Claim Form - MIL Collections Options

[Singi]

I have received a claim form from MIL collections, I have acknowledged it and I'm now looking for some advice on how to put across my defence. The deadline for submitting my defence is the 16th.
I'm also going to send a part 18 request for further information (template found on here).

This is what I have so far;

The Defendant denies any liability whatsoever to the Claimant MIL Collections or in the first instance Car Park Management Service Ltd, for all of the following reasons any of which is fatal to the claimants case.

i. The Claimant has no standing to bring a case.
ii. The Claimant has no capacity to form a contract with the Defendant.
iii. Even if a contract could be formed, it would be void as in breach of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations
iv. The claimant provided no service to the Defendant.

The Claimant has not disclosed a full Cause of Action .

Any help is appreciated,
Singi

[Advertisement]

[ManxRed]

Do you know if - in connection with the original ticket from the original parking company (Car Park Management Service Ltd) - the registered keeper's details were obtained via the DVLA?

[Singi]

They were yes, I emailed the DVLA to complain about CPMS passing my details on to MIL Collections.

[Redivi]

You need to do a lot of reading about the CPMS-Mil scandal and find examples of defences because yours omits all the vital points and is next to useless

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 have not only been replaced but as a defence point were kicked out by the Supreme Court three years ago

This post has been edited by Redivi: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 11:57

[ManxRed]

Presumably the DVLA are staring at a GDPR breach here.

I would notify the ICO now.

However your primary focus should be to put your defence together, there must be plenty of examples on here, there's been quite a number of incidences involving MIL. Try to get the most recent you can find and adapt it to your circumstances.

[ostell]

Would this be a suitable case to raise a counterclaim for the breach of GDPR? The DVLA has previously stated that the KADOE contract does not permit data to be sold on.

So champerty and maintenance could be added to this as weell.

[Redivi]

CPMS and Mil have been previously investigated so they can't deny it's against KADOE

I have a vague recollection that Mil argues that the arrangement is now different
Cannot see how any arrangement that gives Mil the ownership of the "debt" gets around KADOE

[ostell]

But at the moment this is not a debt, it's an alleged debt.

[ManxRed]

I did see a letter on here some months back from MIL which had been adjusted so they were pursuing it as a Debt Collector/Agent (a la Debt Collection Plus), but of course in that arrangement they wouldn't be able to raise a claim in their own name, as they have done here. This seems to have reverted back to the debt ownership model again.

@ Singi - what are the EXACT particulars of claim, and have they previously sent any letters, copies of original tickets. For example a Letter Before Claim, or an assignment of debt?

This post has been edited by ManxRed: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 13:25

[Singi]

Ok, I'll do some more research and have a look at some more recent cases. Thanks so far.

Here is a link to the recent correspondence I've had:
hxxp://s1044.photobucket.com/user/nitropropane/library/PCN



Also this was the response I got from the DVLA regarding my data being sold on:

DISCLOSURE OF DVLA VEHICLE KEEPER DATA TO MIL COLLECTIONS

On 25 November 2017 you contacted DVLA about Car Park Management Services (CPMS) Ltd passing your vehicle keeper data to MIL Collections Ltd.

In my response to you on 27 November 2017 I stated that DVLA was in the process of looking into the arrangements in place between parking operators like CPMS Ltd and MIL Collections Ltd and that I would contact you when an update is available. I am now able to provide you with an update on the current position.

The arrangements in question, referred to as “debt assignment”, involve private parking companies assigning or selling debt or alleged debt arising from unpaid parking charges to MIL Collections Ltd, who then become the legal owner of that debt. This is different to sub-contracted debt collection, where the debt collection company acts on behalf of the private parking company.

This issue has required careful consideration due to the sensitivities surrounding the disclosure and use of the personal data of vehicle keepers held by DVLA. The Agency’s consideration has necessarily taken some time, but soon DVLA will conduct a full audit of CPMS Ltd’s compliance with the terms & conditions relating to its use of DVLA data. Any issues found at that audit could result in suspension from being able to request vehicle keeper data from DVLA.

DVLA will also be working closely with the British Parking Association (BPA) and the International Parking Community (IPC) - the Accredited Trade Associations for the private parking industry - to ensure DVLA’s position on debt assignment is clearly understood.

