Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Just to be clear a Notice to Quit is only the very start of the Housing Association going down the Eviction route there is a long process to go. Also to be clear if you leave at the Notice to Quit date only and go to the Council claiming you are Homeless they will more than likely class you as Intentionally Homeless therefore you have no right to be given temporary housing by the Council. The only way that works is when the Court has Granted a Possession Order then you can approach the Council as Homeless with the Court Order. As for the Housing Association issuing the Notice to Quit because there investigation has proved it's not your main residence but you have witness statement to prove otherwise. From now on with the Housing Association you need to keep a very good paper trail and ensure to get free proof of posting from the post office with anything you send to them. You now need to make a Formal Complaint to the Housing Association and please amend the following to suit your needs:   Dear Sir/Madam FORMAL COMPLAINT Reference: Notice to Quit Letter Dated XX/XX/2024, Hand Delivered on XX/XX/2024 I note in your letter that you stated that the Housing Association has carried out an investigation into myself and came to the conclusion that I am not using this property as my main residence and have evidence of this and have therefore issued a 'Notice to Quit' by XX/XX/2024. I find the above actions absolutely disgraceful action by the Housing Association. 1. Why have I never been informed nor asked about this matter by my Housing Officer. 2. Why have I never been given the opportunity to defend myself before the Housing Association out of the blue Hand Delivered a Notice to Quit Letter. 3. I have evidence and witnesses/statements that prove this is my Main Residence and more than willing provide this to both the Housing Association and the Court. I now require the following: 1. Copy of your Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Copy of your Customer Care Charter (not the leaflet) 3. Copies of your Investigation into this not being my main residence.    As well as the above you need to send the Housing Association urgently a Subject Access Request (SAR) requesting 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whatever format they hold that in whether it be letters, email, recorded calls etc. The Housing Association then has 30 calendar days to respond but that time limit only starts once they acknowledge your SAR Request. If they fail to respond within that time limit its then off with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO).     
    • Hi Sorry for the delay in getting back to you The email excuse and I do say excuse to add to your account and if court decide LL can't recoup costs will be removed is a joke. So I would Ask them: Ask them to provide you with the exact terms within your Tenancy Agreement that allows them to add these Court Fees to your Account before it has been decided in Court by a Judge. Until the above is answered you require these Court Fees to be removed from your Account (Note: I will all be down to your Tenancy Agreement so have a good look through it to see what if any fees they can add to your account in these circumstances)
    • Thank you for your responses. As requested, some more detail. Please forgive, I'm writing this on my phone which always makes for less than perfect grammar. My Dad tries but English not his 1st language, i'm born and bred in England, a qualified accountant and i often help him with his admin. On this occasion I helped my dad put in his renewal driving licence application around 6 weeks before expiry and with it the disclosure of his sleep apnoea. Once the licence expired I told him to get in touch with his GP, because the DVLA were offering only radio silence at that time (excuses of backlogs When I called to chase up). The GP charged £30 for an opinion letter on his ability to drive based on his medical history- at the time I didn't take a copy of the letter, but I am hoping this will be key evidence that we can rely on as to why s88 applies because in the GP opinion they saw no reason he couldn't drive i need to see the letter again as im going only on memory- we forwarded the letter in a chase up / complaint to the DVLA.  In December, everything went quiet RE the sleep apnoea (i presume his GP had given assurance) but the DVLA noticed there had been a 2nd medical issue in the past, when my father suffered a one off mini stroke 3 years prior. That condition had long been resolved via an operation (on his brain of all places, it was a scary time, but he came through unscathed) and he's never had an issue since. We were able to respond to that query very promptly (within the 14 days) and the next communication was the licence being granted 2 months later. DVLA have been very slow in responding every step of the way.  I realise by not disclosing the mini stroke at the time, and again on renewal (had I known I'd have encouraged it) he was potentially committing an offence, however that is not relevant to the current charge being levied, which is that he was unable to rely on s88 because of a current medical issue (not one that had been resolved). I could be wrong, I'm not a legal expert! The letter is a summons I believe because its a speeding offence (59 in a temp roadworks 50 limit on the A1, ironically whist driving up to visit me). We pleaded guilty to the speeding but not guilty to the s87.  DVLA always confirmed to me on the phone that the licence had not been revoked and that he "May" be able to continue to drive. They also confirmed in writing, but the letter explains the DVLA offer no opinion on the matter and that its up to the driver to seek legal advice. I'll take the advice to contact DVLA medical group. I'm going to contact the GP to make sure they received the SAR request for data, and make it clear we need to see a copy of the opinion letter. In terms of whether to continue to fight this, or to continue with the defence, do we have any idea of the potential consequences of either option? Thanks all
    • stopping payments until a DN arrives does not equal automatic sale to a DCA...if you resume payments after the DN.  
    • Sleep apnoea: used to require the condition  to be “completely” controlled Sometime before June 2013 DVLA changed it to "adequately" controlled. I have to disagree with MitM regarding the effect of informing DVLA and S.88 A diagnosis of sleep apnoea doesn't mean a licence wont be granted, and, indeed, here it was. If the father sought medical advice (did he?) : this is precisely where S.88 applies https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64edcf3a13ae1500116e2f5d/inf1886-can-i-drive-while-my-application-is-with-dvla.pdf p.4 for “new medical condition” It is shakier ground if the opinion of a healthcare professional wasn’t sought. in that case it is on the driver to state they believed they met the medical standard to drive. However, the fact the licence was then later granted can be used to be persuasive that the driver’s belief they met the standard was correct. What was the other condition? And, just to confirm, at no point did DVLA say the licence was revoked / application refused? I’d be asking DVLA Drivers’ Medical Group why they believe S.88 doesn’t apply. S.88 only applies for the UK, incidentally. If your licence has expired and you meet the conditions for S.88 you can drive in the U.K., but not outside the U.K. 
  • 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 4967 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

