Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: MIL Collections Court Letter
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping
Alb.
I received two letters a while ago from MIL Collections stating that they had purchased my "debt" from JAS parking. This letter was accompanied with a letter from JAS informing me that they had sold my "debt" to MIL collections. Both letters looked the same and came at the same time.

I replied denying that there ever had been a debt with JAS parking.

I have now received a county court letter for a money claim from MIL, I have logged on and acknowledged the letter. I think this gave me 28 days to form a defence?
From this point I have no idea what to do and any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
Hotel Oscar 87
I assume you opted to submit a defence later?

Using the search function for this forum start to read up on the many MIL Collections threads here - so you get an idea of how their game plays out. Let me assure you it is a game - a numbers game. They buy up old unpaid PCN's from private parking companies (the word is they do so at the princely sum of £1 a pop) and issue court proceedings to recover the full value plus an arbitrary "admin" charge. Most people fold and why wouldn't they? Probably because most of them fondly believe that if its going to court it must be legitimate failing to understand that it needs to go to court to establish its legitimacy. On that subject - as best we know - MIL have lost every single defended case (defended using a defence assisted from here that is) and costs have been awarded against them.

Have a good read.
emanresu
QUOTE
Using the search function for this forum start to read up on the many MIL Collections threads here


+1

And ....contact the DVLA using the V888 form to find out when JAS accessed your details and importantly how long between the parking event and them requesting the information. Come back when you have that.
Alb.
I did ask for 28 days to arrange a defence yes.

I have searched on here and Google and a lot of advice has been that not all cases are the same.

Here is a picture of the court letter and the letters from JAS & MIL








Where would I obtain the mentioned form to contact the DVLA?

Here is my reply to the "debt sold" letter from MIL

Am I also right in saying the court they have submitted the case with is in Northampton?
Can I change this to somewhere closer to me?
Jlc
QUOTE (emanresu @ Thu, 10 Mar 2016 - 06:52) *
QUOTE
Using the search function for this forum start to read up on the many MIL Collections threads here


+1

And ....contact the DVLA using the V888 form to find out when JAS accessed your details and importantly how long between the parking event and them requesting the information. Come back when you have that.

Second this - it's a 2014 case...
Alb.
Would it being a 2014 case work in my favour?
Hotel Oscar 87
You need to edit the documents you have posted. I suggest that you remove them entirely as you have left virtually all of the case details visible. Although you have covered your name I doubt that MIL have issued too many proceedings to the relatively small area in which you live.

You need to concentrate on the JAS Parking cases that MIL have run. MIL's cases follow the same pattern without exception. As a clue JAS Parking's signs are fairly distinctive and do not contain a contractual offer.

The only 2014 cases that are relevant - as far as JAS are concerned - are those that pre-date August 2014. This is from November.
Alb.
I don't have pictures of the signs though unfortunately as the staples is now a B&M.

Could you explain what you mean by relevant to JAS? I'm not sure what this means to my case that it's not relevant to JAS?

Is it bad to have all the case details online? Can MIL benefit from this?
Hotel Oscar 87
JAS used a standard sign format for Staples locations and there are examples already here.

JAS had issues with carrying out DVLA enquiries and up until August 2014 had built up a delay which meant that they were completely unable to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act.

MIL visit here regularly. So do you want them to know what you are discovering and what your defence may be? Additionally, judges tend not to like it when they learn they are the very last people to read a defence because its been bandied around on the forums for months beforehand.
Alb.
So the sign not being a contractual agreement would be worth putting in my defence?

I have edited the pictures out of my post now.

So if my case was in November it's unlikely that they breached the protection of freedom act?
Hotel Oscar 87
QUOTE (Alb. @ Thu, 10 Mar 2016 - 21:33) *
So the sign not being a contractual agreement would be worth putting in my defence?

it goes further than that but you need to read the other JAS/MIL threads here.

QUOTE (Alb. @ Thu, 10 Mar 2016 - 21:33) *
I have edited the pictures out of my post now.

Good move

QUOTE (Alb. @ Thu, 10 Mar 2016 - 21:33) *
So if my case was in November it's unlikely that they breached the protection of freedom act?

