"he had sold the car 5 years previously and had proof of this" ... but he obviously hadn't advised DVLA of the sale, as they gave out his address to PE !

It sounds to me more like his negligence than that of PE.

Was the OP's article this one from The Sun?:

www.thesun.co.uk/news/1767243/thousands-of-familie.../

Or this from The Mail?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3784421/Stranger-...l

The courts issue something like 1.75million civil claims in a year. The vast majority will be in the small claims/debt/default category. Against that background hundreds of cases, while undoubtedly inconvenient and distressing for those involved, are statistically insignificant. Some of the cases mentioned in that piece look very fishy - I'd love to know the circumstances leading to a bill for £30k around a parking ticket.

The claimant has to provide an address for the putative defendant. It's a waste of money in court fees etc to issue summonses while playing fast/loose with accuracy of address for service. Where the address is incorrect the vast majority are returned via Royal Mail. While as a hoseholder I might ignore junk mail for a previous occupier anything with a government frank on it would be returned.

If of course PE or one of the other parking outfits is being careless or using a scattergun approach then hopefully court staff or judges will see the trend and give then a dressing down.

The flip side from claimants point of view is that many defendants ignore their debts up to, and way beyond, the point where summonses are issued. Sometimes it's wilfull but far more common they just hope it will go away. I volunteer for Citizens Advice. Had a client last week present with a summons issued the previous day. He was a complete outlier, far more common that they trail in post judgement with a bailiff's notice etc.

Sorry for the delay in coming back here. Out all day yesterday.

The article was in the Daily Mail or Telegraph, can't remember which. The parking sharks were not alone, just more prominent. Most of these companies put the debt collection into other hands for collection or harrassment. I am just surprised that a court is willing to post out very important papers to any old address without the need to perform at least a few cursory checks. The court must have access to electoral rolls and other information that can locate people quite easily. I would still make it a pre-requisite for these companies to establish absolutely, the correct address for anyone, on which they wish to serve court papers. If they get it wrong, as in many cases in the article, then they must bear all costs to reinstate credit ratings and pay damages.

Palcouk has a good idea about 'noddle'. Worth a look.

A lot of this is a direct result of certain parts of what is laughingly called 'The Protection of Freedoms Act'. What a joke that is. Talk about a government throwing its' own citizens to the wolves. If they spent time making life easier for us all instead of the usual political games they play we would all be better off.

Cheers Concrete