ISP's releasing personal information - re Davenport Lyons

[Zappagirl]

Thanks for that, Conniff. I had a bit of a rant another internet forum, so they will probably try to sue me for libel as well! I had a real go at them.

 

This has got me so angry. I've calmed down now, although that could be due to sleep deprivation and low blood sugar. How do these people sleep at nights? Is this what they went to law school to do?

[Conniff]

Of course it's what they trained for, money nothing else, just money. Why would anyone defend someone of a gross crime knowing they had committed that crime - money.

 

You could ask them to justify the amount, I think you are entitled to that at least, not some sum plucked out of the air.

[SBF]

I received a letter the other day saying I had downloaded a cd. It turns out my 11 year old daughter had done it, after her friends had told her how to and teased for not doing so already (isn't peer pressure wonderful).

 

Going on this I presume it's my responsibility and I have to pay the 'fine'. If this is the case there will be a grounded 11 year old without a computer.

[penumbra]

I received a letter the other day saying I had downloaded a cd. It turns out my 11 year old daughter had done it, after her friends had told her how to and teased for not doing so already (isn't peer pressure wonderful).

 

Going on this I presume it's my responsibility and I have to pay the 'fine'. If this is the case there will be a grounded 11 year old without a computer.

 

Hi, SBF.

 

As you indicate the 'fine' they mention is no such thing. They are asking for a massive amount when it comes to a single album or single. The reality is they have no place in setting damages - the only person with that power is a judge.

 

As you admit to doing what they accuse you of it might be an idea to send them a cheque for the sum of the album and leave it at that.

 

There is some advice on how to handle yourself over at Slyck forums and other sites.

Edited November 24, 2008 by jonni2bad
Links removed

[SBF]

Hi, SBF.

 

As you indicate the 'fine' they mention is no such thing. They are asking for a massive amount when it comes to a single album or single. The reality is they have no place in setting damages - the only person with that power is a judge.

 

As you admit to doing what they accuse you of it might be an idea to send them a cheque for the sum of the album and leave it at that.

 

There is some advice on how to handle yourself over at Slyck forums and other sites.

 

Penumbra

 

Thanks. I'll have a look. My wife is going to take legal advice today, I'll let you know how she gets on.

[Bookworm]

Or you could ground your daughter anyway and tell D/L to prove their case before they try to divest you of a considerable sum of money to which it would seem they have little right. They can only retrieve from you their actual loss, so even if your daughter (not you, your daughter!) had actually d/l the album, how much does a CD cost these day? £10? That would be the maximum amount you should be paying.

 

However, it gets trickier in that these people have little respect for the law they purport to uphold and if you show a sign of weakness (admitting that your daughter did it) then they'll hound you for a lot more.

 

The fact is they accused YOU of d/l the album, and YOU have done no such thing, so my advice would be a firm "I didn't, it is YOUR responsability to prove that *I* did such a thing in court, so see you there and we'll see who the judge believes."

 

As for peer pressure, if that's the worse thing she does because her mates did it, then you'll be very lucky. :-|

[polmac]

Or you could ground your daughter anyway and tell D/L to prove their case before they try to divest you of a considerable sum of money to which it would seem they have little right. They can only retrieve from you their actual loss, so even if your daughter (not you, your daughter!) had actually d/l the album, how much does a CD cost these day? £10? That would be the maximum amount you should be paying.

 

However, it gets trickier in that these people have little respect for the law they purport to uphold and if you show a sign of weakness (admitting that your daughter did it) then they'll hound you for a lot more.

 

The fact is they accused YOU of d/l the album, and YOU have done no such thing, so my advice would be a firm "I didn't, it is YOUR responsability to prove that *I* did such a thing in court, so see you there and we'll see who the judge believes."

 

As for peer pressure, if that's the worse thing she does because her mates did it, then you'll be very lucky. :-|

 

thats what my solicitor has told me. he wrote a letter to that effect to them asking THEM to provide evidence that my father downloaded this album.

