Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You can edit the answers to be in red or would you like me to do it? HB
    • Apologies dx100uk  I did not put the answers in red  Thank you all for your patience. H
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton  Name of the Claimant ? Overdales solicitors  How many defendant's  joint or self ?  Self Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  13 may 2024 What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account 4546384809766042. The defendant faild to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. The dbt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?   Not to my knowledge. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  No Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ?  Online but it was for a smaller amount they kept on increasing this with me asking Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.  It was assigned to a debt collection agency  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? yes  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?  Yes I also made offers to pay original creditor a smaller amount but was not replied to Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  No Why did you cease payments? I was made redundant and got a less paid job I also spent some time on furlough during covid and spent some 3 months on ssp off work. What was the date of your last payment?  May 2021 Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes at the time I communicated with all my creditor's that I was running out of funds to pay the original agreements once my redundancy money ran out that was when my accounts defaulted. I then wrote to all my creditor's with pro rata offers of payments but debt collectors took over the accounts.
    • Just an update for all. I received about a letter every other week, increasing in threat levels. Then I hadn't had one for a about two weeks, then Saturday received a carbon copy of the very first letter they sent me in February. Made me laugh, rinse and repeat. 
    • So, your response was not received by the SCP as you did not send it with a valid stamp. Therefore, from my two option in post #14, the first option is the only one available to you, but you do not have the option of asking to be sentenced at the fixed penalty level as the reason the SCP did not receive your response was down to you. Here's a reminder of what to do: Respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box state that you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. This is a tried and tested method to deal with your problem and is almost always successful. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to do this "deal" because it needs the agreement of the police prosecutor.. During the pandemic courts made every effort to have as few  people as possible attend and they began doing this deal under the "Single Justice" procedure without the defendant's attendance. Some courts have carried this procedure on whilst others have reverted to a personal attendance being necessary. If you are required to attend, your case will be taken out of the SJ procedure and you will be given a date for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court. If that is the way they do it in the area involved you will have to attend, see the prosecutor and offer your "deal" in person. 
  • 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 
      • 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

ISP's releasing personal information - re Davenport Lyons


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4723 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

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by jonni2bad
Links removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :-|

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by patrickq1
FEW MISTAKES NEED TO EDIT
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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 :shock:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...