I have recently found myself the defendant in a civil law case brought against me by a local building company who had acted in breach of their contractual obligations to me.

 I refused to buckle to the aggressive approach used by the building company’s legal team as I have independent proof that the claimant had breached the contract:

The contract was negotiated between the builder and the Loss Adjuster (insurance company). 
I did not see the contract until ten days after the L A had agreed it and five days after work had started.
Once the contract was finally presented, my signature was obtained via bullying tactics and I signed under duress. 

The builder fitted a cheaper kitchen that the £5831 one agreed to in the contract
Leaving almost £7,000 of the £21,000 contract work unfinished
Failing to earth the electrical wiring, even though the builder claimed £1,000 for electrical works
Failing to meet the finish date, agreed to in writing.

I had refused to pay the builders due to the breaches of their contractual obligations, for which I was sued. 

 At an interim hearing the claimant asked for partial costs (£2,500 approx.) which the judge agreed to.

 I explained to the Judge that I did not have that sort of money but was willing to pay in instalments.  The judge, however, would not accept this, ruling that if the money was not paid within  days the counterclaim would be struck out and the claim awarded to the claimant.

 I suffer from a debilitating disability which is degenerative and seriously hinders my financial independence.  It was due to this which prevented me making the initial £2,500  payment and the judge offered no compassion, refusing my suggestion of partial payments and striking out my counterclaim.

 Although I had a solid counterclaim I am now faced with a bill for the claimants costs estimated at £50,000.

 To me, this seems ludicrous.  If the judge believed I was unable to pay £2,500 how was it justified that he escalated the monies owed to £50k with a single ruling, causing me both an unmanageable financial burden whilst depriving me of any justice.  How can wealth be a justice prerequisite in England and Wales?

 Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that everybody has the Right to a Fair Trial.  How, then, in England and Wales can the judiciary prevent a trial from occurring by restricting access to the courts to only the wealthy?

 The system based on justice for the rich must change, and I hope that my case can begin this.  Please help me prevent eviction from my home and help stop the poorest people in the country being refused justice by the richest.