 

No doubt they will twist it and put it back on us. we will not be paying for something we didnt do just because they say so.

[SBF]

Couldn't get an appointment until next Monday. I'll let you know how we get on.

 

I'll be bringing up the fact they only give you 21 days to reply. Trying to panic and pressurise people into paying. DL wouldn't do that would they?

[polmac]

Couldn't get an appointment until next Monday. I'll let you know how we get on.

 

I'll be bringing up the fact they only give you 21 days to reply. Trying to panic and pressurise people into paying. DL wouldn't do that would they?

lol it seems they are doing that to everyone and trying to bully people into paying for something 'because they said so'.

[patrickq1]

I CONFIRM HAVING RETURNED MY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE TO YOURSELVES JOINTLY TO I NOW NOW ASK ONE LAST TIME FOR YOU TO MAKE A FORMAL APOLOGY ,YOU SHALL ALSO AGREE TO OUR COSTS IN CLEARING MY NAME FURTHERMORE DURING THE TIME I HAVE MY COMPUTER TESTED BY AN INDEPENDENT COMPUTER FORENSIC SPECIALIST WITH REGARDS TO YOUR ACCUSATIONS AND ALL COSTS INVOLVED SHALL BE CHARGED TO YOUR COMPANY

 

DAVENPORT LYONS SOLICITORS

30 Old Burlington Street

London

W1S 3NL

Edited December 2, 2008 by patrickq1
FEW MISTAKES NEED TO EDIT

[toxicdebt]

After doing much research on the web I have come across a solicitor who takes up cases of people who have received this letter for a small fee (1/10th of the demanded costs). He used to do it for free but he is so inundated that he now has extra staff to deal with it and therefore must make a small charge (apparently).

 

I instructed this solicitor to reply on my behalf and have heard nothing since. His letter instructs Davenport Lyons to send all future correspondence to him and not to contact me directly.

 

I was asked if I 'Knowingly' download the file (which i did not) and what DL's proof was. (just my network IP address).

 

The letter sent to DL on my behalf states case law regarding wireless network security etc, as well as my mitigation.

 

Not sure of the correct procedures on the forum for this but I do have this solicitors name and address for anyone who wants it.

MODS: delete if necessary and please accept my apology if i have any broken any rules in my post. I have read the rules - most of em

[SBF]

Took legal advice on Monday. The first thing he asked was I have checked the IP ADDRESS is mine (doh). He said the letter was a standard pre littigation letter.

 

When I got home, I checked and it wasn't. However he is also going back with same correspondence as toxicdebt's solicitor.

 

I'll let you know if we get a reply from DL.

 

I would recommend anybody who gets one of these letters contacts a Solicitor (moreso toxicdebt's). Better to pay a percentage than the full amount.

[Lawman99]

I've just had a quick trawl through this thread. I'm not sure that I agree with all the advice set out. one or two of my thoughts:

 

1/ on an economic basis they are less likely to pursue a non-communicating party than one who engages in correspondence. take care in not responding to registered or recorded mail however.

 

2/ lack of funds does not seem to be a deterrent. save your hard luck stories as they are irrelevant to the legal assessment of the merits of the case. these cases are, after all, primarily deterrents rather than money-making exercises.

 

3/ set out your defence clearly at an early stage once you have been engaged in correspondence. ideally you are trying to make your case a difficult one for them to prove: perhaps they will not issue on your file and choose an easier target. defences with some prospect of success include: multiple persons with access to a home computer; insecure wireless network; dispute that copyrighted material present on home PC - which could be backe up with an offer of access for examination of the computer. there may be a basis for technical disputes in respect of IP masquerading/ allocation but I am not sufficiently tech savvy to comment on these points.

 

4/ dispute the basis of the assessment of loss. suggestions that loss is limited to purchase cost are simply wrong: the correct basis for an IP claim is loss of profit. all these cases arise from dispute the implied assertion that one download = one lost sale. request proof that you personally uploaded material to others apart from the p2p tracker employed by the applicant.

