MIL Judgements

Captain_Krunch

Hi All,
I have been helping a mother and her son with a llawnroc parking charge. Their 'debt' was sold to MIL and they had received a several letters from the including an LBA at the beginning of the year. Fast forward to this week and the mother has received a judgement. She did not receive a claim form.
Her son had moved last year and looking at the dates we think his claim will have arrived after the 3 month mail forwarding had expired. The mother has contacted the present tenant and theire is mail at the old address which will be collected this week. Im guessing there will be a claim and a judgement waiting.

We are looking into a set aside. I have the paperwork for the N244. Having been on the forums I've been well aware of MIL though this is the firt time I've dealt with them.
I've not been on here or pepipoo much for nearly a year due to personal reasons but I have lay repped on 4 cases though I feel quite rusty at the moment. I've been reading back through MIL info. I know they promised the DVLA that they wouldnt buy parking cases and pursue them through the courts and I have that email.
My questions are:
1. What information are they looking for in question 10 on the N244. Is that the defence?

2. I'm still catching up with reading on MIL and defences. Is it still the same procedure?

Thanks in advance. We intend to pursue through to costs/DPA breach. The sons parking charge was also issued while he still had time left on his ticket. Reason for issue Ticket expired...Oops

bargepole

Captain_Krunch wrote: »

My questions are:
1. What information are they looking for in question 10 on the N244. Is that the defence?

2. I'm still catching up with reading on MIL and defences. Is it still the same procedure?

Thanks in advance. We intend to pursue through to costs/DPA breach. The sons parking charge was also issued while he still had time left on his ticket. Reason for issue Ticket expired...Oops

Answers as follows:

1. Yes, this is where you provide a brief summary of your Defence. You can either type it into the box provided, or put "see attached document", and set it out more fully in a separate document, with numbered paragraphs.

2. Essentially, the actual circumstances in which the ticket was issued by the original PPC are largely irrelevant. The main line of defence is that there was never any valid assignment of debt to MIL in accordance with Section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925, and therefore they have no locus to pursue via litigation. It falls under the doctrine of champerty and maintenance.

I don't think you're likely to succeed with a DPA breach claim, you would have to demonstrate damage and distress caused by the breach, and in the circumstances you describe, where you were unaware of the claim until recently, that seems a bit of a stretch. Costs would be the standard ones for small claims.

The_Deep

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences.

Parking Eye, Smart and a smaller company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (who take hundreds of these cases to court, and nearly always lose), who have also been reported to the regulatory authority.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas

Captain_Krunch

Hi to all,
Thanks for the previous replies. The deadline is on friday to submit the N244 and £255 payment. I am meeting my friend on Tuesday so she can sign the N244. I will post up the statement of defence shortly but I have some questions!!!!

1. Do I include with the N244 at this stage any other documents eg the D DUnsford email from Feb 2017 re: date Protection and Kadoe Breach or is this for later? Is it just a paragraphed defence with nothing else at this stage?

2. foi@dvla.gsi.gov.uk. Is this the correct address to complain to the DVLA?

3. How do I go about wording the retrieval of the £255 from the court or Mil?

4. Should I contact Mil referencing Champerty and Maintance amd asking for the signed and dated Deed of Assignment between them and Llawnroc Parking and their permission from the DVLA that has allowed them to pursue my friend?

ampersand

op - please ensure that 'I will post up the statement of defence shortly',happens in time for critique here before that N244 signature on Tuesday.

Please pay particular attention to grammar/spelling/auto-correct and predictive text mess.

Captain_Krunch

Yes, later this evening. Cheers.

Captain_Krunch

Morning. I've found a defence and adjusted it accordingly. Can someone confirm Im on the right track. I have these questions too that I'm not sure about.

1. Do I include with the N244 at this stage any other documents eg the D DUnsford email from Feb 2017 re: date Protection and Kadoe Breach or is this for later? Is it just a paragraphed defence with nothing else at this stage?

2. foi@dvla.gsi.gov.uk. Is this the correct address to complain to the DVLA?

3. How do I go about wording the retrieval of the £255 from the court or Mil?

4. Should I contact Mil referencing Champerty and Maintance amd asking for the signed and dated Deed of Assignment between them and Llawnroc Parking and their permission from the DVLA that has allowed them to pursue my friend?


Statement of Defence

1. The Defendant denies any liability whatsoever to the Claimant for all of the following reasons, any one of which is fatal to the Claimant’s case :
I. The Claimant has not acquired the alleged debt as a valid Assignment from the Operator (Llawnroc Ltd) and has no legal capacity to bring the claim
II. The Defendant has never owed any debt to the Operator (Llawnroc Ltd) to be assigned
III. The Operator (Llawnroc Ltd) had no capacity to offer a contract with the motorist
IV. The signage did not offer a contract with the motorist
V. No consideration passed from either the Operator (Llawnroc Ltd) ) or the motorist
VI. The Operator (Llawnroc Ltd) ) did not identify the driver
VII. The Claimant has disclosed no cause of action to give rise to any debt
IX. Even if a debt had existed, it would be due to theLand owner not the operator, nor the Claimant


1, The Claimant has provided no evidence that there was a valid assignment of debt, in the form of a Deed of Assignment signed by the original creditor, pursuant to s136 of the Law of Property Act 1925. Absent such evidence, the Claimant has no locus in this matter and falls within the ambit of nmgfwChamperty and Maintenance.

