Civil litigation - unbelievably unfair

[notreallyreallyme]

Have NC for this and not really expecting any help but just got to get it out.
Someone has a personal vendetta against DH. Last year he accused DH of taking valuable personal property from him (complete lies.)
DH suggested he go to the police. He didn't go to police but launched a civil case. The costs on both sides are huge.
The person bringing the case has a lot of money so costs etc not an issue. Completely different situation for us and the costs are crippling us.
He is also able to pay huge sums for expert witnesses (who just seem to be saying whatever he pays them to say ??)
I don't want try and settle because DH has done absolutely nothing wrong but the stress is unbearable. The financial impact of settling would be life changing anyway but if we keep going and then lose - we would literally lose everything.
I realise there's nothing anyone can say to help - but before this I really believed in the justice system. I now know how naive I was. Basically if you have a lot of money - you can make someone's life a misery.

Apparently in France at quite an early stage someone looks at the case to judge if there is any validity - to stop costs racking up when no case to answer. That doesn't happen here.

We've been told that even if we win we will never see our costs again because other party will just default and we don'thave the money to take out a case against them

Sorry so long - not even sure why I've written this. Just needed to write it down.

I found this interesting comment in an article about a different type of civil case. Very different background but it sums up my thoughts:

'However, many lawyers and doctors feel angry that, under the system of civil law, claimants do not need to do anything to establish the validity of their allegations before they reach court. To bring a civil case, a member of the public need only fill out a claim form and pay a processing fee of £500.

If the case is lost, the claimant will pay costs, meaning that the route is usually only pursued by the better off. In the case of Bibi Giles, it meant that her consultant could be charged with sexual offences, even though she had not reported the alleged assault to police, and though the GMC had decided not to take any action.'

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-health/6845447/Your-patient-will-sue-you-now....html

i dont get it. if someone said i had stolen from them and i hadnt , how could they sue me in civil court if no evidence thspat i have done the crime. i know the burden of proof is lower but if there is no proof, there is no proof. have to confess that my extensive knowledge of the law comes from Judge Judy on telly! the lawrences lost their civil action because of lack of proof

I don't know much about legal stuff. And I don't expect you can say too much on here. But it sounds as if it could be some sort of business fraud or misappropriation of funds your DH is being accused off. Sometimes unions can give free legal advice if you are in one. I think you are right not to settle out of court.

Do you have lawyers acting for you?

It sounds as if you don't necessarily understand the process which is what you pay lawyers for.

Jayfee that is what we are pinning our hopes on (that eventually a judge will decide that he DH didn't do it.)
But in the meantime the whole process is hugely expensive. There is a whole process you have to stick to as part of the pre action protocol which is very complicated and we need legal advice and help with - so unfortunately we can't just ignore it and turn up at the trial and say 'not guilty'

(If you don't adhere to the pre action protocol then this all works against you.)

Hi namechanged yes we do have a solicitor and barrister.
Unfortunately we do now understand the system - the issue is that I can't actually believe that it allowed to happen.

Vivienne yes I'm trying to avoid identification but you are on right lines.
Unfortunately DH not in union.

I feel for you OP - I was in almost exactly this position. If you haven't been involved in litigation, it is very difficult to understand just how tortuous and expensive the process is. There are so many expensive preliminary processes to go through before the evidence is ever looked at.

I toughed it out (luckily DH is on a good salary) and because of the delays the other side were continually introducing, the costs were a drip feed rather than a gush.

It was all worth it in the end, though.

Sounds like a partnership dispute or similar. Did your solicitor discuss ways of funding the claim? There are various options available which would mean you're not forced to decide how to conduct the defence on affordability of the costs.

Namechanged no he didn't really although we've been able to do some if it on fixed fee basis. But the claimant keeps changing goal posts so whatever we try and allow for changes.

Carolesinger thank you - you are right I had absolute no concept of how horrendous this process is. I guess in lots of cases both sides are very wealthy (or they are big business cases) so both sides just pay a legal team as much as needed to make it go away.
I'm glad yours was resolved.

