CORRUPTION OR WHAT AT SHERIFF COURTS KILMARNOCK AND AYR?
PART
1
0n
26-10-2022, I file a lawsuit at Ayr Sheriff Court against a company
for an outstanding invoice.
The
court normally serves papers through registered mail or, would the
mail option fail, directly through a Sheriff.
On
03-11-2022 the defendant contacts me and confirms that he received
the claim form from the court.
On
02-12-2022 Ayr Sheriff Court writes to me that they could not serve
the claim on the defendant.
Quote:
'I refer to
the above Simple Procedure claim and write to advise you that we have
been unable to formally serve the Claim Form on the respondent using
recorded delivery post.'
In
short, the letter continues to mention that for me to have the
summons served by a Sheriff would potentially cost me hundreds of
pounds.
I
immediately demand an explanation from the court on the matter and
they respond by email:
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Good
Afternoon,
We
have attempted service with royal mail and they have all come back as
not served. If you can get the other side to send us an email to
confirm that they have received the paperwork then we can update the
case and won't require to instruct sheriff officers. I can see your
email on the thread of this email but it is not clear who this is
from.
Thank
you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed,
I have forwarded them the email with the confirmation, as well as the
defendant's contact details, so that they could affirm. Yet the above
email is the only explanation I have received from Ayr Sheriff Court
on this matter.
As
the respondent has moved his office from Mauchline (Ayr) to
Kilmarnock, the case has been moved to Kilmarnock Sheriff Court.
PART 2
As
the respondent has moved his office from Mauchline (Ayr) to
Kilmarnock, the case has been moved to Kilmarnock Sheriff Court.
The
court date for the above-mentioned case has in the meantime been set
to 19-05-2023 at 10:00 am.
On
19-05-2023 I arrive at Kilmarnock Sheriff Court and check-in at the
reception. When the courtroom opens I enter with a group of others.
I
await my case to be called. I notice that the respondent is not
present. I sit and listen to a sea of rent arrear cases but, in the
end, my case
is not called.
A
court assistant now explains that she saw the case listed, but that
now it isn't there.
The
Judge also indicated to recall something about the listing, but no
more.
I
have demanded a full explanation from Kilmarnock Sheriff Court on
this matter and on 23-05-2023, I receive the following response:
'I
have received a response from our IT department this morning. They
have received a response from the external IT developers confirming
that unfortunately, the system does not leave a data footprint
indicating how or who processed the disposal of Friday’s
hearing. I
have advised court staff of this and going forward we will make
additional checks to avoid this happening again.'
Preceding
a telephone conference hearing of this case on 09-06-2023, Sheriff S.
Mundell briefly commented: Quote: "Due to an error of a court
employee, the listing had been removed from the court's list."
Note:
If a defendant does not appear, the Plaintiff can ask for a default
judgment against the defendant.
a) the
court claims that the claim papers could not be served, as they tried
several times.
b) the
claim papers were actually served before the court claimed that they
were not.
c) the
defendant did not appear in court on the appointed date (according to
Sheriff S. Mundell) under the excuse that the summons landed in his
spam box.
d) coincidentally,
the day the defendant did not appear in court, the
listing/appointment (according to Kilmarnock Sheriff Court)
mysteriously vanished from the court's roll.
e) The
court's IT department claims that what happened could not be traced,
but preceding the start of the telephone conference of 09-06-2023,
Sheriff S. Mundell commented that the listing was erroneously removed
by a court employee.
KILMARNOCK
SHERIFF COURT'S RESPONSE
What happened on the 19 May 2023
You attended at the building for your case calling on the 19 May 2023
and were requested to go to court room 5. Your case did not
automatically call as the clerk of court did not have a court sheet for
your case. The clerk of court and sheriff spoke with you at that time.
The sheriff recalled having seen the case name when preparing for the
court some time before the court date. The sheriff asked the clerk of
court to make enquires. It was noted at that time that there was no
representative from the respondents firm. The clerk of court left the
court room to go into the office to investigate why they had not been
given a court sheet. When the clerk of court returned to the court room
you had left and on making enquires at reception you seemed to have
left the building as there was no response when your name was called.
The sheriff was advised that you had left the building and therefore
could not call the case to hear what the current position was with your
case. A letter was emailed to you to request that you lodge an
application to restart the case. You emailed the court later that day
and were in correspondence with the clerk of court.
What should have happened on the 19 May 2023
Your case should have called having been assigned by the court to call
on the 1st March 2023. Both parties should have been in attendance for
the case management discussion to take place before the sheriff. The
sheriff would have pronounced a further order of court.
What happened on the 19 May 2023
You attended at the building for your case calling on the 19 May 2023
and were requested to go to court room 5. Your case did not
automatically call as the clerk of court did not have a court sheet for
your case. The clerk of court and sheriff spoke with you at that time.
The sheriff recalled having seen the case name when preparing for the
court some time before the court date. The sheriff asked the clerk of
court to make enquires. It was noted at that time that there was no
representative from the respondents firm. The clerk of court left the
court room to go into the office to investigate why they had not been
given a court sheet. When the clerk of court returned to the court room
you had left and on making enquires at reception you seemed to have
left the building as there was no response when your name was called.
The sheriff was advised that you had left the building and therefore
could not call the case to hear what the current position was with your
case. A letter was emailed to you to request that you lodge an
application to restart the case. You emailed the court later that day
and were in correspondence with the clerk of court.
What should have happened on the 19 May 2023
Your case should have called having been assigned by the court to call
on the 1st March 2023. Both parties should have been in attendance for
the case management discussion to take place before the sheriff. The
sheriff would have pronounced a further order of court.
What happened on the
What happened on the 23 May 2023
The clerk of court received an email from you dated 22 May 2023 timed
22:49 explaining that the date and time of the newly agreed hearing for
the 26 May 2023 was no longer suitable to you. The clerk of court
replied to you on the 23 May 2023 at 12:50pm confirming to you that our
IT department were unable to assist with our enquire and could not
advise which staff member had clicked on the disposal hearing tab on
our system for your case for the hearing date of 19 May 2023. We also
confirmed, that the respondent had confirmed that our email of 1 March
2023 had been received but had unfortunately gone into the
“spam” email folder and that is why
www.scotcourtstribunals.gov.uk
the respondents were not in attendance on the 19 May 2023
Conclusion
In conclusion, I uphold your complaint in part in respect of point one
above in that a staff member wrongly selected your case for disposal in
advance of the court hearing meaning your case did not call. The court was unable to call your case later that morning as you had left the building
and did not inform the clerk that you were leaving. I am not able to
uphold your complaint in respect of point two as the court cannot offer
to you a formal explanation has to why the respondents failed to attend
on the 19 May 2023 as this is something out with our control. We did
include an explanation for their failure to attendance on the 19 May
2023 in our email to you of 23 May 2023, having been given this
information from the respondents.
Note: When
the court shouts 'RISE' and everyone stands up and all leave the court,
the court is clearly closed. And, like everyone else, I left the
building. Liars always leave traces to their lies. The respondent
claims the email landed in his spam box, while he received numerous
emails in runup to the case. But just this one landed in the spam box,
right. And then the case is coincidentally by accident removed by
a court employee.
Too coincidental to be a coincident. This minds me of a group of pimps doing all they can to favour each other.
They are simply making it up!