I think the closure of the larger thread is somewhat premature. This issue has far from gone away. I visit a few other places of interest in this matter and there is some more developments that others may like to understand so that the fear can be dissipated.

It appears ACS have ramped up a little to bring a new level of fear. I thought this would prove interesting to other visitors here. Hopefully, everyone who gets this kind of letter won't be as intimidated by it as they might otherwise have been.

With regards to the new wave of letters that ACS are sending out there seems to be a lot of confusion. Andy is at his teather now with the big public spanking he is due to get. Instead of his usual letters demanding £300 - £500 via 2nd class mass post he has changed tactics which is causing a lot of sceptisism of new posters. For those accusing people of being "spies" remember you were once a new poster and how would it make you feel if the shoe was on the other foot? Not to mention he is using official court documents. How many of you would have payed? Its stressful enough recieving a nasty gram, but asking for help/advice then being accused of a spie/mole will only scare more people into paying up, and as long as people pay up this will continue!

 

Andy's new tactic is for the following reasons:

 

1). The 10,000+ first wave of letters makes demands with a threat of court action didn't work and the courts kept granting NPO's. This prompted action from people in creating Beingthreatend, letters templates etc. This resulted in the cash cow drying up slightly.

 

2). New NPO's were granted but had clauses included by the judge about how many people had been took to court etc, making it a little harder for andy. People then started to contact the various bodies, which, SRA etc, applying more pressure to andy.

 

3). The huge leak of his database was the biggest DPA breach in history creating huge problems for andy. Prompting him to find a new way to make money and try to save his neck with the courts and future NPO's and the SRA.

 

4). New wave of letters are sent out but this time he has a new strategy to create fear and create more revenue and "in fighting" on the forums. This time he has sent out probably 100 letters ranging in the £1000 plus mark, filed with the courts at a cost of £85 per LOC. If 70% of these new demands pay he has made a nice "little earner", has more ammunition for the courts with regards to more NPO's, reads this forum and sees how his dasterdly plan has worked (accusing people of being plants etc), without him having to write a single post.

 

5). Even though he is now using the courts to do his dirty work for him, nothing really has changed. Its not up to the courts to send a summons out to you, andy will still have to file this. So as long as you send your lettes of denials it puts him in the same position as before, no chance of a case going to court and a new game of letter tennis and mor expense to him!

 

People are looking at the scans of the new letters saying that they look like fabrications, but you should have seen the first batch that was sent out (copies of the davenport letters). They were worse and had DX numbers belonging to another firm, dates wrong and he wasn't even registered as data controller! Even when he did he managed to get the latter part right he still managed to cock that up a couple of times.

 

Lets not play into his hands and still help each other out and not make accusations at new posters who will be terrified enough at recieving a new style of nastygram. It is stressful enough at recieving one of these letters, never mind the prospect of losing your job and christmas just round the corner.

Posted as is for completeness. Ignore references to previous/other posts.

I received my 3rd letter today like 2 weeks after my 2nd LOD.

Saying pretty much the same thing as the 2nd letter I received saying it was a template and they cant accept at face valve at what I said because it is a generic response.

In my 2nd LOD I simply said I standby my 1st letter and having spoken to my solicitor you have no valid reason not to accept my letter.

Further on in the letter they say the open offer of compromise made in our original letter to you is hereby withdrawn. We have instructions from our clients to pursue this matter against you further.

And then in another page they write something to totally contradict what they said in the 1st page.

They send me a form to offer to settle.

Also don't think they even read what they wrote because one line says

If the offer is accepted with 21 days of service of this notice you will be liable for out clients costs in accordance with rule 36.10 of the civil procedure rules SAVE THAT if you accept the offer within this time our client will waive any claim for costs.

Surely a NOT is missing somewhere in the 1st line, unless it is of course me being the dumb one and cant read.

