Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

ACS:Law copyright file sharing claims, Gallant Macmillan - and probably some others along the way...


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4928 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Not sure if its the right place to post but here goes

 

Recieved a letter this morning claiming "Infringement of Copyright" saying they have "retained forensic computer analysis" to identify me as sharing a game on P2P over a year and a half ago.

 

Now after reading all the long confusing paragraphs about this that and the other I have a form on the back saying I'm to pay over £730 to ACS

 

I'm going to dispute this as the game in question really doesn't ring any bells and maybe someone else who was using my computer may have downloaded it but early days yet.

 

Back to my main question has anyone any story's about ACS:law at all as well as some information as how to tackle this.

 

There based in London W1S 1NX If that is any help

ASPIRE to INSPIRE before you EXPIRE

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Thanks for that Cerberus ..I will keep an eye on that posting and see what develops as Im thinking Im not the only one in the country to receive this letter today.

ASPIRE to INSPIRE before you EXPIRE

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to laugh when I read that piece, my IP is listed amongst the many others but one problem they would have to overcome is the fact that Kcom & Eclipse (who are one and the same IP) do not issue static ISP addresses, mine can change a dozen or more times a day. :D

 

Then of course there's the little matter of file sharers who use 'third party' servers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm thinking back I was on a wireless router but again will be hard to prove .. not sure what to make of it up to now.

 

Do I ignore or wait and see what happens as another letter arrived shortly after the £730 one printed the same with a few ip details and dates but wanting £860

 

So now have 2 debts ....

ASPIRE to INSPIRE before you EXPIRE

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd ignore them for now. It seems that those that respond to them start to get hounded, whereas those that have ignored them have been left alone. According to the link you gave, there have been no known proscecutions so far, besides just having an ISP address proves nothing anyway. I think they would have a very hard time proving anything & would rather rely on some poor smuck just coughing-up without a fight. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks ..the link in the P2P freak forum is picking up ..seems it may well be a [problem] so going to wait off a bit and see what happens.

ASPIRE to INSPIRE before you EXPIRE

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd ignore them for now. It seems that those that respond to them start to get hounded, whereas those that have ignored them have been left alone. According to the link you gave, there have been no known proscecutions so far, besides just having an ISP address proves nothing anyway. I think they would have a very hard time proving anything & would rather rely on some poor smuck just coughing-up without a fight. ;)

 

It's all rather worrying, esp if events years back can be refered to..I have had various flatmate over the last few years and allow them to use my WiFi service, how on earth could I really be held liable for what they download, also |Im on Virgin media and I belive that they don't have staic IP's either so they are always changing :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

All these guests just for 1 thread :cool:

Anyway whatever this thing is & whoever is behind it..it goes without saying, do not pay a penny & report to the OFT/trading standards & Watchdog etc...

The police (not 999) might also be interested to be made aware of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

VBulletin is designed to be very search engine friendly - I'm on the site team at another forum, and it amazes us how quickly a thread can go to the top of the rankings. Within a couple of hours sometimes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

True.Ive no proof on my part other than them taking my computer away and testing it to see if there is a trace of this so called "Two Worlds" there but can most likely guarantee it wont be.

 

A few people use the PC regularly but there is a lot of speculation on the company who gather the data ... Logistep

 

Antipiracy group's tactics violate Swiss law | Developer World - InfoWorld

 

the link is based on a case in Switzerland so I'm not sure how they stand over here or how much weight they actually carry

ASPIRE to INSPIRE before you EXPIRE

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldnt worry about it coz if the worst came to the worst..it would be a simple case of them having to take the individual to the county court (at cost to them) & obtaining money that way...once all outgoings are catered for etc...so they'd get £1 per month or something, same principle with the DCA's

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4928 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...