MIB/Banner Jones - Some advice needed

[boyfalldown]

Hi,

 

Back in April I received a letter from these alleging a debt of £12,000 for an accident in 2005. I sent a reply and also a complaint to the MIB stating that the debt was both statue barred and as I'd never agreed to them representing me then I didn't owe them anything. I heard nothing in reply and assumed (foolishly) that was that.

 

Anyway I received a letter from the MIB yesterday that they've instructed solicitors to take county court action against me. As of yet I've not received so can't post a POC.

 

They also said something interesting in that letter, that the original claimant in the action had taken action against me, and the MIB as joint defendants in 2007 (news to me) and a judgement had been obtained in default. Registry Trust has no record of the CCJ but I'd expect this if the MIB had paid inside a month.This is where I need some advice though.

 

I'm assuming this judgement effectively does the following.

 

I can no longer defend on the basis of liability as this has already been decided by the 2007 judgement

 

I'm not clear where I stand on the question of statue barred. Although the debt is old enough I assume this judgement removes this.

 

Now I assume I can use the following in defence instead

 

The original claimant has no further cause of action, by virtue of a judgement being obtained and paid. They have no further cause of action and therefore the MIB have no cause of action under the transfer of rights. This seems a bit too simple to me though.

 

As the MIB were defendants in the case, they were equally liable and choose to pay the entire debt.

 

I'll post the POC when it comes, as I'm sure it will, but would be really grateful for your thoughts on the above

 

BFD

[rebel11]

Hi boy

 

The guys will be happy to advise as soon as they are available.

[boyfalldown]

anyone - advice much appreciated, am a little confused by this

[Ganymede]

I assume that you were either uninsured then?

 

You answer your own question regarding the debt being SB - it cannot be as the accident was 2005 and judgment was obtained in 2007.

[boyfalldown]

Thank you for that. I was uninsured but have no clue who I was insured with at that time. The accident was a minor bump which caused no damage, and the other driver and I left after agreeing this and exchanging details.

 

This came to light in April this year and I'd moved 3 months after the accident. No effort was ever made to contact me.

 

I thought as much re the statue barred issue, but it was the other lines I wanted some advice on. If I wasn't clear above then (according to the MIB, they won't or can't provide details of this) the other driver took me and the MIB to court as joint defendants and won by default. The MIB paid out in exchange for the other drivers rights which is why I have nothing on my credit file or against my old address.

 

I *think* the MIB in buying the other drivers rights, have lost the right to take me to court as the other driver has already done so and won, but I don't think it can be that simple. I'd really love some input on this issue

Edited July 12, 2011 by boyfalldown
quick clarification

[Ganymede]

Thank you for that. I was uninsured but have no clue who I was insured with at that time. The accident was a minor bump which caused no damage, and the other driver and I left after agreeing this and exchanging details.

 

This came to light in April this year and I'd moved 3 months after the accident. No effort was ever made to contact me.

 

I thought as much re the statue barred issue, but it was the other lines I wanted some advice on. If I wasn't clear above then (according to the MIB, they won't or can't provide details of this) the other driver took me and the MIB to court as joint defendants and won by default. The MIB paid out in exchange for the other drivers rights which is why I have nothing on my credit file or against my old address.

 

I *think* the MIB in buying the other drivers rights, have lost the right to take me to court as the other driver has already done so and won, but I don't think it can be that simple. I'd really love some input on this issue

 

 

Sorry are you saying that you did or didn't have insurance at the time?

 

The MIB do not "buy" the right to sue, it is usually assigned to them from the Claimant in return for the settlement. Goolge "MIB assignment" and have a read.

 

As for the MIB being named as the 2nd Defendant, this is standard practice when making a claim against an uninsured driver.

[boyfalldown]

Sorry are you saying that you did or didn't have insurance at the time?

 

The MIB do not "buy" the right to sue, it is usually assigned to them from the Claimant in return for the settlement. Goolge "MIB assignment" and have a read.

 

As for the MIB being named as the 2nd Defendant, this is standard practice when making a claim against an uninsured driver.

 

sorry - I'm not being clear, typing too fast. I was insured, but due to a house move April this year was the first time I became aware of the issue

 

If I am taken to court by the original driver with the MIB named as second defendant and judgement is entered against us, how can the assignment of rights include the right to sue again as there is no further cause of action, the claimant has already sued. This seems too simple to me but was my original question

[Ganymede]

sorry - I'm not being clear, typing too fast. I was insured, but due to a house move April this year was the first time I became aware of the issue

 

If I am taken to court by the original driver with the MIB named as second defendant and judgement is entered against us, how can the assignment of rights include the right to sue again as there is no further cause of action, the claimant has already sued. This seems too simple to me but was my original question

 

 

Good question, but if you exchanged details at the scene and had insurance then why are the MIB even involved??

[boyfalldown]

Good question, but if you exchanged details at the scene and had insurance then why are the MIB even involved??

 

another good question, at the scene we exchanged names and addresses. There was no damage following a very minor bump. No idea why they are involved - no-one made any contact with me to say they'd being some damage we were initially unaware of or anything else, but I did move some three months later. I also know I received a HORT 1 form, at around the same time, following passing through a ANPR recognition check and was stopped straight away as a result of been flagged, so I can only assume for whatever reason my policy details weren't stored on whatever database at that time, but produced all documents ok with no action. (The HORT 1 and the accident were completely unrelated). It was a fair while ago, TBH I've no chance of producing evidence of insurance from back then now and I've lived at this address, with insured cars for 4 years now, so why the MIB didn't contact me sooner is another good question

[Jasper1965]

Something isn't right here if the "victim" took you/MIB to Court and gained a default judgment against you jointly and severally then any payment from the MIb to the victim was made under the terms of that judgment and was not open to negotiation. I think somebody is lying about the default judgment here and I would insist that they supply proof that this judgment exists before entering any further into dialogue with them.

They would have to prove the ccj exists to get around any statute barring anyway.

After succesfully enforcing their right to action through a court action I like yourself am unsure exactly what right(s) remained to be assigned.

 

it's possible the police recorded the details of your insurance company when you received the producer, failing that your bank and/or other financial statements statements from the time would show who you paid for insurance if you don't have them an SAR would provide them.

[boyfalldown]

Thank you Jasper, will follow the bank route to get the info, and also insist they provide details of the judgement