small claims - who should I claim from??

peachpieplum · 2025-04-10T12:48:28+00:00

Hi, I would greatly appreciate any advice. Just about to complete small claims form for a loan which was made some time ago and recipient refuses to repay. The arrangement was really to loan them a sum they asked for. This happened to be paid into their business account (limited company, they are the only director). Does this mean I have got to make the claim against the company? I'm nervous, I'm unsure if there are pro's or cons either way - but I'm thinking advice will be it has to be a claim against the company? If I claim against the person, they have property and money from an investment, if it has to be the company, this accounts are always made to show a loss. I'd really appreciate any views - thanks.

Eileen101 · 10/04/2025 13:52

What does the contract say? As in, the parties to?

Cerialkiller · 10/04/2025 13:52

If you lent it to a person you should be claiming it from the person. Which account it ended up in shouldn't be relevent (did you even know it was a business account?). That way they can't just shut down then company.

itscomplicatedagain · 10/04/2025 13:55

I’d probably name them as an individual as presumably you lent it to them as a person rather than to the company. The details of which bank account you paid it in to are not that important. Also if you were to name the company they may hide behind the company and declare the company as an entity has no money.

Hoppinggreen · 10/04/2025 13:56

Is there paperwork to support this being a loan not a gift?
If so who's name is on that?

WeeOrcadian · 10/04/2025 13:56

Was the arrangement with the company or the individual?

Original poster

peachpieplum · 10/04/2025 13:58

I'm so glad I posted, thank you that makes sense about it not mattering which account it was paid into.

I did know it was a business account but that was the details they gave me.

OP posts:

WhyIsItAlwaysDownToMe · 10/04/2025 17:44

Do it to the person. If it is a limited liability company you may not get your money back if there is none, and if there are no assets in the company. They will only be personally liable to the value of issued shares.

if you claim against the person and you win, you can claim against their personal assets if bailiffs are needed.

Original poster

peachpieplum · 11/04/2025 10:53

This has turned out to be much less straightforward than I had thought.

Firstly, the amount is well above the threshold for small claims court. It's also over six years old.

I had been relying on the fact that we had recent written correspondence about it but it seems this is not enough. There was no written agreement.

I thought showing the money had been sent to their bank account together with various emails referencing it would be enough.

I have spoken to a solicitor who feels all they'd have to do is go to court and say the debt is unenforceable after this time.

Google says - Any written communication acknowledging the debt or a payment resets the six-year clock. The written communication I have denies the debt...

I am devastated. I thought I would post again on here to see if anyone has any differing thoughts on any other route I can try??

OP posts:

prh47bridge · 11/04/2025 13:12

A communication denying the debt doesn't help you. The only thing that resets the clock is a communication acknowledging the debt.

If you had a written agreement, the clock started running whenever that agreement said you could take court action.

If the six years is up, I'm afraid you cannot use the courts to get your money back.

Original poster

peachpieplum · 11/04/2025 19:20

OK, I am absolutely clutching at anything I can here.

I have been going through all emails again. I have one, dated just within the six years which says:

"The majority of that money actually went to paying......."

Would that be strong enough (along with the older emails / correspondence referencing it) to be considered an acknowledgement of the loan?

I'm sorry I know I'm really hammering on about this now, I would be so grateful for any viewpoints - thanks.

OP posts:

Hoppinggreen · 11/04/2025 19:35

peachpieplum · 11/04/2025 19:20

OK, I am absolutely clutching at anything I can here.

I have been going through all emails again. I have one, dated just within the six years which says:

"The majority of that money actually went to paying......."

Would that be strong enough (along with the older emails / correspondence referencing it) to be considered an acknowledgement of the loan?

I'm sorry I know I'm really hammering on about this now, I would be so grateful for any viewpoints - thanks.

Not a lawyer but that doesn't sound like it is acknowledging the money was a load to be repaid.
Is there anything that says it was?