2, Even if there was a valid Deed of Assignment, the Claimant has no interest in, or privity to, any purported original contract, and it is submitted that such an assignment would be champertous. The sole purpose is to enable the Claimant to instigate legal proceedings, which is a chose in action, and on that basis the Claim should be struck out by the Court, as was the case in MIL Collections v Stephen Bowker, Case No B1QZ7N32, Oldham CC 15/01/2016


4. The Operator has failed to inform the Defendant of the assignment of the alleged debt to the Claimant. The Operator did not therefore assign THE debt to the Claimant as stated in the Particulars of Claim. Furthermore, the partial assignment fails to meet the conditions required of a valid Legal Assignment in accordance with The Law of Property Act 1925 Section 136(1). As an Equitable Assignment the Claimant may not bring an action unless the Operator is included as a party.

5. The Claimant has not explained what authority the Operator had to acquire a chose in action to assign to the Claimant.
ParkingEye v Sharma (3QT62646 Brentford County Court) examined the contract and dismissed the claim for the reason that the Claimant had no ownership of, or proprietary interest in, the land ; it followed that the Claimant, acting as an agent, had no locus standi to bring court proceedings in its own name. ParkingEye v Gardam (3QT60598) similarly examined the contract and found the Sharma judgment persuasive. The Defendant also refers the court to ParkingEye v Somerfield (2012) (EWCA Civ 1338 case A3/2011/0909) that examined ParkingEye contracts. This stated that any debt was due to Somerfield and that ParkingEye did not have the authority to issue proceedings. It follows therefore that if a debt exists, it is down the claimant prove its authority.


6. The Particulars of Claim state that the alleged debt was assigned to the Claimant with the knowledge of Parking Awareness Services. The Claimant is put to proof that the Operator’s contract provided for parking charges to be so assigned.

7. The Claimant is also put to proof that the Operator had sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf as required in the British Parking Association’s Legislation Guidance to Operators.

8. The Operator had no standing to offer a contract; there was no meeting of minds nor any consideration passed. None of the elements that are fundamental to a contract were present and therefore no contract could possibly have existed. The Defendant was, at the most, granted a licence to park. Whatever the conduct was that the Claimant alleges, a breach of a licence would be trespass, not a breach of contract. It could only be pursued by the land-owner.

9. Whether there was a contract or a licence, only the Land-owner has standing to bring a claim, not the Claimant nor the operator.

10. The Defendant has no idea what terms and conditions were stated on the signs but disputes the Claimant’s statement that such an amount would have constituted an offer and submits that it in fact threatened punitive sanctions to discourage the undisclosed conduct. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Operator’s intention was not to offer a genuine contract to park at that price and the main purpose was to deter the undisclosed conduct by attempting to enforce a penalty. The Defendant refers the court to 3YK50188 : Civil Enforcement Ltd v McCafferty (Luton County Court appeal) that was decided by Mr Recorder Gibson QC in almost identical words (21 February 2014).

11. The defendant neither confirms or denies being the registered driver of the alleged parking incident. It is therefore for the claimant to provide proof that this is the case and that keeper/driver liability has been proven in accordance with schedule 4 of the protection of freedom act 2012.

I believe the facts stated in this defence are true.

Fruitcake

1, The Claimant has provided no evidence that there was a valid assignment of debt, in the form of a Deed of Assignment signed by the original creditor, pursuant to s136 of the Law of Property Act 1925. Absent such evidence, the Claimant has no locus in this matter and falls within the ambit of nmgfwChamperty and Maintenance.

Is that a typo?

I had to look up the meaning of ambit. Good word.

Your headings mix Arabic and Roman numerals.

There is no paragraph 3.

5. The Claimant has not explained what authority the Operator had to acquire a chose in action to assign to the Claimant.
... It follows therefore that if a debt exists, it is down the claimant prove its authority.

Missing words.

Ed2000

complain to DVLA:

Attention Mr Robert Toft

Data Sharing Strategy and Compliance Team

dvladatarequests@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

Data Sharing Strategy and Compliance Team
D16
DVLA
Longview Road
Swansea
SA99 1DY

Dear Sir,

please explain how my personal data was given to MIL Collections Ltd and what you are going to do about it. Please inform the ICO of this breach.

Please treat this email as a formal complaint and contact the Accredited Trade Association.

Then complain to the ICO
casework@ico.org.uk

Coupon-mad

Statement of Defence heading should be just:

DEFENCE

Captain_Krunch

Hi,
Thanks fruitcake for reading over the defence. I'll amend the errors. Ambits a great word.I wanted to clearly state Champerty and Maintenance in the paragraph and I'd remembered it being used in legalese before.
Thanks Ed2000 for the dvla info and SRM for correct title.