The timeline of truth, from pre-litigation to post-litigation. District Judge Brett gave the correct verdict

PRE-LITIGATION ( SUING FOR FEES ) - FACTS NOT OPINIONS

1.  In February 2001 we were employed by Mr & Mrs R... (we can't state their name, as in his internet posting Mr R....  hid behind the cloak of anonymity. Also, data protection laws that control UK business do not allow us to divulge his name. We believe he does this because if people googled his own name, they might find out what type of person he really is).  Mr & Mrs R... employed my firm to provide architectural services for a two storey side extension to their family home.

A recent update on this ex-client:    For some reason, he recently decided (on 18th June 2016) to leave a negative review on my google business page.   Therefore, you can now see his real name and what he looks like.

2.  A few days after my initial meeting with Mr & Mrs R.... I sent a quotation by post for my architectural services to Mr & Mrs R.... on 14th February 2001. Once the quotation was signed by both parties, it became a contract for me to provide architectural services to Mr & Mrs R.... the clients. 

3.  Mr & Mrs R...  signed the (quotation) contract on 21st February 2001 and Mrs R...  delivered it by hand to our offices.  I remember this distinctly, as I thought she might have been a new parent that lost her way, as her child in buggy might be starting Under Fives Nursery on the ground floor.

4.  We then undertook a measured survey of the existing property on 21st March 2001, which is the first stage in any building project.  It helps us determine the best way to provide a new extension on the property.  Furthermore the local authority will require elevations and plans of the existing building in order to determine the proposed extension once it enters the planning process.

5.  We then prepared the existing plans and sent them with a letter on 27th March 2001 to the clients, explaining that we will proceed with the proposals "as soon as possible".   We also sent them an invoice for the survey work.  They paid for the survey work within a week of receiving it.

6.  We had prepared the sketch proposals and a programme, and sent them with a letter to the clients on 3rd April 2001.

7.  On 5th April 2001, we received a telephone call from Mr R.... informing us that he required us to "hold fire on the schemes" because he had problems with his employment.  The sketch proposals had already been sent by post and we advised Mr R... of this at the time.  Mr R... did not seem surprised that he would be receiving the drawings, however following his telephone call, we had agreed to wait for Mr R... prior to invoicing him for the proposals done to date. It should also be noted that we have never received a written confirmation for postponing the project, as was required in the signed contract. i.e. if he felt he needed to instruct us to continue with the work, he would not have needed to phone us to stop the work and  District Judge Brett picked up on this.

8.  On 20th June 2001, we telephoned Mr R.... to see if his employment situation had improved. He stated that he was "in dire straits".  As a result of his response, we decided to wait a further six months prior to contacting him again (this was noted on the record of telephone call).

9.  On 6th March 2002, we sent a letter to Mr R... requesting an update on his situation, prior to archiving the project.  As you note, it had been almost a year since we were asked to suspend the project.  Mr & Mrs R... never responded to this letter.

10. On 18th June 2002, we telephoned Mr R... requesting an update. He stated that he was still looking for work. 

11. On 10th September 2003, we decided to invoice Mr & Mrs R... for only 2/3rds of the work that we had already undertaken.  We sent a letter explaining that we had postponed the invoice as a result of Mr R...’s circumstances.  This was two years and five months after we were asked to postpone the project.  The invoice was for only £ 924.22 + VAT (£1085.96), which included three sketch proposals shown over 24No. A3 sheets of drawings.  Mr & Mrs R... never responded to this letter.  We were only charging for 65% of the fees for that stage as we felt that was a reasonable amount to charge at the time.

12. On 21st October 2003, we telephoned Mr & Mrs R... requesting payment of the invoice.  Mrs R... tried to evade the telephone call claiming that they had paid. She was reminded that it was only for the survey work that they paid and that they were still liable for the payment of the invoice for the sketch proposals.  Mr R... took over the phone call and claimed that the sketch proposals were sent after he instructed us to stop.  We stated that this was not the case and he had no intention of paying.  He stated that if we did not like it we can take him to court.  We stated that we will undertake our normal procedures until the fee is paid. Mr R... stated "see you in court then".

LITIGATION PROCESS - Mr & Mrs R... are sued for unpaid fees 

13. On 24th October 2003, we sent Mr & Mrs R... a letter requesting payment and as a warning of debt recovery procedures.

14. On 7th November 2003, we received a letter dated 4th November, from Mr & Mrs R... basically claiming that the sketch proposals were sent after he instructed us to stop.  Mr R... also asked us to acknowledge that no payment is due.

15. On 13th November 2003, we sent Mr & Mrs R... a letter acknowledging receipt of their letter and requesting payment as final warning prior to litigation and suing for unpaid fees through the civil court process.  We also stated that we will be claiming interest on the debt as we are entitled to do so under the signed contract and that we require payment within 7 days prior to civil proceedings, without any further notice. We received no reply or payment of the fees.

