QDR Smart Parking court claims

ChirpyChicken

It transpires that a lot of smart parking court claims from QDR are actually NE Parking Ltd cases which smart brought a while back.(think they brought NE parking a few years back)

@Coupon-mad

@kryten3000

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6654906/qdr-smart-parking-court-claims

Interesting. How did you find that out?

Surely they (Smart) are not the creditor?

ChirpyChicken

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81880554#Comment_81880554

A couple of reply to defences for some cases

I guess it would depend on the nature of smarts purchase , probably included all the rights to any debts etc

Coupon-mad

Still very debatable that they are the creditor (or the offeror of the contract) per POFA though.

ChirpyChicken

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81880705#Comment_81880705

What are your thoughts @troublemaker22

Johnersh

NE Parking Ltd continues to trade. This is not a case where a company has been bought and subsumed into a new one. It follows that NE Parking Ltd may or may not be beneficially owned by Smart Parking Ltd, but they remain a separate entity (person).

That means unless the contract debt has been sold to Smart and there is a paper trail and notice of that (which itself is a whole new can of worms), the correct party bringing the claim must still be NE Parking Ltd, because there never was any contractual agreement with Smart by the driver (assuming all signs said NE Parking).

If the wrong company were to be named on claim forms (as we have seen before) that should result in a complete defence.

Coupon-mad

Thanks @Johnersh

There is also a DVLA data angle: the KADOE rules forbid selling or assignment of DVLA data.

ChirpyChicken

Great @Johnersh

Coupon-mad

@ChirpyChicken

Do you fancy making a complaint to the DVLA pointing out that the DVLA data in the example cases was provided only to NE Parking Ltd, which continues to trade. However, a third party, Smart Parking have acquired, processed and shared the data with QDR and Smart Parking have used the DVLA data to sue.

However, they are not the creditor and this is not a case where a company has been bought and subsumed into a new one. It follows that NE Parking Ltd may or may not be beneficially owned by Smart Parking Ltd, but they remain a separate entity (person). 

That means unless the alleged NE Parking debts (where NE Parking are the data controller) have been sold to Smart, they - Smart - cannot sue. Yet they have, in a batch of new cases.

But of course, selling or assigning debt is a breach of KADOE. This bears all the hallmarks of illegal DVLA data selling or third party assignment. It mimics MIL Collections, who were eventually banned by the DVLA after years of getting away with suing on debts that were not theirs. The DVLA must investigate immediately.