that he does not owe the money.


----------



## lawdable (21 Apr 2009)

Sue the limited company on the back of the cheque.

And consider using a different solicitor.


----------