I'm being a bit vague for obvious reasons but the serious family health problem is a very significant issue. Before that happened I was adamant that we would see it through to the very end regardless of the outcome - but that has changed things.

It's unbelievable that someone can do this without trying the usual forms of redress first . I didn't actually believe it was possible when I read your op, bloody hell
So sorry op . Stay strong.

Thank you Molly

Not really - this sounds awful :( Is there anyone else who could help-your MP?

So difficult to prove you haven't done something...

Wishing you strength

Thanks clickershed
Unfortunately it's difficult to get that support (from day someone like an MP) because the answer is 'you need to go through the process'. Which I don't blame them for - I would probably say the same. The problem is the process.

What I am determined to do though (whenever this nightmare is over one way or another) is to act as an advocate for people who find themselves in a similar position. I had absolutely no concept of the situation innocent people find themselves in before this happened.

What stage are you at with the case? There should be costs budgeting in most claims for under £10 million at a Case and Costs Management Conference after the exchange of pleadings (particulars of claim, defence and Reply). The court will require both parties to produce costs budgets and will make sure that the costs are not disproportionate. You can also apply for costs budgeting in cases that are not automatically caught by the regime. Has your solicitor advised you on that?

I am sure you have been advised of this, but if you get a judgment for your costs which the claimant does not pay, you can eventually make the other party bankrupt (or wind it up if it is a company). The insolvency practitioner will then investigate their assets and recover assets improperly hidden or paid away. Litigation is horrendous but there are some systems in place to protect you.

confused as to how the claim that he stole money is complicated? Sounds quite straight forward to me.

Can you not report this person to the police for harassment or something? i am sorry I know nothing on this but read what you write with incredulity.

fire Case Management is next thing to happen (we received date last week.)
As you say costs will be looked at then but one of the issues is that what the judge may regard is 'reasonable' still seems like an unbelievable amount of money. I think it's probably because we have been pushed into a world that neither of us knew anything about before.

Initially I tried to treat it in a detached way - as though I was dealing with a problem at work but the longer it has gone on the harder I've found it to do that.

Re costs if we win. I guess my fear is just that we won't have any money left to pursue them (or invoke any systems to make them pay up.)

pregnant it's the process that is very complicated. There is a lot of pre action steps that have to happen before it gets to trial

travail we did actually ask police for some advice (and they were great) but he has the right to launch a case. And of course in principle I believe in that right (or at least I did until I realised that you can get this far without any concrete evidence.)

If there really is no evidence, surely your solicitor should be advising you to go for a strike out or summary judgment. There must be some sort of evidence for it to have got this far. This seems very odd to me (I'm a disputes partner in a law firm so have seen all sorts).

eurochick it's difficult to reply fully without giving too many identifying details but basically the accountants reports show that that it is 'possible' that some money 'may' have gone missing (it is actually written in those terms. Despite lengthy disclosure there is zero evidence that links DH to any 'possible' missing money. Hope that makes sense.
I have asked a number of times about seeking to have it thrown out but the solicitor says that won't happen. I concerned about that advice though from you are saying.

Btw thank you so much to everyone who has replied. A few people know about this in RL but I tend to give off a 'everything will be ok' message to stop people worrying but I'm absolutely terrified about this. It's been really helpful just to write it down.

eurochick when you say :
'There must be some sort of evidence for it to have got this far. This seems very odd to me (I'm a disputes partner in a law firm so have seen all sorts).'

No one apart from the solicitors on both sides have looked at the case in any detail yet. Obviously they are telling their solicitors one thing and we are telling ours another. No one else has made a judgement on any evidence (or not) yet. All the claimant had to do was pay a fee to the court to launch the case. Are you saying there should have been another stage to assess the evidence by an impartial party (I'm grasping at straws)

No, no one else should have looked at the claim. But if I was presented with a case as weak as you say by the other side, I'd be suggesting going for strike out or summary judgment. Obviously I haven't seen the file though. I only have this thread to go by.