 

5/ try to ensure that the matter is allocated to the small claims track. this is the normal track for cases in which the subject matter is less than £5,000. Interestingly in the Barwinski case the damages claimed were some £6,000 - which cynically I would suggest was not coincidental. This is important: the costs in that case were approximately £10,000 - significantly more than the damages.

[toxicdebt]

1/ on an economic basis they are less likely to pursue a non-communicating party than one who engages in correspondence. take care in not responding to registered or recorded mail however.

I can answer this from experience...

 

If you reply directly to them they send another letter with the compensation charges doubled telling you that this will be the last letter sent before court action proceeds. (Something the SRA are now investigating this is bad practice).

 

If you don't reply, they wait for the 21 days to pass then send you another letter with the amount of compensation demanded doubled.

 

The letters do not come recorded, just in the normal post.

 

The letter informs the defendant that they will take civil action in court. It does not give the opportunity to opt for small claims. Not sure if one could force them to.

 

In my case only a letter from a solicitor - the one who appeared on BBC Watchdog made it go away (I was wrongly accused by the way)

 

Also remember the one case they won was not answered nor contested in court.

[Lawman99]

this is the section of the civil procedure rules governing allocation to one of the three tracks: small claims, fast track and multi-track.

 

PART 26 - CASE MANAGEMENT – PRELIMINARY STAGE

[NitrousOxide]

Also remember the one case they won was not answered nor contested in court.

It seems it was indeed a default judgement from what I've read. They send a copy simply to frighten people into paying.

[0siris]

What happens if your computer had been infected and being used to store [Warez] I.E Someone had exploited a service on your machine and was able to gain a terminal to which they installed a command line p2p client/server and was using your computer as a storehouse, would microsoft not be partly to blame for not releasing a patch for the service etc that had been exploited and how can they prove that you wasnt infected? I guess they would request some kind of proof but you have already formated your computer as no Anti Virus as of yet was able to detect the Exploit and you wasnt prepared to leave your computer infected.

 

How did you tell that you was infected when your Anti Virus didnt detect anything ? you read an article on the internet that taught you how to close all applications that use the internet and then how to open a command prompt and type netstat -n to view open connections which revealed a continues connection all day to a certain IP Address.

[Ihatedca's]

If you are going to try the above tactic make sure you delete your hardrive with military percision as anything can be recover if you do not over right it 7 times and hen delete it again lol

[0siris]

Lol yeah I work as a IT systems specialist you could always just encrypt the drive with a lengthy key but the law has made it that if you dont provide the encryption password automatic jail without passing go, although createing partitions and formating the partition then deleting it again recurring will do the trick another method is to just say you use Linux on a Live CD as this only loads into your RAM no need for a harddrive so how could you of stored anything

[Brent Knoll]

Well 2 years on we know its a [problem] called speculative invoicing. You can safely just ignore the letters as they have never taken anyone to court as they can't prove it was you so cannot be sure of winning.

The more you engage them the more they will bully you. Just chuck the letter in the bin and forget them.

For every 100 letters they send out they hope at least 1/3 will be scared into paying and thats how it works.

Look whats happened to ACS now LOL.

[locutus]

This thread was started with the concerns of the ISP's releasing personal info to Davenport Lyons... seems them concerns were well justified!

[andydd]

Well 2 years on we know its a [problem] called speculative invoicing. You can safely just ignore the letters as they have never taken anyone to court as they can't prove it was you so cannot be sure of winning.

The more you engage them the more they will bully you. Just chuck the letter in the bin and forget them.

For every 100 letters they send out they hope at least 1/3 will be scared into paying and thats how it works.

Look whats happened to ACS now LOL.

 

 

According to ACS's figures (now released to the known Universe )it is somwhat less than a third who pay up and even then, some its only partial or maybe in installments.

 

Andy

[42man]

Update - http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/two-solicitors-accused-over-file-sharing-bully-tactics