And last of all the biggest joke was the amount

The offer is £225.00

The reason the above offer has increased from the "open" offer of compromise is that you have chose not to accept the open offer of compromise and delivered in response a template letter that you obtained from the internet, which did not address the specific infringement of copyright identified as having occurred through your internet connection.

Funny thing is the amount has actually gone DOWN! The amount originally £295.

Anyone else get this? Or just me? Should I worry if it is just me?

I received my 3rd letter today like 2 weeks after my 2nd LOD.

 

Saying pretty much the same thing as the 2nd letter I received saying it was a template and they cant accept at face valve at what I said because it is a generic response.

 

In my 2nd LOD I simply said I standby my 1st letter and having spoken to my solicitor you have no valid reason not to accept my letter.

 

Further on in the letter they say the open offer of compromise made in our original letter to you is hereby withdrawn. We have instructions from our clients to pursue this matter against you further.

 

 

And then in another page they write something to totally contradict what they said in the 1st page.

 

They send me a form to offer to settle.

 

Also don't think they even read what they wrote because one line says

 

If the offer is accepted with 21 days of service of this notice you will be liable for out clients costs in accordance with rule 36.10 of the civil procedure rules SAVE THAT if you accept the offer within this time our client will waive any claim for costs.

 

Surely a NOT is missing somewhere in the 1st line, unless it is of course me being the dumb one and cant read.

 

And last of all the biggest joke was the amount

 

The offer is £225.00

 

The reason the above offer has increased from the "open" offer of compromise is that you have chose not to accept the open offer of compromise and delivered in response a template letter that you obtained from the internet, which did not address the specific infringement of copyright identified as having occurred through your internet connection.

 

Funny thing is the amount has actually gone DOWN! The amount originally £295.

 

Anyone else get this? Or just me? Should I worry if it is just me?

I think the little little man:-) at ACS law is trying to pull some money in before he gets that :lol:BIG FINE:lol: or slapped by the Law big boys:lol:.

This may be a new tatic as they usally send a question sheet.

I received my 3rd letter today like 2 weeks after my 2nd LOD.

 

Saying pretty much the same thing as the 2nd letter I received saying it was a template and they cant accept at face valve at what I said because it is a generic response.

 

In my 2nd LOD I simply said I standby my 1st letter and having spoken to my solicitor you have no valid reason not to accept my letter.

 

Further on in the letter they say the open offer of compromise made in our original letter to you is hereby withdrawn. We have instructions from our clients to pursue this matter against you further.

 

 

And then in another page they write something to totally contradict what they said in the 1st page.

 

They send me a form to offer to settle.

 

Also don't think they even read what they wrote because one line says

 

If the offer is accepted with 21 days of service of this notice you will be liable for out clients costs in accordance with rule 36.10 of the civil procedure rules SAVE THAT if you accept the offer within this time our client will waive any claim for costs.

 

Surely a NOT is missing somewhere in the 1st line, unless it is of course me being the dumb one and cant read.

 

And last of all the biggest joke was the amount

 

The offer is £225.00

 

The reason the above offer has increased from the "open" offer of compromise is that you have chose not to accept the open offer of compromise and delivered in response a template letter that you obtained from the internet, which did not address the specific infringement of copyright identified as having occurred through your internet connection.

 

Funny thing is the amount has actually gone DOWN! The amount originally £295.

 

Anyone else get this? Or just me? Should I worry if it is just me?

i received the same letter about 3 weeks ago stating that i had 14 day to pay he is going to get nowt not even a third lod. he is getting desprate

i have been trying to find the emails as my name should be on them as i am a sky customer and would like to have some evidence to use against sky and sly andy for data protection leek cannot download torrent can any one help

I think the best thing to do would be to assume your details have been compromised if you are a Sky customer and have previously received a LoC from ACS. If you've given any form of payment details, get them blocked and changed.

Otherwise you could submit a SAR to ACS and to Sky and ask what details have been exchanged and when. You'll have to pay a tenner each for the privilege and I doubt you'll get anything worth while. But you could and should still complain to the ICO about the breach, I know they say they don't need any more complaints, but I think they must still get a true scale of this breach.

