MIB Issue Legal Proceedings over Statute Barred Claim

[Azazal23]

MIB got in touch with my in May 2004 in which it has been alleged i was involved in an accident and was not insured. The vehicle i owned at the time was off the road (head gasket) so i let my insurance lapse. But i did not file the off road declaration with DVLA.

 

Anyway i wrote back saying no chance as the car is not drivable and i would be happy for them to inspect it. They never replied, but the strange thing is the claimant had the same first initial and surname as myself.

 

Was contact on 24 12 10 yes... by Close Credit management saying they wanted 15k for this claim. I emailed back stating it was a fraudulent claim and in any case is statute barred.

 

I was issued with CC proceedings on 7 Jan 2011, have filed acknowledgement of service. Have wrote a defence out can anyone take a look and give me an opinion

 

 

1. The defendant states that the time limit for the commencement

of any proceedings related to the alleged Road Traffic Accident on

** May 2004 has expired.

 

2. The Limitation Act 1980 section 11(4)states there is a 3 year

time limit in which to bring action for such claims, this has

clearly expired, the claimant therefore has no right to bring such

action as the claim is statue barred by virtue of the Limitation

Act 1980.

 

3. The defendant requests the claim be struck out as an abuse of

the process, the claim is vexatious and a waste of the courts

time.

 

4. The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £15000.00 or

any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

[rebel11]

Hi AZ

 

I'm sure the experts will respond soon, this does sound a bit bizzare.

[nicklea]

I just posted this on another thread. I think in your case it will be very impotant to find out the date when teh MIB paid out the claim in 2004. If it was anytime before 7th Jan 2005 then you are correct.

 

 

 

I've just been having a look at some information from the MIB, the forms they get you to fill in when you make a claim against them and also the Uninsured Drivers Agreement.

 

My understanding - and it is just my understanding - is that for the MIB to pay out a claim they get the person to make a county court claim and they pay out whatever amount is settled on. They then get the person to sign a document of assignment giving them all the legal rights to pursue you for the debt.

 

So, if you have the MIB coming after you then there will be a CCJ against you from about the time when the MIB paid out to the other party. The 6 year limitation will run from the date that the CCJ was awarded.

 

So I would suggest that you need to send a cpr 18 request to ask if there was a judgement and what the details were. You might also want to think about if you have any grounds to get the original judgement set aside

[Azazal23]

Hi

 

Have already check my credit record, there have been no CC judgements assigned to me over the past 6 years. Nor have i recieved any debt or court documentation until dec 2010

 

Plus the time limit for RTA claims and personal injury or any type of neglegence claim is 3 years.

[42man]

Looks good to me Azaz - Please let us know how it goes...!!

[nicklea]

If you haven't previously received a claim then that's fine. If you had of previously received a claim then they could make another claim within 6 years of the date of the earlier judgment.

[Azazal23]

Hi

 

Definetly have not recieved a claim before, and nothing has been rgistered on my credit file. I am quite maticulous about my credit file so have copies going back 5 years.

 

If the defence looks ok i am going to file today on moneyclaim to save time.

 

I have also wrote a letter to the court asking for the decison to allow the claim to be filed to be reviewed, i have stated the claimant would have known the claim is statute barred, vextrous and a waste of the courts time. So they may decide to strike it out before if goes any further.

 

I will keep you all up to date with proceedings. Obviously any other comments or suggestions are welcome.

[tommy.king]

Hi It appears the following has happened.

Somewere down the line your car might have been involved in a accident or was fraudulantly used to appear you were at fault.

(£15k seems like £10k fees and £5k payouts)

The Solicitors must have issued a claim against you since 2004 and now they have won by default because you never instructed Solicitors.

For arguements sake lets say the solicitors waited until almost till the end of the 3 years, then issued a claim, the statuat bar has then been lifted as a claim is filed in court.

After the claim goes default, default they will eventually win.

If there was a default judgement against you, you will not get a CCJ unless you donot pay the amount.

 

You will need to do the following

You need to see which court has issued the judgement or was it a solicitor letter- call them and ask for the details of the court.

If the Solicitors didnt file a claim in the courts you dont have to worry.

If they have you are liable, as long as you had insurance and you let it lapse, Im assuming you were covered on the date of the alleged accident.

You can phone the insurance company up and say "you are my insurance company pay the bill" they may get a bit annoyed at you as you made them waste £15k when it could have been settled at less if you told them it was fraudulant.

Edited January 28, 2011 by MARTIN3030

[Endymion]

Please can you post the Claimant's particulars of claim. I am very interested to see how they have worded this and to see if Counsel has drafted it or not.

 

In respect to your defence, you need also to plead that you are prejudiced by the late issue of the claim and any attempt to plead for a relief from sanctions under Section 33 should not be allowed due to you not being able to defend it properly. You also need to include that you are denying the claim and the reasons why and also try something like this as an amended pleading along with your denial:

 

1. The Defendant will resist any application to dissaply the primary limitation period under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 on the basis that it would be inequitable to do so as:

a. The Claimant has put forward no reason for the delay in bringing this claim;

b. The delay is likely to bring significant prejudice to the Defendant in terms of investigating the claim as:

i. Car off road etc

ii. Due to the length of time since the incident, it is difficult for the Defendant to undertake the relevant investigations into the allegations made by the Claimant. The Defendant’s ability to defend this case has therefore been severely compromised as a result of the Claimant’s delay in issuing proceedings;

c. The Conduct of the Defendant cannot be criticised (and explain why);

d. The Claimant has not acted promptly (explain why). As such, there has been a delay in over x years in issuing proceedings;

e. Liability is denied in this matter. As such, it cannot be pleaded that the Defendant will suffer a windfall if the Claimant’s claim is struck out.

[nicklea]

Hi It appears the following has happened.

 

The Solicitors must have issued a claim against you since 2004 and now they have won by

 

No, this isn't the case. In the large majority of cases the MIB pays up without the injured party having to go to court.

[Azazal23]

here is the claim form seems very basic, think it was done via money claim online

[Jasper1965]

IMO It is critically important that you take on board the information presented in post number 9 and incorporate this into any defence.

You must also state that in May 2004 you rebuked an allegation from the claimant that you were involved in any such accident and invited them to visit and inspect the vehicle to ascertain that it had not been involved in any accident and was indeed undriveable for mechanical reasons at the time of the incident from which this claim arises and that the claimant subsequently failed to make any such inspection of the vehicle .

 

A timely claim from the MIB would have enabled you to provide overwhelming evidential proof that you and your vehicle were not involved in the accident from which this claim arises, that the claimant chose not to inspect the vehicle as invited and failed to bring the claim or even to remain in dialogue with yourself for such a long time has severely and fatally prejudiced your ability to defend this action on the single most important piece of evidence since you no longer have the vehicle.

 

 

(Assuming there wasn't)

It is also stated that no criminal investigation was ever instigated against the defendant by the police, nor was any criminal conviction in respect of any offences relating to this accident and/or the defendants failure to insure any vehicle in accordance with the law either upheld or even attempted.

[Azazal23]

.....Update

 

Filed my defense in Jan, phoned the court today and the claim has been stayed indefinetly as the other party has failed to respond.

 

I am now think of either applying to have the claim struck out which costs £40 and recover the costs from the other party.

 

Or

 

Get in touch with the claimant solicitors and seek confirmation that they do not intend to take the action any further.

[ellieabbs]

Hi , Just wondered what happened after your last post? Did the MIB get any money from you?