Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I disagree with the charge and also the statements sent. Firstly I have not received any correspondence from DVLA especially a statutory notice dated 2/5/2024 or a notice 16/5/2024 voiding my licence if I had I would have responded within this timeframe. The only letter received was the single justice procedure notice dated the 29.5.2024 this was received on 4.6.2024. I also disagree with the statement that tax was dishonoured through invalid indemnity claim. I disagree that the licence be voided I purchased the vehicle in Jan 2024 from RDA car sales Pontefract with agreement to collect the car on the 28.1.2024. The garage taxed the vehicle on the 25.1.24 for eleven payments on direct debit  using my debit card on my behalf. £62.18 was the initial payment on 8.2.24  and £31 per month thereafter the second payment was 1.3.24.This would run from Jan 24 to Dec 24 and a total of £372.75, therefore the car was clearly taxed before  I took the car away After checking one of my vehicle apps  I could see the vehicle was showing as untaxed it later transpired that DVLA had cancelled my tax , without reason and I did not receive any correspondence from DVLA to state why it was cancelled or when. The original payment of £62.18 had gone through and verified by my bank Lloyds so this payment was not declined. I then set up the direct debit again straight away at my local post office branch on 15.2.2024 the first payment was £31 on 1.3.2024 and subsequent payments up to Feb 2025 with a total of £372.75 which was the same total as the original DD that was set up in Jan, Therefore I claimed the £62.18 back from my bank as an indemnity claim as this payment was from the original cancelled tax from DVLA and had been cancelled . I have checked my bank account at Lloyds and every payment since Jan 24  up to date has been taken with none rejected as follows: 8.2.24 - £62.15 1.3.24 - £31.09 2.4.24 - £31.06 1.5.24 - £31.06 3.6.23-£31.06 I have paper copies of the original DD set up conformation plus a breakdown of payments per month , and a paper copy of the second DD setup with breakdown of payments plus a receipt from the post office.I can also provide bank statements showing each payment to DVLA I also ask that my licence be reinstated due to the above  
    • You know hes had it when they call out those willing to say anything even claiming tories have reduced taxes on live tv AS Salmonella says: The Conservative Party must embrace Nigel Farage to “unite the right”, Suella Braverman has urged, following a disastrous few days for Rishi Sunak. The former home secretary told The Times there was “not much difference” between the new Reform UK leader’s policies and those of the Tories, as senior Conservatives start debating the future of the party. hers.   AND Goves replacement gets caught booking in an airbnb to claim he lives locally .. as of yesterday you can rent it yourself in late July - as he'll either be gone or claiming taxpayer funded expenses for a house Alongside pictures of himself entering a house, Mr McGuinness said Surrey Heath residents “rightly expect their MP to be a part of their community”. - So whens farage getting around to renting (and subletting) a clacton beach hut?   Gove’s replacement caught out on constituency house claim as home found on Airbnb WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Social media users quickly pointed out house Ed McGuinness had posted photos in was available to rent     As Douglas Ross says he'll stand down in scotland - if he wins a Westminster seat - such devotion.
    • I've completed a draft copy to defend and will post up here for review.  Looking over the dates and payments this all stemmed from DVLA cancelling in Feb , whereby I set up a new DD in Feb hence the overlap, why they cancelled when I paid originally in Jan I have no idea. Anyway now stuck with pending court action and a suspended licence . I am also firing off a letter to DVLa recorded disputing the licence revoke
    • Thank you both for your expert knowledge and understanding. You're fighting the good fight by standing up for people like me and others with limited knowledge of this stuff. I thank you. I know all my DVLA details are good. I recently (last year) renewed my license, and my car's V5 is current with the correct details; the same is valid for my partner. I'll continue to ignore the love letters 😂 and won't let it bother either me or my partner.  I'll revisit this post if/when I get a letter of claim.  F**k ém.
    • Please check back later on today for a fuller response and some edits
  • 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

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 4975 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

no ive not i went to CAB and they said to ingore it so i did thats when the first letter came in, any chance any1's got a LOD they could send me a copy of id apreachate it, as ive not idea how to write 1

thanks

scooby

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

Whats bothering me about this is the lack of information about this monitoring software, bearing in mind that these NPO's are granted based on the evidence obtained from it, I wander if there is some kind of industry standard or quality requirments that this software is required to conform to? Surely there should be if it is used evidentually.

