Defendant has permission to amend his statement of case.

[Amilcar]

I am suing a trader in the County Court. His defence was served some time ago but now he has a solicitor who has applied to the judge to allow him to amend his statement of case in consequence of Part 18 Replies. This was granted when the judge accepted the Defendant's draft directions at an allocation hearing. Does this mean that I won't be able to refer to details from his original defence from now on?

[Eve]

Have original details you were hoping to refer to now been taken out in the amended statement of case? If so, do you know why?

Amendments should not be allowed if they try to add or amend facts which are inconsistent with the original.

The judge should use their discretion to make sure neither side are unfairly prejudiced from an amendment.

Is the whole text from the original in the new one with the amendments struck out or added in a different colour or have you just been sent the amendment?

Were you also given chance to amend your statement of case in response?

Could you put things a bit more in context?

[Amilcar]

Thanks for that. I think your second para helps enormously. The situation is that the allocation hearing was on Friday so I haven't seen an amended statement of case from the trader, yet. I am simply concerned that he has exposed himself to Misreprsentation 1967 S2(1) in his initial response and his solicitor might avoid that for him with the Amended version (and I was worried that the Amended version would rule out my exploiting the weakness he has already shown. Although I am using SoGA S14 for the faulty goods/not conforming to contract aspects, the Misrep Act gives me a powerful means of showing how he negligently advertised/described the goods. Although misdescribed = faulty under SoGA, it is v. hard for him to weasel out of the misdescription under the '67 Act and S2(1) should allow me to claim a full refund and consequential damages all in one decision. Hope that puts it into context without bending your ears off !!! TNX Bryn

[Eve]

No worries, there is some more info on amending statements of case here...

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=NEtrlKo9CYg C&pg=PT267&lpg=PT267&dq=amend+his+statement+of +case&source=web&ots=MAuH_S-eov&sig=vXlL1rYyb1 w1IFyEDKliptZ-6xY&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&re snum=1&ct=result

[Amilcar]

TNX agn. That's great. At the allocation hearing, the Defendant's solicitor submitted his own Draft Directions which - apart from timetable details - were all approved by the judge inc the permission to amend statements (Part 18 Replies) to which I've just referred. At the time, I didn't pick it up or object. That doesn't mean that the Defendant has the freedom to chuck out his original story and enter a new one depriving me of the chance to exploit his first story, I hope. If so, I'll have to lodge a protest. We are both supposed to serve and file on Friday of next week. I have to amend my Particulars to include cuases/cite laws in more detail while the other side, I imagine, will be submitting a beefed up defence now that the Defendant has the benefit of legal representation...

[Amilcar]

I have received the Amended Defence. There are 9 pages of denials most of which I could argue and disprove with copy Emails. But the bombshell is that the Defendant's solicitor says I am suing the wrong party. I was suing Pierre Bloggs t/a Bloggs Motors when I should have been suing his registered company. The solicitor says my contract was not with the individual. I can see the sense in this, of course, and I'm kicking myself.- especially as they might well claim the costs of defence from me.However, this dispute has been going on for 12 months, the Defendant's original defence was filed by him, in his name, in mid-March, and only last month the case was allocated to the multi-track with all the directions specified by the Defendant's solicitor. It seems pretty late in the day to find this fault which. I realise it's my mistake but - had it been pointed out earlier - that would have caused me to drop the Claim and save on the costs. Are there any tactics I can adopt to minimise my exposure? I had thought of CRP 19.2.4 enabling me to substitute the company with the individual and revive my Claim that way....? Any help appctd! Bryn.

[Amilcar]

Sorry, that should be CPR not CRP.)