We are in discpute with a client on some extra works that have been carried out on site.
Our Contracts Manager who was running the project is no longer with the Company and we are no longer on speaking terms.
We were approached by Vinci Construction to carry out some works on one of their site. VCUK wanted to place and Order with us but they wanted to speed the process up so they requested one of their Subcontractors to do this. We subsequently carried out the works, but encountered numerous site problems meaning our works had many delays and extra costs.
These costs were forwarded to VCUK and the works were completed. VCUK are not willing to pay these extra costs.
We have a full documented eveidence of events on site which we feel VCUK are responsible for, however we have no witness statements to put forwards as the main witness is no longer with the company.
Therefore VCUK are claiming the following:
'The developments since mean that your case cannot possibly succeed not least because you are not in position to adduce witnesses of fact or expert evidence at the trial. In the absence of such evidence, whatever your perceptions as to the underlying merits, I cannot conceive how it is even open to the court to find in your favour.
In such circumstances, I repeat my previously expressed view that the continuation of this action will serve only to increase the costs which you will be liable for. It should be discontinued without further delay.'
Are VCUK correct in their estimation?