 

When they produce the evidence to the judge they pretty much say its not a direct accusation to the owner of the internet line but the release of addresses would help with their enquiries.

 

If there was 100% accurate method then illegal file sharing would shut down instantly, unfortunately there isn't. That is why this method is called speculative invoicing. There is a chance the person accused has downloaded the file and the threat of court action makes them pay up.

 

It even says in their letters they send out that they are not directly accusing you but word it very very well so it sounds like they are. Its a get out clause.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no ive not i went to CAB and they said to ingore it so i did thats when the first letter came in, any chance any1's got a LOD they could send me a copy of id apreachate it, as ive not idea how to write 1

thanks

scooby

 

I think that I saw a sample LOD posted on this site within the past few days. Have a look at the posts and I am sure that you will find it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found another site talking about gallant macmillan, heres what they have to say....

 

"If were unable to reach an agreement with the recipitent of our letters, and still consider that our client has a good claim, we shall sue. We recognise that its not appropriate to make threats of proceedings and then to not follow through with thoes threats in appropriate cases."

 

Take a look the site is called Torrentech!

 

Lets hope there just all talk!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scare mongering, lets hope they do try and sue some one. Immediate loss game over for all cases remaining for all solicitors. Not a chance in hell of it happening.

 

Well it could happen when the money starts to dry up and they are desperate for a win, they will look over all previous cases where clients have declined to pay and choose the case with the most chance of winning, just one last shot in the dark at keeping the scheme running. My view on the mater anyway.

Edited by youtube
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have not already send a LOD, do not ignore them as it could make matters worse. What makes me laugh is why has it taken so long to get back to you. Probably to busy with their mass mailing.

 

Please could anybody explain why ignoring such letters would be a bad thing? There is a lot of discussion on here about the LOD's but not much about actually ignoring them in the first place - if their letters didn't arrive surely there is nothing to respond to.

 

Are there any disadvantages in ignoring?

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any disadvantages in ignoring?

 

Cheers

 

Who knows? But where will it get you - unless you think they'll just give up after one letter. I should think that is extremely unlikely, for obvious reasons.

 

If you continue to ignore subsequent letters then they might decide to proceed to a Court appearance, aiming to get a default judgement, as you will have offered no denial or defence.

 

And if you had already ignored more than one letter, how would you justify that to a judge?

 

If you are NOT guilty, then you should issue a firm LOD (imo), or if you ARE guilty then offer a realistic settlement figure.

Edited by HenriIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please could anybody explain why ignoring such letters would be a bad thing? There is a lot of discussion on here about the LOD's but not much about actually ignoring them in the first place - if their letters didn't arrive surely there is nothing to respond to.

 

Are there any disadvantages in ignoring?

 

Cheers

The letters , however unreasonable they seem, are legitimate claims (although based on suspect evidence) made in accordance with The code of Practice for Pre-Action Conduct in Intellectual Property Disputes. This code requires that the "defendant" should provide a written response.

 

It's obviously up to the individual what they do but IMO should one of these claims ever get to court, a dim view would be taken by the Magistrates if the defendant had not , as a minimum, replied with a denial and hence discharged his duties to comply with the code of conduct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, HenriIV had already answered while I was typing!

 

It's worth noting that Bridget Prentice MP (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State in Feb 2010) in a letter to Lord Young (Minister for Postal Affairs and Employment Relations) wrote:

 

"It may be helpful to say to recipients of a letter from ACS Law who are satisfied they have no liability whatsoever in respect of the issues raised, that it is open to them to inform ACS Law that they are not liable and do not intend to reply to any further correspondance, save to defend a claim should one be bought."