I too would give up on responding after the first two LoD's, just file the rest under "Harrassment Claim"

thanks for your reply zoomboy.

its a pity the tread was closed i think it should have stayed open as i have been reading it since june and i think others have and new people with claims look to it for support and information.

ps . i hope todays ruling against google over data protection breech dose not help acs law i hope they throw the book at him.

Well it's just a thread and others like this one can be started. The Slyck thread continues to get updates and is 500+ pages long now. Even the closure of the CAG thread got a mention on there

I think closure of the one here will result in newer information just being posted in other threads. After all ACS haven't gone away and things change, so new and old visitors still have something to learn from those still keeping an eye on this.

Well I have decided not to reply to their latest letter because I don't think it would make any bit of a difference. But I still can't just shake that horrible feeling away it still always at the back of my mind. I think I read people are starting to get court orders but it means nothing its just another scare tacit. If I get one I know I def won't be able to sleep with worrying too much even though I have not done anything wrong. God I have acs law!

Sorry rant over

please ignore all the threat-o-grams. / scanvoices

just this week two of the big publishing companies that were behind the copyright drive have both withdrawn

and there is a major govt review in a few days time of related laws...http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11695416

this will obv have an impact on this subject too.

dx

An LOD is not sufficient response to a court claim. The initial defence/acknowledgement must be filed to the court not to ACS. Not responding to previous letters of claim will have little impact except potentially costs at a later date, but failing to respond properly to the court claim will likely result in default judgement against you.

 

ACS can drop their court claim up to the last minute to avoid trial, if a defence is accepted by court the next step will be their disclosure of case documents and exchange of questions/evidence. Read the CPR or consult CAB/a local solicitor for a better idea of the process.

Source

Are you really so sure we should ignore such threat-o-grams?

most of that is actually conjecture of what might/could happen, supported by others blowing up the one ballon.

i feel it much better to let one test case p'haps go through [if one ever does]

then for people to LOD, or WHY or follow further advise.

dx

That's all well and good unless you happen to be the test case. But as you say, it's probably unlikely to ever get that far. But knowing my luck I'd be the one out of the hat first

Source

 

Are you really so sure we should ignore such threat-o-grams?

Well..what has happened to the many tens of thousands of people who have ignored them so far..absolutely nothing. If you had a chance to read the leaked ACS emails you will see that about 30% paid up, of the remaining, about half sent a LOD and the other half did nothing, the end result is the same..ACS took no action...and it is even less likely now that they ever will.

It is not surprisng that the original thread was closed, as it just repeated itself over and over. There really was no new information or advice to add.

Andy

Well..what has happened to the many tens of thousands of people who have ignored them so far..absolutely nothing. If you had a chance to read the leaked ACS emails you will see that about 30% paid up, of the remaining, about half sent a LOD and the other half did nothing, the end result is the same..ACS took no action...and it is even less likely now that they ever will.

 

It is not surprisng that the original thread was closed, as it just repeated itself over and over. There really was no new information or advice to add.

 

Andy

But the new wave of letters aren't all standard LoC's from ACS, but court claims. There is a difference. It's cost Andy some £'s to get them so he's upping the game in terms of scare tactics. I'm sure his aim is to invest a little, generate some more fear to gain a higher return. Apparently the lack of response to a court claim is more risky than that of a simple LoC and LoD. Without understanding the process the alleged file sharers may find themselves on the end of a default judgment. So ignoring these claims may not be the smartest thing to do.

But the new wave of letters aren't all standard LoC's from ACS, but court claims. There is a difference. It's cost Andy some £'s to get them so he's upping the game in terms of scare tactics. I'm sure his aim is to invest a little, generate some more fear to gain a higher return. Apparently the lack of response to a court claim is more risky than that of a simple LoC and LoD. Without understanding the process the alleged file sharers may find themselves on the end of a default judgment. So ignoring these claims may not be the smartest thing to do.