I trust I have explained matters but, if you remain unhappy with the service you have received, you can write to our Complaints Team and I have provided a link to our complaints procedure leaflet for your reference:
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations...aints-procedure

Yours sincerely,

Steve Hopkins
Data Sharing Strategy & Compliance

[kommando]

A tonne of fudge from the DVLA, public leeches not public servants.

Without the DVLA then you are left with including the Kadoe contract and pointing out to the judge where it disallows PPC's from selling the debt.

This is V4, you will have to get a copy of the Kadoe agreement inforce.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/go...Contract_V4.pdf

G1.3. The Customer may only disclose the DVLA’s Confidential Information
to the Staff who are directly involved in the supply of the Data through
the KADOE Service and who need to know the information, and shall
ensure that such Staff are aware of and shall comply with these
obligations as to confidentiality.

G1.4. The Customer shall not, and shall ensure that the Staff do not, use any
of the DVLA’s Confidential Information received otherwise than for the
purposes of this Contract.

H1. Transfer and Sub-Contracting
H1.1. Except that the Customer may sub-contract its Processing of the Data
to a Data Processor and may sub-contract to a debt collector the
recovery of unpaid Parking Charges from any person in accordance
with clause D5.1, the Customer shall not assign, sub-contract or in any
other way dispose of the Contract or any part of it without the prior
written permission of the DVLA.
H1.2. Sub-contracting any part of the Contract shall not relieve the Customer
of any of its obligations or duties under the Contract. The Customer
shall be responsible for the acts and omissions of its sub-contractors
as though they are its own. Where the DVLA has consented to the
placing of sub-contracts, copies of each sub-contract shall, at the
request of the DVLA, be sent by the Customer to the DVLA as soon as
reasonably practicable.

[ManxRed]

When did you get the email from the DVLA? Was it a while ago? Write back and notify them that you've received a claim from MIL.

I thought they'd given an undertaking not to pursue legal action? The DVLA should be informed of this claim if you haven't already.

[Redivi]

Ask if CPMS has requested permission to sell the debt and if the DVLA has granted it

A denial gives you the evidence of a specific breach of KADOE

[emanresu]

There is a new version of the KADOE contract (May 2018) which says

“Debt Assignment” means when debt and Data related to an unpaid Parking Charge is assigned or sold to a third party debt collector who becomes the legal owner of such debt. For the avoidance of doubt, the disclosure of Data to third parties as part of a debt assignment agreement is not permitted.

Perhaps they are doing this under the old contract but there is still the issue of whether it is a breach of the DPA which only the ICO can rule on. DVLA can only rule on contractual issues and this falls outside the contract at the time.

[SchoolRunMum]

You need to do a lot of reading about the CPMS-Mil scandal and find examples of defences because yours omits all the vital points and is next to useless

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 have not only been replaced but as a defence point were kicked out by the Supreme Court three years ago

This ^^^

Just copy a previous MIL defence from 2017 when we saw a few.

You need to talk about the lack of valid assignment, and the fact that the data was obtained unlawfully (assuming CPMS got the data from the DVLA and not from YOU, in an early appeal?).

[cabbyman]

Is GDPR retrospective? If there is a claim form, the matter has probably been ongoing since way before GDPR?

[ManxRed]

Not sure. However the OP has only just found out that his personal data is currently being misused. With all emphasis on the 'currently'.

[emanresu]

Is GDPR retrospective?

No. Currently where personal data is being used from pre 25th May, all permissions have to be renewed. They also have to be reviewed to ensure the information being held is proportionate to the issue at hand. The so-called "granularity" of GDPR.

But you might use the "granularity" argument as to the continued processing of personal data.

[Singi]

I've done a bit of research today on what to put in my defence, I'll put a draft up later. I'm also going to email the DVLA to find out who accessed my details and when. I'll be pursuing CPMS parking once I get this done and dusted

[ManxRed]

With respect to the data issue, raise a formal complaint with the ICO. If you can get them to agree that your data has been misused, and if they indicate who they think might be at fault (could be PPC, could be DVLA, or both) then you'll have a better idea of who to pursue, and it will be valuable ammunition.

But concentrate on the defence for now.

This post has been edited by ManxRed: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 - 14:19