There is a difference between failing to comply and breaching. They are under no obligation to comply with the Act - there are no offences committed if you do not do what it sets out. It just means that they cannot invoke the keeper liability provisions of Schedule 4. That said, simply because they may have obtained the keeper details on time does not mean that they haven't in other respects failed to comply with the Act - there are a rake of things they have to get right to be able to go after the keeper.

You need to do some more research about POFA. There are very few companies indeed who have ever consistently managed to comply with the Act.
Alb.
Do you think it's worth writing to MIL with a part 18 letter and waiting for a reply?
Which if judging by other threads they won't reply and then I can use this in my case against them?

Thanks for all the help so far.

Can't really sleep worrying, considered just paying it as I want to get a mortgage this year
Cuthbert
So you pay this scammer so he can use the money to go after other people, so far HO87 has a 100% win rate and gets costs, take his advice.
Jlc
QUOTE (Alb. @ Fri, 11 Mar 2016 - 08:42) *
Can't really sleep worrying, considered just paying it as I want to get a mortgage this year

Absolute worst case scenario is that you 'lost' or they gain default judgment - you pay it and no CCJ. They are ultimately playing the numbers game and are unlikely to plan to attend any hearing - opting for papers-only. Losing is unlikely, especially if you play the numbers game back - you may even be able to make a 'profit'!
nosferatu1001
QUOTE (Alb. @ Fri, 11 Mar 2016 - 08:42) *
Do you think it's worth writing to MIL with a part 18 letter and waiting for a reply?
Which if judging by other threads they won't reply and then I can use this in my case against them?

Thanks for all the help so far.

Can't really sleep worrying, considered just paying it as I want to get a mortgage this year


Have you read the otehr MIL threads? THe ones where - if defended - they lose everytime?

STart to pull together your defence.

The part 18 that HO87 wrote is a ood start. It puts out there that you know the assignment is false.
Alb.
So I've written my part 18 letter from a post from Gan on another thread.

I'm now going to start writing my defence, is there a way I can have the court moved because the paperwork has come from Northampton and I'm in Cornwall?

Thanks for giving me the help and confidence to fight this
nosferatu1001
Northampton is simply a central processing court. You get a directions questionnaire where you can name a court local to you. Cornwall is where mil are based from memory so this might be one time they show up...

Which part 18 is it? The one from ho87 is likely more focused

Has ho87 pm'd you? They're an expert on this.
Alb.
Yeah the nearest court to me is Truro so if they're going to turn up to one it will be this one!!

No pm but plenty of help from his posts so far.

The part 18 was along the lines of this one;

Dear Sir

Ref ****

I note your letter dated ****.

It appears that you have been misled because no debt to (whatever name for JAS they used) has ever existed.
Under the circumstances I cannot be expected make any payment to your company.

In order that I can make an informed response, please send me copies of your paperwork from JAS and the contact details of the individual you dealt with.

Thank You

Yours Faithfully
Hotel Oscar 87
QUOTE (Alb. @ Fri, 11 Mar 2016 - 19:12) *
Yeah the nearest court to me is Truro so if they're going to turn up to one it will be this one!!

No pm but plenty of help from his posts so far.

The part 18 was along the lines of this one;

Dear Sir

Ref ****

I note your letter dated ****.

It appears that you have been misled because no debt to (whatever name for JAS they used) has ever existed.
Under the circumstances I cannot be expected make any payment to your company.

In order that I can make an informed response, please send me copies of your paperwork from JAS and the contact details of the individual you dealt with.

Thank You

Yours Faithfully

This does not amount to a Part 18 request and would pass simply as a letter.

Part 18 is a request for information - not for evidence and you are asking for evidence. As with other so-called "working" examples here it seems to be thought that you can drop a request into a letter about other matters and it magically turns it into a Part 18. That is not the case. The CPR is quite direct on the subject - see Practice Direction 18. For ease of reference I've copied paragraph 1.6 below as it sets out the format:

QUOTE
1.6

(1) A Request (whether made by letter or in a separate document) must –
(a) be headed with the name of the court and the title and number of the claim,
(b) in its heading state that it is a Request made under Part 18, identify the first party and the second party and state the date on which it is made,
© set out in a separate numbered paragraph each request for information or clarification,
(d) where a Request relates to a document, identify that document and (if relevant) the paragraph or words to which it relates,
(e) state the date by which the first party expects a response to the Request.
(2)
(a) A Request which is not in the form of a letter may, if convenient, be prepared in such a way that the response may be given on the same document.
(b) To do this the numbered paragraphs of the Request should appear on the left hand half of each sheet so that the paragraphs of the response may then appear on the right.
© Where a Request is prepared in this form an extra copy should be served for the use of the second party.