Link to post
Share on other sites

i just want a decnts night sleep now, i'm so tired of worrying, i've done everything by the book, i have never downloaded anything without reading the T's & C's carefully, as for torrents, to be honest, i don't see the point, i'm a sucker for a CD. i'm going for a cry..........:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello people, i also got the letter last week friday. been watching this forum since then.

 

the song is also evacuate the dancefloor, the date they alleged i download this song on the 29/09/2009. 01:54:02

 

i have a few question.

 

i phoned up my ISP which is o2 and they say they have no records of them releasing my details. on there document it states that my isp is BE UNLIMITED anyone have information on this?

 

the court order/application which is dated 17 feb 2010 also looks very dodgy to me. has anyone phoned up the court to verify there court order/application?

 

i plan to write an LOD letter, but should i also get in touch with citizen advice bureau?

 

can i use this LOD example that user DANNY:BOI created or used, will there be a problem if i used this or is there another one i can use?

 

please make adjustment to the letter if needed

 

ACS:LAW

Andrew J Crossley

20 Hanover Sq,

London,

W1S 1JY todays date

 

RE: Letter of Claim Dated (insert date) concerning “insert file in question as mentioned in the letter” (“The Work”)

Dear Sir,

I am writing in reply to your letter of claim dated (insert date) stating that my connection was used in an infringement of copyright, using peer to peer networks which allegedly occurred on the date (insert date) and concerns the work “insert file in question as mentioned in the letter” (“the work”).

You assert in your letter that the infringement was apparently traced to my internet connection. I note that I am not personally being accused of the infringement, as you have no evidence to this effect.

Nevertheless, I categorically deny any offence under sections 16(1) (d) and 20 of the CDPA 1988. I have never possessed a copy of the work in any form, nor have I distributed it, nor have I authorised anyone else to distribute it using my internet connection. I note that section 16(2) of the act requires a person to either directly infringe copyright, or authorise someone else to do so. I have done neither, and you have not provided any evidence of my doing so.

As such I cannot and will not sign the undertakings as provided by you.

As you seem to be perfectly aware, it is impossible to link an IP address to a particular person or computer without further detailed analysis, which requires a level of expertise I do not possess. Furthermore the delay in your sending of a letter of claim precludes any such analysis. In your letter you state that “it is unlikely that a simple denial (without further explanation) will change our view of the circumstances”, unfortunately I do not have the expertise to provide a detailed explanation. As such I can only conclude that I have been a victim of foul play.

As far as I am aware, there is no law in the UK under which you could properly hold me responsible for an infringement occurring via my internet connection, without either my knowledge or permission. I would be interested to hear your legal basis for attempting to do so.

Please inform your clients that if they wish to pursue this matter, I will seek to recover all my costs to the maximum permitted by the Civil Procedure Rules. The signature of the undersigned confirms the statement provided to be accurate and legally binding under the terms required by pre-action protocol in civil law.

Yours Faithfully

Your name

 

thanks in advance

Edited by londonukguy
Link to post
Share on other sites

i just want a decnts night sleep now, i'm so tired of worrying, i've done everything by the book, i have never downloaded anything without reading the T's & C's carefully, as for torrents, to be honest, i don't see the point, i'm a sucker for a CD. i'm going for a cry..........:(

 

The initial letters are frightening, but you'll eventually come to see that it's all bark and no bite. Remember, like all bullies these lawyers want you to be afraid so that you'll pay up, but this is their only weapon. As long as people stand up to them they'll fall back.

 

Remember - no one has yet been taken to court in a contested case, and this has been going on for years.