Are you sure though ?. I see the original post uses the phrase "offical court documents" but its not really clear what this means.

I somehow still doubt whether ACS Law have actually filled Court Claims (It would be usefull if someone could post one up). This would be an ex;ensive and extremely risky thing to do, you would of though that if anything ACS would progress through one court claim first otherwise if they lose one then they risk losing them all and with it a large sum of money.

It is of course more than 'risky' to not respond to a court claim, it is an automatic win for the Claimant but I still believe that ACS has more to lose than win with a risky strategy such as this, especially as their position is a lot weaker now due to the fact everyone on the planet now knows their stategies and thoughts and the fact that the company is very likely to be penalised by the SRA or ICO, perhaps both.

If he has indeed started court claims these cannot easily be stopped, unless he specifically discontinues them, the defendant then has an opportunity to go for wasted costs.

Andy

No, in all this smoke and mirrors and misdirection can anyone be sure of anything to do with ACS?

I personally have not been the recipient of one of these "Court Claim" letters, but I wouldn't put it past Crossley to up the game and raise the panic level a little higher. As you say he can cancel proceedings at anytime, but may incur costs to do so. But all it takes is one person to pay the £1,000 and he's covered the costs of 10 of his claims letters.

There is always the chance that the claims have not been filed with court, who knows? The language used on the letters appears to be contradictory.

OK lots of speculation going on with regards to potential court claims issued etc, this has the potential to worry new recipients to the point of paying for something they have not done. Just a few points for new recipients who may be reading this thread and a little concerned.

 

1) If new Court claims have been issued this has been done for one reason and one reason only, and it’s been timed perfectly to coincide with this latest batch of new letters. It’s not because Crossley ever intends to take a defended case to court it’s because of the fear it causes for recipients and this fear increases his pay-up rate.

 

2) Court claims were filled last summer in 2009 by ACS:Law, however how many of these cases actually reached court? , well exactly ZERO, all it costs Crossley is £85.00 to issue a Court Claim, anyone can do it, anyone can then procrastinate and drag it out so it never reaches Court, he knows it will never reach Court and he never wants it to reach court, it’s just another bully tactic to make people pay.

 

3) A Court claim made with the Patents Court is just one stage further from a bullying letter, it’s just that he has lodged it officially with the court, it is not a summons, it just a more formal letter of claim, don’t you think these claims issues in summer 2009 would have reached court yet if he ever intended to.

 

4) As others have mentioned he does have a motive to try to issue some claims in Court, firstly to please the SRA that this is not a massive [problem], secondly the courts are now more aware that he could be abusing the process of obtaining NPO’s and finally the ISP are now on his case and want to see some figures on the number of claims issued.

 

And remember most importantly if no one pays ACS:Law they will be finished very soon , far sooner then they will if people continue to pay. Help shut them down and stand strong and refuse to pay.

Source

If he's filing claims in the court with no intention to see them through then would this be classed as a Vexatious litigant and barred from bringing anymore claims.

From Wiki:

Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a meritorious cause of action. Filing vexatious litigation is considered an abuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions against the offender.

 

A single action, even a frivolous one, is not enough to raise a litigant to the level of being declared vexatious, though repeated and severe instances by a single lawyer or firm can result in eventual disbarment.

 

Some jurisdictions have a list of vexatious litigants: people who have repeatedly abused the legal system. Because lawyers could be disbarred for participating in the abuse, vexatious litigants are often unable to retain legal counsel, and therefore represent themselves in court. Those on the list are usually either forbidden from any further legal action or required to obtain prior permission from a senior judge before taking any legal action. The process by which a person is added to the list varies among jurisdictions.

If he's filing claims in the court with no intention to see them through then would this be classed as a Vexatious litigant and barred from bringing anymore claims.

From Wiki:

Thanks for that, very useful and informative.