By all means attach a covering letter but the request for information should - as set out above be on a separate document.

May I suggest that you concentrate on building your defence at the moment. There is plenty of time to submit the Part 18 once you have filed you defence - provided it reaches MIL before the case is formally allocated to the small claims track. The generally accepted response time to be given for a Part 18 is 21 days (to give less is likely to be frowned upon) so the chances of your receiving a reply in time to use the information in your defence is practically nil. Besides, I have yet to see MIL respond to one at all let alone provide the answers sought.

So, in other words what you need to do is prepare an interim or holding defence that will cover the legal bases so that you can then expand upon them in a final defence you submit just before any court hearing.

When you are ready here's an example Part 18 Click to view attachment You will notice my deliberate mistake and will need to change the title "Respondent" to "Defendant"
emanresu
JAS are no longer on the British Parking Associations list to get Keeper details. Why not drop them a line (aos@britishparking.co.uk) and ask why. It may give you some more ammunition for a defence.
farmerboy
QUOTE (Alb. @ Fri, 11 Mar 2016 - 18:12) *
Yeah the nearest court to me is Truro so if they're going to turn up to one it will be this one!!


There is a MIL tread where the hearing was held in Truro. I recall they did send a rep but still lost. MIL along with scammers Armtrac are based in Truro. Follow the advice and you will beat this.
Cuthbert
JAS site states BPA http://www.jasparkingsolutions.org/
emanresu
QUOTE


It's the BPA list that counts. And the BPA only update their page once a month usually on 1st. To change it mid-month suggests a sudden and unexpected removal from the BPA's ATA scheme - hence the question.
Alb.
Thanks HO87, in going to concentrate on a good defence.

Would the defence from post 17 of this link be a good reference for building my own?
http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t87484.html

Also can I submit it in writing rather than online?

Thanks

QUOTE (emanresu @ Sun, 13 Mar 2016 - 08:23) *
JAS are no longer on the British Parking Associations list to get Keeper details. Why not drop them a line (aos@britishparking.co.uk) and ask why. It may give you some more ammunition for a defence.



Emailed. Thanks will post with their reply
Alb.
This just came through,

Dear Mr XXXXXX,


Thank you for your email.

J.A.S Parking Solutions are currently suspended from their BPA and AOS membership, but they are still members. Unfortunately, we are unable to provide information as to why this is the case.

Kind regards

Fiona Kirkham
Office Services Coordinator
British Parking Association
farmerboy
QUOTE (Alb. @ Tue, 15 Mar 2016 - 12:23) *
This just came through,


J.A.S Parking Solutions are currently suspended from their BPA and AOS membership, but they are still members. Unfortunately, we are unable to provide information as to why this is the case.


laugh.gif classic. probably racked up too many sanction points. Anyone caught up in a MIL & JAS court claim scam may wish to add this to their defences. They didn't say how long they're suspended for did they?
nosferatu1001
Adding this to the defence is key - point out there is therefore doubt cast as to whether any material supplied by JAS can be relied upon.
The Rookie
Oops!
Alb.
No word as to how long they are suspended.

The email read exactly as I posted it smile.gif
Hotel Oscar 87
It is likely to be relevant (and in some cases very relevant) given that MIL claim that POFA was complied with sufficient for them (as the "creditor for the moment") to be able to invoke keeper liability. JAS have been caught out seemingly ignoring DVLA directives and although we have some knowledge there is a rabbit hole here that we can clearly see but we don't know how far down it JAS are. There is also the question of what exactly is the DVLA's involvement in this as its far from clear at the moment.

Please bear in mind that this may materially affect quite a number of MIL/JAS cases and that is being worked on as we speak but instant answers there cannot be.

On that basis speculation really isn't going to do anyone any good and could well damage the defences of those already in the midst of court cases.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.