 

These lawyers are continually sending out new batches of claims - they're relying entirely on breaking you down with the first one or two. Their entire business model is based on NOT having to go to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I originally posted this on Slyck, but i think it is just as relevant here

 

come on Guys and Girls, lets show this new company what "People Power can do", if we all sent an email or letter to Gallant McMillan's other clients, then they may exert some pressure on them to stop this mass mailings. Why would the likes of

Clients of Gallant McMillan

 

Serviceair

Kookai

Ted Baker

Liberty

Long Tall Sally

Claims Direct

Hunter

and Ministry of Sound. -( not that i would buy their Shi**

Want their business associated with this "Legal Blackmail" I am sure that given enough bad press, Gallant McMillan will go the way of Tilly Bailly and Irvine and Davenport Lyons.

 

ACS Law never had a reputation to loose, but Gallant McMillan have.....

 

It takes years to gain a good reputation, but seconds to lose it !!!!

 

Lets try to get them to lose it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know of anyone (or they themselves) contacted any lawyers/solicitors on this matter? I haven't managed to yet and the longer it goes on the more worried I'm getting!

 

As this is a totally new grey-area, a lawyer will prob be unable to give specific advice anyway, but you will be a lot poorer.

 

Just send a LOD. Nothing else is needed.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

We received a letter yesterday from ACS:Law about a copyright infringement for Guru Josh - Infinity, their client is DigiProtect.

 

Reading all of the posts on here it would seem that most people have always received a 1st letter which gives more details, IP address, date of offence etc but we have only received the 2nd letter, stating about their previous letter and noting we havent responded.

 

We really dont know what to do, should we reply or not ? The letter states we have 14 days to respond.

 

I would like to know how they got this information in the first place. If they obtain the information from our internet provider surely they would need a court order or something to obtain personal details. I did call our provider and they said had they received any letter from a solicitor they would have a legal obligation to provide the information but dont keep records of these so called letters. It worries me greatly that they would just hand out the information to someone claiming to be from a legit legal practice.

 

Any advice would be greatly received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

P2P or peer to peer file as its known is continuously ransacked by firms threatening to sue etc... some have and some have not.

 

Let's be clear on this and this to everyone who has had a letter.

 

In order to have been deemed ( whether you have really or not ) responsible to breaching copyright specifically with a torrent file as states the following needs to have happened:

 

you need to have a software client, utorrent for example, you have to download this.

 

you need to access a website that hosts torrent files like thepiratebay

 

you need to open the file and select the software client to download it.

 

You can't do this by accident, and it isn't simply a case of 'the file just appeared' you have to have done it! simple.

 

So because there is a huge debate as to if this is a [problem] or not, let's look at it this way... do you use torrents? if yes then maybe you should be worried ofcourse unless you can prove it and if you don't use torrents then there can be NO WAY you are liable, again unless you have had a hdd replacement can be proved within reason.

 

I don't file share I don't need to but let's say you do, I cant stress how highly important it is you understand the SHARE part, its one thing to download it, its another to share the download after it has finished.

If it was me, any downloaded files would be moved straight out of the shared folder and stuck elsewhere, and the torrent file deleted.

Also any wireless security can be hacked unsecured or not. In the IT world we use terms like piggybacking where your relying on someone elses connection to browse and download. Or you can interrupt data packets and capture logon details. Please also bear in mind there next to no chance of someone bothering with your wifi if it is security protected.

Why target yours when lots of others cant be bothered to secure their connections.

Also I will point out it can be deemed an offence not to have a password as you are deemed to be broadcasting.

 

To summarise, if you don't use Torrents and none of the above makes even the most highly tuned brain cell tick over then send a LOD and forget abut it.

But if you use Torrents for gods sake stop the sharing! this is where you will get the big boys coming after you under the DCMA etc!

 

Fair enough to a point but there are many perfectly legal uses of torrents. it is also not illegal to download torrent software or use torrents. Just because you use them and software associated with them does not brand you a criminal. Its just like saying because you wear a hoodie you must be involved in unsavoury activities. Its generalisation/stereotyping/prejudice/Pidgeon holing or whatever you want to call it.

 

Ha!

 

Nobody needs to be formatting hardrives, as this is a civil matter they can't demand your pc for forensic examination. Anyway an IT forensic team would be able to recover the data from a drive after formatting at low level. The only way to truly prevent recovery it is to physically destroy the disks medevil style (a hammer and screwdriver) and lose the bits in a scrap yard.

