Moses Sulph Claims Court Failed to Deliver Justice

Moses Sulph

In March of last year, Moses Sulph entered into an agreement with an individual to order a number of items which would later be purchased upon delivery.  When the products arrived the customer was unable to pay her bill because she was reportedly strapped for cash.  Sulph, a trader, agreed to a payment plan with the young lady to cover the cost of the items over a specific period.  When she defaulted on the obligation he took action against her by filing a civil claim.  That matter commenced in September 2015 and has since been adjourned on several occasions.  While the defendant did not appear in court for the scheduled dates, Sulph proceeded to make his case against her by submitting supporting documents before the lower court detailing their transactions.  Notwithstanding that information from his ledger, the magistrate ruled in favor of the woman.  The decision comes as a surprise to Sulph who says that despite the outstanding sum owed to him, there has been a miscarriage of justice.

Moses Sulph, Plaintiff

“I brought in some products for a client of mine and they were supposed to pay me certain money and the arrival of those products, it didn’t due to certain financial restraints they told me they had with regards to graduation.  This is last year and different things came up; however, I gave that person lead time over and over to try to collect the money they had owed to me.  However, it got to a point where they seemed to have forgotten the amount they had and that was in dispute.  So I decided to take the matter to court because I have evidence of where I wrote down what people paid at a certain time because there is a payment plan I have.  So there’s a clear concise track of that, all the clients pay and this is what they pay.  Now, from last year September this is in the court and it’s been adjourned, been adjourned, been adjourned.  Finally, I think we had trial a month ago or two and the person did not even show up for trial.  I went to trial, I gave my statement and I tendered whatever evidence I had to tender, along with my statement of how this person owes me and how much they owe me.  Now I am very surprised at the ruling because, the outcome of the matter because number one: the person did not even show up to trial to contradict what I say or to rebut what I say or to say, “Your Honor I did not agree with what Mr. Sulph said.”  That person did not show up at all.  However, the previous magistrate who was handling the matter before it was turned over to this magistrate; however, there was no trial then.  The person made it clear then that they know they owe but they were in dispute of the amount they owe me.  Now yesterday I went back to get a verdict.  The magistrate told me that she went over all the evidence and she listened to my verbal statement and she has decided that she is going to award verdict in favor of the defendant.  Now a defendant did not show up in court any at all for trial to express their rebuttal of what I am claiming and still she is going to file in favor that defendant is…  To me it’s ludicrous and basically I think that the merit of the case wasn’t properly looked at with regards to the outcome.  If someone owes me an amount of money, and this is why the court is there, to give you justice and when justice is perverted through the court then people take things in their personal, their personal way of collecting their money.  …I won’t get that money back because she has decided now that she ruled in favor of the client who owes me the money, you know, and this is why people don’t go to court sometimes in these civil matters because the court, first of all, it drags on cases forever.  Secondly, sometimes the outcome you waste more money than you had actually been owed.”