Small Claims Ruling

[ecmst12]

And in NO CASE would OP's wife EVER have to pay those costs.

 

[Willlyjo]

Reading is fundamental... perhaps you'd like to go back and read the context of the conversation before you embarrass yourself further. There is NEVER a reason why the WIFE would be ordered to pay the defendant's costs as a result of the HUSBAND suing the defendant over. You... just aren't that bright, are you?

I'm right regarding BOTH facts.

And if you insist that I am wrong... then find me something that says I am. I'll wait.

Who is saying anything about the wife having to pay defendant's costs as a result of the Husband suing the defendant over?!! You are the one who totally lacks reading comprehension-not me.

I simply stated that Defendant's in small claims court DO have to pay costs if they lose the case. Your statement that since it is small claims court, the defendant does not have any costs is ambiguous at best! In the case of the Op's wife, there are no costs.

In the way you versed your statement, it implies that all defendants in small claims court have no costs. This simply is not true as I pointed out.

 

[CourtClerk]

Who is saying anything about the wife having to pay defendant's costs as a result of the Husband suing the defendant over?!! You are the one who totally lacks reading comprehension-not me.

I simply stated that Defendant's in small claims court DO have to pay costs if they lose the case. Your statement that since it is small claims court, the defendant does not have any costs is ambiguous at best! In the case of the Op's wife, there are no costs.

In the way you versed your statement, it implies that all defendants in small claims court have no costs. This simply is not true as I pointed out.

Perhaps you should read the quoted part of what I was responding to... then you'll stop embarrassing yourself. You know, the one that was deleted, but is still there because I quoted it??? Hmmm?????

 

[Willlyjo]

Perhaps you should read the quoted part of what I was responding to... then you'll stop embarrassing yourself. You know, the one that was deleted, but is still there because I quoted it??? Hmmm?????

...I don't know what you are trying to say, Clerk, but it really don't make any sense. If there is anyone embarrassing themself in this thread, it is you (for the reasons I already pointed out). This is my last response to you in this thread because my time is more important than to respond to your nitpicking.

 

[CourtClerk]

...I don't know what you are trying to say, Clerk, but it really don't make any sense. If there is anyone embarrassing themself in this thread, it is you (for the reasons I already pointed out). This is my last response to you in this thread because my time is more important than to respond to your nitpicking.

"It really don't make sense..." please tell me you really don't speak this way, because "it really don't make sense" doesn't make sense...

Nevertheless, I see this whole conversation is above you. Go spend your time continuing to give bad advice.

 

[Double Eagle]

"But the OP doesn’t say that he is a co-owner! He isn’t claiming ownership at all. He writes only that his name is on the registration of a motor vehicle of which his company is the legal and beneficial owner"

Sorry for any confusion on ownership. Let me clarify. I own the company. On the registration of the vehicle it states: My Company or My Name as the registered owner. Hope this clears up the confusion. I spoke to small claims advisory today and they said to simply file a new claim under my name as an individual.

Thank you for all your responses, it was very informative. I have a new issue to bring to attention and will be posting a new question.