Last Updated on June 10, 2025 by Beltz Law Group
NTTA Lawsuits: Unpacking the Civil vs. Criminal Conundrum in Tollway Non-Payment Cases
Understanding the Legal Foundation of North Texas Tollway Authority Claims
Failure to Pay Tollway Tickets In Texas
Our firm has observed a concerning trend in recent lawsuits filed by the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA) related to unpaid tollway violations. While the alleged initial tolls may be relatively modest (e.g., $6,000), the inclusion of escalating administrative fees has led to exorbitant demands, sometimes exceeding $80,000. These cases, often filed in county court, raise critical questions about the proper legal framework for recovering such debts.
Historically, our office has successfully defended against NTTA claims that were settled pre-suit due to fundamental flaws in their legal approach. These earlier cases primarily relied on common law causes of action.
The Clash of Legal Principles: Equity vs. Statutory Enforcement
Common law claims, by their very nature, are rooted in principles of equity and fairness. This necessitates a “reasonable” approach to debt recovery. The NTTA’s practice of levying disproportionate administrative fees, transforming a $6,000 debt into an $80,000 demand, starkly contradicts these equitable principles. While the Texas Legislature has codified some of these administrative fees within the Transportation Code, we argue that this legislative allowance, often driven by political expediency rather than public protection, creates an inequitable burden on citizens.
Traditional equitable claims, when applied to debt collection, allow defendants to challenge the reasonableness of fees and the existence of a valid agreement for payment. This places the burden on the NTTA to justify their inflated charges, a task that often proves challenging when confronted with a jury focused on fairness.
The NTTA’s Shifting Strategy: Leveraging Criminal Statutes for Civil Claims
Recently, the NTTA has adopted a new litigation strategy. We’ve observed them citing Texas Transportation Code Section 366.178 as the foundation for both the alleged debt and the accompanying administrative fees. This citation is then used to support common law civil claims such as “suit on sworn account,” “breach of contract,” and “quantum meruit” – particularly the “action of debt.”
The elements for an “action of debt” are seemingly straightforward: the debt must be indisputable, owed, and unpaid. The NTTA’s legal strategy appears to hinge on the premise that Section 366.178, by its language, renders the debt “indisputable.” However, our analysis of the statute reveals a critical distinction that undermines this approach.
NTTA Ticket Lawyer
A Deeper Look at Texas Transportation Code Section 366.178
Let’s examine the relevant excerpts of Section 366.178:
- (b) A person who fails or refuses to pay a toll provided for the use of a project is liable for a fine not to exceed $250, plus any administrative fees incurred in connection with the violation.
- (e) If the registered owner of the vehicle fails to pay the amount included in the third notice of nonpayment by the date specified in the notice, the owner may be cited as for other traffic violations as provided by law, and the owner shall pay a fine of not more than $250 for each nonpayment of a toll.
- (f) Except as provided by Subsection (f-1), in the prosecution of a violation for nonpayment, proof that the vehicle passed through a toll assessment facility and that the amount included in the third notice of nonpayment was not paid before the date specified in the notice, together with proof that the defendant was the registered owner or the driver of the vehicle when the unpaid toll was assessed, establishes the nonpayment of the registered owner.
- (g) The court of the local jurisdiction in which the unpaid toll was assessed may assess and collect the fine in addition to any court costs. The court shall collect the unpaid tolls, administrative fees, and third-party collection service fees incurred by the authority on or before the date the fines and court costs are collected by the court and forward the tolls and fees to the authority. Payment of the unpaid tolls, administrative fees, and third-party collection service fees by the registered owner may not be waived by the court unless the court finds that the registered owner of the vehicle is indigent.
Our Firm’s Argument: Misapplication of a Criminal Statute in Civil Litigation
Our fundamental argument is this: Section 366.178 of the Texas Transportation Code, when read in its entirety, primarily outlines the process for pursuing criminal violations for non-payment of tolls, specifically referencing “fines” and “prosecution” in a “court of the local jurisdiction” (i.e., justice of the peace courts).
Civil claims, such as “suit on sworn account,” “breach of contract,” and “quantum meruit,” require proof that the defendant benefited from the tollway usage and that a contractual agreement (express or implied) existed. This requires a higher evidentiary burden than simply proving the defendant was the registered owner of the vehicle, which is the standard often applied in criminal toll violation cases.
The NTTA’s current strategy of citing Section 366.178 to support civil claims implies they are attempting to leverage a criminal statute to establish the “indisputable” nature of the debt in a civil context. However, civil courts do not have jurisdiction over criminal matters, nor can they assess criminal fines. The statute explicitly refers to justice of the peace courts for enforcement and the collection of fines.
If a civil cause of action is based on common law, there isn’t a specific statute that dictates the debt’s indisputable nature. Conversely, if a statute is on point, it must be applied in its entirety. The NTTA’s selective reliance on Subsection (a) of 366.178 while disregarding the broader context of the statute – particularly its references to fines and criminal proceedings – is an attempt to circumvent the equitable principles inherent in common law.
The Implications for Defendants
When the NTTA attempts to bootstrap civil claims onto a criminal statute, it creates a significant legal vulnerability for their case. If the civil court cannot rely on Section 366.178 to establish the “indisputable” nature of the debt, then the “action of debt” claim becomes untenable.
This forces the NTTA to either dismiss their lawsuit or amend their petition to allege other common law causes of action. Any alternative common law claim will inherently be based on equity, providing defendants with strong grounds to challenge the reasonableness of the exorbitant administrative fees. It is simply not equitable or fair to demand $80,000 for an initial $6,000 debt.
If you have been served with a civil lawsuit by the NTTA where they are attempting to manipulate the Texas Transportation Code in this manner, it is crucial to seek legal counsel. Our experienced tollway defense attorneys can review your specific case, provide an honest assessment of your legal position, and help you navigate these complex legal challenges.
They are doing the same thing to me. I have a lot in administrative fee, were they mail the invoice to the last known vehicle registered address. I would like to know what I can do resolve this matter.