| Claim defeated in County Court |
|
MILS scheme saves client approximately £12,000. Case Details: In November 2006 Mr Reid entered into an agreement with the petrol suppliers, Bayford & Co Ltd. He signed a petrol retail agreement. Annexed to this agreement was a separate agreement signed by a salesman representing Bayford & Co agreeing to a specific price for the supply of fuel. Mr Reid had specifically requested this side agreement because he wanted certainty in terms of the price of his fuel.Despite this agreement Bayford presented Mr Reid with invoices which reflected a far greater sum for the supply for fuel. When Mr Reid challenged this the salesman denied that he had ever signed the agreement. When Mr Reid refused to pay Bayford & Co sued him in the County Court for the monies that they said were owed. MILS used one of their specialist Barristers to represent Mr Reid. The case put forward on behalf of Mr Reid was that Bayford & Co had, by their salesman, agreed to a specific sum for the supply of fuel and that they were therefore bound by the signed agreement. The trial went ahead and the Judge dismissed Bayford & Co’s claim and accepted the defence put forward by Mr Reid. Bayford & Co’s lawyers had presented a bill of costs at the trial in the region of £12,000. This was dismissed by the Judge.
|