Hi all . . .
- Thread Starter symbiodek
- Start date
- Status
cbg
Super Moderator
You can, but it's primarily a US board and I don't know of any regulars who know anything about UK law. It's not impossible that someone would know the answer to your question and you can certainly try, but there's no guarantee you'll get an answer.
I'll ask just incase . . you never know!
Im involved in a small claims (county court) civil case with my ex, who has borrowed (and decided to keep - claiming i gave it to her as a gift) my £20k ($40k) car.
She has no proof that ownership was signed over to her, and cannot prove it was given as a gift.
She has fabricated a letter (typed only, without my name on it and having no signatures) and is purporting that it is evidence of it having been given as a gift.
This I wasn't too concerned about, but now she has got (six) of her 'close friends' to give written statements, stating that the letter is authentic, and now I am concerned - as these constitute 'Hearsay Evidence' . . . .
My question to all out there is:
Has anyone come across a case of this nature, and if so could you point me in its direction ?
Have any american cases like this been won, and if so how ? - could you refer me to them . . .
(Worried - symbio-dek)
Im involved in a small claims (county court) civil case with my ex, who has borrowed (and decided to keep - claiming i gave it to her as a gift) my £20k ($40k) car.
She has no proof that ownership was signed over to her, and cannot prove it was given as a gift.
She has fabricated a letter (typed only, without my name on it and having no signatures) and is purporting that it is evidence of it having been given as a gift.
This I wasn't too concerned about, but now she has got (six) of her 'close friends' to give written statements, stating that the letter is authentic, and now I am concerned - as these constitute 'Hearsay Evidence' . . . .
My question to all out there is:
Has anyone come across a case of this nature, and if so could you point me in its direction ?
Have any american cases like this been won, and if so how ? - could you refer me to them . . .
(Worried - symbio-dek)
What hearsay evidence are you concerned about? Hearsay, if admissible at all, is given less weight than first-hand testimony. I would note, however, that what her friends say may not be hearsay: for instance, "I saw him type it out, and this is the letter right here, my lord."
If by "case of this nature" you mean "he said, she said, and she fabricated evidence to support her position and got her friends to perjure themselves", there are a zillion. They all turn on credibility of witnesses and corroborative evidence. Most of the ones I'm aware of ended badly for the fabricater.
If by "case of this nature" you mean "he said, she said, and she fabricated evidence to support her position and got her friends to perjure themselves", there are a zillion. They all turn on credibility of witnesses and corroborative evidence. Most of the ones I'm aware of ended badly for the fabricater.
First of all, thank you so much for the reply 
- it's Very much appreciated.
On checking the witness statements, it clearly states on the 'notice of service' letter accompanying them (from the defendant) that she wishes to submit them as hearsay evidence, (but that all the witnesses would be willing to attend court if required - where does this leave the witness statements' status ?)
None of the statements say anything like 'i saw him write the letter', they are all more along the lines of ' he contacted us, asked us to meet with him, and showed us a letter which stated that he wanted to give the car as a gift . . . and having now been shown the letter by the defendant, i can confirm this is it' . . .
Do these hold any weight - or would they have to be orally represented at court to be taken seriously?
Can i use the fact that 'all' of her witness statements are from her good friends who she has known for a long time, to cast doubt on them ?
Finally, (if i wanted to - not sure whether to!) i could contact her previous employer (blue chip pharmaceutical company) and prove to them (and testify to) that she conned them out of six months (fully paid) sick pay prior to resigning. I can prove this, in that she went on training courses (hairdressing refresher courses) and purchased equipment for (provable) her new career, whilst on the sick, and months prior to her resignation.
If i did this, could i use this to attack her character at trial, to show that she is the type of person who is willing to obtain financial gain via deception ?
Symbio-dek
- it's Very much appreciated.On checking the witness statements, it clearly states on the 'notice of service' letter accompanying them (from the defendant) that she wishes to submit them as hearsay evidence, (but that all the witnesses would be willing to attend court if required - where does this leave the witness statements' status ?)
None of the statements say anything like 'i saw him write the letter', they are all more along the lines of ' he contacted us, asked us to meet with him, and showed us a letter which stated that he wanted to give the car as a gift . . . and having now been shown the letter by the defendant, i can confirm this is it' . . .
Do these hold any weight - or would they have to be orally represented at court to be taken seriously?
Can i use the fact that 'all' of her witness statements are from her good friends who she has known for a long time, to cast doubt on them ?
Finally, (if i wanted to - not sure whether to!) i could contact her previous employer (blue chip pharmaceutical company) and prove to them (and testify to) that she conned them out of six months (fully paid) sick pay prior to resigning. I can prove this, in that she went on training courses (hairdressing refresher courses) and purchased equipment for (provable) her new career, whilst on the sick, and months prior to her resignation.
If i did this, could i use this to attack her character at trial, to show that she is the type of person who is willing to obtain financial gain via deception ?
Symbio-dek
I know about my ex having claimed 6 months of sick pay from her previous employer, and that i could prove this to be the case.
If i contacted them, so as to teach her the value of not taking other peoples property and to then be able to use 'character' against her in my case ?
Character, as far as i can see, is the only way around her false testimony. And especially that of her phoney witnesses' 'hearsay' eveidence.
I cant afford to risk her 'hearsay' evidence affording her £20k of my property !
Would my having done this, so as ensure i get my property back reflect badly on me with the court, or would the court not frown on it as i had done the right thing . . . ??