16. On 1st December 2003, we issued a claim to Bromley County Court for unpaid fees against Mr & Mrs R...

COURT CASE - Mr & Mrs R... are sued for unpaid fees

17. On 19th January 2004, the court informed us that Mr & Mrs R... filed a defence to the claim.  Mr & Mrs R... basic counter argument was that the sketch proposals were done after Mr R... had telephoned our office to stop. Mr R... also made other allegations, that we lied, that we forced him to sign the contract and that we had a verbal agreement not to proceed with the proposals until he gave the go ahead. 

18. On 2nd February 2004, we sent the court our refutation of Mr & Mrs R’s... defence.  We principally made reference to the signed contract and that we did not force Mr & Mrs R…  to sign the contract.  It was clear that Mr & Mrs R... were prepared to purger themselves as as a way of getting out of paying their debt.

19. On 9th September 2004, we went to Bromley County Court under claim number:  BR306970.

20. The District Judge Brett took evidence from both sides. Mr R... presented his case in a very animated way, trying to intimidate and goad us. The judge stopped Mr R...’s antics and tried to appease, with what he thought would calm Mr R... down and prevent him from purgering himself in Court. In his efforts, the judge stated that he can see that Mr R... tries to be an honourable man and that he has a full grasp of the English language. 

21. The Judge tried to assure Mr R.... that with so many drawings produced, there was no way abp Arhcitects could have produced them in a matter of a few hours, as Mr R... was claiming that they were produced following his phone call.

22. District Judge Brett also assured Mr R... that he could have easily received the package of drawings a couple of days later with the postmark the day after they were posted.  The Judge confirmed that he had in previous cases visited the post office facilities to see how postage is handled and stated that he (the Judge) himself had witnessed the delays.  The Judge therefore concluded on this point that the work was done prior to the telephone call from Mr R... to stop the works.

23.  The Judge was also amazed that abp Architects waited "many many many many" months before we had even prepared an invoice for unpaid work. The Judge commended abp Architects on their compassion in this area.

24.  District Judge Brett again looked at the signed contract and advised Mr R... that he could see that the contract had referred to a meeting prior to the contract being prepared.  The Judge therefore concluded that Mr R... being an intelligent man would have carefully read the contract prior to signing and was therefore on his own when he signed the contract and therefore under no duress, before he returned it to abp Architects.

25.  The Judge also stated that it is clear in the contract that abp Architects would proceed with all stages as stated and would only stop when instructed to do so.  Therefore, Mr R.... should have been aware that this was the case and that when the measured survey stage was delivered to him, abp Architects would continue with the design stage.  This was not withstanding the fact that in the letter accompanying the measured survey drawings, abp Architects clearly stated that they would proceed with the design stage.  This letter had been sent at least two weeks prior to the telephone call from Mr R... instructing abp Architects to "put the schemes on hold".  Hence logic could be seen that Mr R... was aware that abp architects were in the process of producing the "schemes" by the mere fact that he had referred to them.

JUDGEMENT IN OUR FAVOUR -  Mr & Mrs R... had to pay our unpaid fees.

26.  District Judge Brett in his summing up concluded that Mr & Mrs R... were liable for the fees and costs.  Mr & Mrs R.... and abp Architects had a contract and abp Architects had honoured their side of providing architectural services and drawings and it was therefore only right that abp Architects had their fees paid. 

27. The Judge stated that there was no evidence of any verbal agreement that Mr & Mrs R.... were trying to purport. As such a written and signed contract stands in law.  ( After all what is the point of having a signed agreement, to then try and rely on a verbal  discussion, assuming one had happened in the first instance? )

28.  Mr R... asked how he could appeal Judge Brett's verdict.  District Judge Brett said you need to ask him.  Mr R... asked the judge if he can appeal.  District Judge Brett, gave an emphatic... "NO".

POST LITIGATION - Mr R... and his unjustified internet postings

29.  abp Architects discovered a few years after the court case that Mr R.... had anonymously posted untruths on the internet about our firm and the court case.

30. abp architects discovered through typing Mr R….’s name that he is a known internet troll and we have noted his activities with others and other companies out there on the internet.

31.  abp Architects contacted the police, as advised by a solicitor.  The local police were initially interested in the case and spent many hours taking evidence about the defamatory postings on the internet.  However,  it was the Crown Prosecution Service ( CPS) that decided not to take any further action, as they stated that it was a civil matter against a business not a criminal matter against a person.

32.  abp Architects also took further advice from other legal firms and they stated that there is a good case against Mr R... but we would spent a lot of money and time taking Mr & Mrs R... to court and then for him/them to plead poverty. 

33.  The above is the truth in response to the untruths, smears and allegations Mr R... is posting about abp Chartered Architects, Bernard Humphrey-Gaskin & Maria Humphrey-Gaskin.

34.  You can see what our clients really think of us :  
https://www.abpriba.co.uk/Testimonials-bernard-humphrey-gaskin-abp_architect.html