 

Not true. data can be recovered from a HDD fragment measuring a tiny size. There are some low level formatting tools available such as SecureErase (by the Center for magnetic recording Research) which uses the hard drives built in formatting function and is pretty much the best thing out there aside from turning it to powder and recently US Government approved for high security (or something like that). read the FAQ on the site. That said, almost everyone on here (myself included) are indeed innocent and you have therefore no need to worry about using such a tool as 1) you have done nothing and 2) they have no right to inspect your machine.

 

So they actually are monitoring data transfer, and not just getting the IP addresses of the swarm? That's a more honest strategy than what I assumed these companies were up to

...And highly illegal i would think. A blatant breach of privacy. Even government s get into trouble for doing that kind of thing without a court order or something.

Edited by Caimbeul
something went wrong?
Link to post
Share on other sites

We received a letter yesterday from ACS:Law about a copyright infringement for Guru Josh - Infinity, their client is DigiProtect.

 

Reading all of the posts on here it would seem that most people have always received a 1st letter which gives more details, IP address, date of offence etc but we have only received the 2nd letter, stating about their previous letter and noting we havent responded.

 

We really dont know what to do, should we reply or not ? The letter states we have 14 days to respond.

 

I would like to know how they got this information in the first place. If they obtain the information from our internet provider surely they would need a court order or something to obtain personal details. I did call our provider and they said had they received any letter from a solicitor they would have a legal obligation to provide the information but dont keep records of these so called letters. It worries me greatly that they would just hand out the information to someone claiming to be from a legit legal practice.

 

Any advice would be greatly received.

 

If you didnt do it, send a letter of denial. If you really want, ask them to provide information on how they obtained this susposed "evidence" and your personal details. I would avoid this though as you are opening up an avenue for further dialogue. In all likellyhood they will ignore formal requests for information even though they are obliged to provide if it is requested (they ignored me).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true. data can be recovered from a HDD fragment measuring a tiny size.

 

Thats why I said lose the bits?

 

Anyway we are getting away from the main point I was trying to make, which was that as this is a civil case, people don't need to worry about destroying/formatting drives.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello people, i also got the letter last week friday. been watching this forum since then.

 

the song is also evacuate the dancefloor, the date they alleged i download this song on the 29/09/2009. 01:54:02

 

i have a few question.

 

i phoned up my ISP which is o2 and they say they have no records of them releasing my details. on there document it states that my isp is BE UNLIMITED anyone have information on this?

 

the court order/application which is dated 17 feb 2010 also looks very dodgy to me. has anyone phoned up the court to verify there court order/application?

 

i plan to write an LOD letter, but should i also get in touch with citizen advice bureau?

 

can i use this LOD example that user DANNY:BOI created or used, will there be a problem if i used this or is there another one i can use?

 

Yes you can use that LOD

 

I still can't believe that they are still using the same Court order from the beginning of the year, or is it because they can't get any new court orders .

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

i phoned up my ISP which is o2 and they say they have no records of them releasing my details. on there document it states that my isp is BE UNLIMITED anyone have information on this?

 

Can't help with this.

 

the court order/application which is dated 17 feb 2010 also looks very dodgy to me. has anyone phoned up the court to verify there court order/application?

 

This court order is genuine, it's just been photocopied many times.

 

i plan to write an LOD letter, but should i also get in touch with citizen advice bureau?

 

Up to you, I have read on here that CAB have not been that helpful.

 

can i use this LOD example that user DANNY:BOI created or used, will there be a problem if i used this or is there another one i can use?

 

please make adjustment to the letter if needed

 

It's up to you adjust the template to suit your needs. They may write back saying "they don't accept your letter as it is based on template available on the internet" There is no legal reason as to why you shouldn't use a template. Anyway their letters are templates.

 

I would also recommend spending some time reading through this thread - all of your questions are answered within.

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4975 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...