Anyone any experience with this who could advise ?
symbio-dek
If i contacted them, so as to teach her the value of not taking other peoples property and to then be able to use 'character' against her in my case ?
Character, as far as i can see, is the only way around her false testimony. And especially that of her phoney witnesses' 'hearsay' eveidence.
I cant afford to risk her 'hearsay' evidence affording her £20k of my property !
Would my having done this, so as ensure i get my property back reflect badly on me with the court, or would the court not frown on it as i had done the right thing . . . ??
Anyone any experience with this who could advise ?
symbio-dek
Evidence of her prior misdeed pretty much irrelevant and highly prejudicial. It would be excluded outright by the judge or given very little weight, and odds are you'd look like a dick for trying to introduce it. It might make a decent bargaining chip in your negotiations with your ex for the return of your car.
It's still not clear why you think the testimony of her friends is "hearsay". Nor why you would be particularly concerned about it. She has an unsigned, typewritten letter and the word (if it's even allowed) of a pack of brazen strumpets. The way around her false testimony is your true and more credible testimony. Why would you have given her a L20,000 car? Do you have any friends who know the nature of your relationship? Also, look into the rules of evidence and procedure in your county court - in many small claims courts, parties have a very limited ability to call witnesses or produce that sort of evidence.
It's still not clear why you think the testimony of her friends is "hearsay". Nor why you would be particularly concerned about it. She has an unsigned, typewritten letter and the word (if it's even allowed) of a pack of brazen strumpets. The way around her false testimony is your true and more credible testimony. Why would you have given her a L20,000 car? Do you have any friends who know the nature of your relationship? Also, look into the rules of evidence and procedure in your county court - in many small claims courts, parties have a very limited ability to call witnesses or produce that sort of evidence.
If they don't give oral evidence at the trial, I can render the statements hearsay . . .
------------------------------------------------------------
CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES 1995 – Part 32 (5)
32.5 Use at trial of witness statements which have been served
(5) If a party who has served a witness statement does not –
(a) call the witness to give evidence at trial; or
(b) put the witness statement in as hearsay evidence, any other party may put the witness statement in as hearsay evidence.
------------------------------------------------------------
If they are hearsay, are they subject to the 'notice to admit or produce documents' (proof of authenticity) that i served her with ?
------------------------------------------------------------
32.19 Notice to admit or produce documents
(1) A party shall be deemed to admit the authenticity of a document disclosed to him under Part 31 (disclosure and inspection of documents) unless he serves notice that he wishes the document to be proved at trial.
(2) A notice to prove a document must be served –
(a) by the latest date for serving witness statements; or
(b) within 7 days of disclosure of the document, whichever is later.
------------------------------------------------------------
Plus, when she issued me with copies of the 6 witness testimonies, they came with a document headed 'Notice to rely on hearsay evidence'
Why she has issued them as hearsay, if it counts for less, is beyond me . . . is there a reason for her to have done this ?
Or is she just dumb ?
The typed, unsigned letter and the six witness statements are the crux of her case, has anyone ever known anyone win, or even come close, with so few, weak lies ? If so, who and how ?
I'm also claiming about £6k in costs (initial solicitors, court fees, and interest over the period of the claim) is there any way she could get out of this ?
If she did i would be out of pocket for thoudsands . . .
symbio-dek
------------------------------------------------------------
CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES 1995 – Part 32 (5)
32.5 Use at trial of witness statements which have been served
(5) If a party who has served a witness statement does not –
(a) call the witness to give evidence at trial; or
(b) put the witness statement in as hearsay evidence, any other party may put the witness statement in as hearsay evidence.
------------------------------------------------------------
If they are hearsay, are they subject to the 'notice to admit or produce documents' (proof of authenticity) that i served her with ?
------------------------------------------------------------
32.19 Notice to admit or produce documents
(1) A party shall be deemed to admit the authenticity of a document disclosed to him under Part 31 (disclosure and inspection of documents) unless he serves notice that he wishes the document to be proved at trial.
(2) A notice to prove a document must be served –
(a) by the latest date for serving witness statements; or
(b) within 7 days of disclosure of the document, whichever is later.
------------------------------------------------------------
Plus, when she issued me with copies of the 6 witness testimonies, they came with a document headed 'Notice to rely on hearsay evidence'
Why she has issued them as hearsay, if it counts for less, is beyond me . . . is there a reason for her to have done this ?
Or is she just dumb ?
The typed, unsigned letter and the six witness statements are the crux of her case, has anyone ever known anyone win, or even come close, with so few, weak lies ? If so, who and how ?
I'm also claiming about £6k in costs (initial solicitors, court fees, and interest over the period of the claim) is there any way she could get out of this ?
If she did i would be out of pocket for thoudsands . . .
symbio-dek
She probably has to include them as written statements rather than viva voce testimony because of your local small claims rules limit live testimony. Regarding costs, many small claims courts have strict policies against granting costs, and you might not recover anywhere near what you're claiming. (6K in costs on a 20K claim?) As for your other questions, you are getting into the details of your jurisdiction's civil procedure and rules of evidence, and you'd be best served consulting a local lawyer.
You'd be hard pressed to find a case where somebody won with "lies" - if they were found to be lies, the party relying on them wouldn't have won. But as for its weakness - that all depends on whether yours is stronger. It's hard to predict, funny things happen in court.
You'd be hard pressed to find a case where somebody won with "lies" - if they were found to be lies, the party relying on them wouldn't have won.
But as for its weakness - that all depends on whether yours is stronger. It's hard to predict, funny things happen in court.- Status
Ask a Question
Share this page