Original poster

peachpieplum · 11/04/2025 19:45

Thank you for replying. Yes, there is an earlier email to HMRC stating this loan and it's source.

OP posts:

Hoppinggreen · 11/04/2025 19:47

peachpieplum · 11/04/2025 19:45

Thank you for replying. Yes, there is an earlier email to HMRC stating this loan and it's source.

Does that involve the recipient admitting its a loan?
Even if it does that fact that its been 6 years and no acknowledgement could be an issue

Original poster

peachpieplum · 11/04/2025 19:57

Thank you Hoppinggreen.
Yes, they clearly state it is a loan, the amount and who it is from.

From my reading of it, the six year clock restarts from the last time the loan was acknowledged.

So I am hoping that when I question the repayment in an email and they respond:

"The majority of that money actually went to paying......."

do you think that may be enough to go ahead to court with? I totally see how flimsy it is but together with the paperwork showing the funds transfer and their subsequent denial of receiving the money - I am hoping that all paints a picture?

OP posts:

Delphigirl · 11/04/2025 20:08

No it isn’t an acknowledgment of the debt.
You are statute-barred it appears.

Hoppinggreen · 11/04/2025 20:12

peachpieplum · 11/04/2025 19:57

Thank you Hoppinggreen.
Yes, they clearly state it is a loan, the amount and who it is from.

From my reading of it, the six year clock restarts from the last time the loan was acknowledged.

So I am hoping that when I question the repayment in an email and they respond:

"The majority of that money actually went to paying......."

do you think that may be enough to go ahead to court with? I totally see how flimsy it is but together with the paperwork showing the funds transfer and their subsequent denial of receiving the money - I am hoping that all paints a picture?

As I said I am not a lawyer and depending of the amount it may be worth you getting proper advice
Best of luck

PithyCritic · 12/04/2025 09:17

You need an acknowledgment of the debt (that they owe you the money) not that it was a loan. They can acknowledge the loan but still dispute they need to pay it back.

Velmy · 13/04/2025 02:52

peachpieplum · 11/04/2025 19:57

Thank you Hoppinggreen.
Yes, they clearly state it is a loan, the amount and who it is from.

From my reading of it, the six year clock restarts from the last time the loan was acknowledged.

So I am hoping that when I question the repayment in an email and they respond:

"The majority of that money actually went to paying......."

do you think that may be enough to go ahead to court with? I totally see how flimsy it is but together with the paperwork showing the funds transfer and their subsequent denial of receiving the money - I am hoping that all paints a picture?

Does this interaction specifically refer to the money as a loan though? Could it appear to refer to a gift? I'd get a second legal opinion.

Have they made any repayments?

A debt being statute barred means that a court won't enforce it with a CCJ. You can still send demands for payment or instruct debt collectors, however they wouldn't be able to do any more than ask.

LillyPJ · 13/04/2025 03:00

Without written agreement, I think you'll find it very difficult to get your money back. It can be hard enough even with a signed and dated contract. I guess you've tried asking, persuading, demanding, pestering etc. Some people just seem to have no conscience about paying up, but you might manage to wear them down in the end. Good luck.

prh47bridge · 13/04/2025 08:10

peachpieplum · 11/04/2025 19:57

Thank you Hoppinggreen.
Yes, they clearly state it is a loan, the amount and who it is from.

From my reading of it, the six year clock restarts from the last time the loan was acknowledged.

So I am hoping that when I question the repayment in an email and they respond:

"The majority of that money actually went to paying......."

do you think that may be enough to go ahead to court with? I totally see how flimsy it is but together with the paperwork showing the funds transfer and their subsequent denial of receiving the money - I am hoping that all paints a picture?

Simply saying how the money was spent isn't going to be enough. It doesn't matter if you can paint a picture showing it is a loan. If the debt is statute barred, which it sounds like it is, you cannot enforce it through the courts. If it is a significant sum of money you may want to consult a solicitor to get certainty but, on the basis of the information you have posted here, you will not be able to pursue this through the courts.