I think he's got a limited life expectancy anyway. So I wonder if a series of vexatious litigations would beat him to the SRA or ICO finishing post. I'd suppose trying to complain about this would be too early as I'm sure Crossley will argue he has every intention to follow through. This may be the "wrong footing" answer he's looking to present to the SRA, as in "see I told you I was serious".

If he's filing claims in the court with no intention to see them through then would this be classed as a Vexatious litigant and barred from bringing anymore claims.

From Wiki:

Very true and the same applies if you suddenly discontinue a claim, you cant then bring any similar claims in the future.

Andy

Abit of light reading for all.

If you looks up acsbore.wordpress.com

and look at

davenport-lyons-solicitors-discplinary-hearing-date-set/

ACS Law may be next.............

:whoo: :whoo:

I received my 3rd letter today like 2 weeks after my 2nd LOD.

 

Saying pretty much the same thing as the 2nd letter I received saying it was a template and they cant accept at face valve at what I said because it is a generic response.

 

In my 2nd LOD I simply said I standby my 1st letter and having spoken to my solicitor you have no valid reason not to accept my letter.

 

Further on in the letter they say the open offer of compromise made in our original letter to you is hereby withdrawn. We have instructions from our clients to pursue this matter against you further.

 

 

And then in another page they write something to totally contradict what they said in the 1st page.

 

They send me a form to offer to settle.

 

Also don't think they even read what they wrote because one line says

 

If the offer is accepted with 21 days of service of this notice you will be liable for out clients costs in accordance with rule 36.10 of the civil procedure rules SAVE THAT if you accept the offer within this time our client will waive any claim for costs.

 

Surely a NOT is missing somewhere in the 1st line, unless it is of course me being the dumb one and cant read.

 

And last of all the biggest joke was the amount

 

The offer is £225.00

 

The reason the above offer has increased from the "open" offer of compromise is that you have chose not to accept the open offer of compromise and delivered in response a template letter that you obtained from the internet, which did not address the specific infringement of copyright identified as having occurred through your internet connection.

 

Funny thing is the amount has actually gone DOWN! The amount originally £295.

 

Anyone else get this? Or just me? Should I worry if it is just me?

Hi,

I have just today received the exact same letter, with the same 'mistakes' as you. Along with the 2nd LOD I put "I will not enter into any

further correspondence, and any further letters and/ or demands will be considered as harassment" and obviously denied the whole thing... again. What should I do regarding this 3rd letter I have received from ACS LAW? I’m happy to play letter ping pong if that’s the way to do it, just need some advice please! Also, what should I expect next?

On a side note, instead of taking weeks to months in replying back to you, ACS seem to have picked up their speed. I'm guessing this is so that they can make as much money as possible before they go to court?!

I Don't know what I would have done without all the great help and advice on this site.

Thank you!

dont you just love the fleecers!

dx

Hi,

I have just today received the exact same letter, with the same 'mistakes' as you. Along with the 2nd LOD I put "I will not enter into any

further correspondence, and any further letters and/ or demands will be considered as harassment" and obviously denied the whole thing... again. What should I do regarding this 3rd letter I have received from ACS LAW? I’m happy to play letter ping pong if that’s the way to do it, just need some advice please! Also, what should I expect next?

On a side note, instead of taking weeks to months in replying back to you, ACS seem to have picked up their speed. I'm guessing this is so that they can make as much money as possible before they go to court?!

I Don't know what I would have done without all the great help and advice on this site.

Thank you!

 

Don't play ping pong. Yo have stated your denial, you have nothing to add. Anything beyond that is unnecessary. They have provided no further evidence, so now it's just a file and ignore process. You could also see this 3rd letter as the start of your harassment case against them.

3rd?

1st letter!!!

dx

3rd?

 

1st letter!!!

 

dx

True, but until you get this far the 1st can't be considered harassment on its own as it could be a genuine claim. But by the 3rd they have proven that it is not due to the lack of supporting evidence.