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

As i said before I have had two of these letters now from both Gallant and acs law. I havent done it but if anyone has can these guys proove it? I have had two letters now so how many more are likely to arrive out of the blue - i cant keep sending lods off indef.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ozzy MOS

Just going back to your post of a few weeks ago,

 

 

Were you accused of downloading the whole album or just one track, and did the torrent contain the full album?

What I'm wondering is that if the torrent contained the whole album then there are many artists that appear on it, most signed to other labels. Ministry of Sound will obviously have permission to use their work on "The Annual 2010 but have these other artists given their permission for their work to be used in this way by MOS & ACSL and, if not, aren't ACSL guilty of making their work available for download themselves?

Do the other artists even know that this is happening? and if they did would they allow it?

(This has probably been answered elsewhere and if it has I do apologise)

 

8of9

 

I was accused of uploading/sharing the full album. presumably the individual artists licence the use of their tracks to ministry of sound? I'm not sure how it works from a legal point of view

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if you type in "ACS:Law" into google..you get the following

 

ACS Law | InterSolicitors.co.uk

 

The post code is exactly that as mentioned above.:cool:

 

It gives a link to a web site for the company & an email contact addy for a Mr [email protected]

 

:cool::cool:

Also had a letter 3 weeks ago from ACS LAW asking me to pay them for alledged copyright infringement in sept 09, had no knowledge of this so have spent the cost of a 2 nd class stamp asking for more details, i believe this is a [problem] and expect a letter harrasing me. the original letter bleated on about costs and courts etc etc and advised me to seek the advise of citizens advise.

any ideas as whats going to happen next ? it will keep us all informed of the situation.:p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I recived my 2nd letter yesterday saying the same ol' stuff "templete blah blah blah" but yet again they have the cheek to send me a templete lol oh well it says ive got 14 days to cough up my monies....fat chance as ive done nothing wrong. Has anyone got any other letters after the 2nd one? just wondering what to exepct...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the 2nd Letter..

 

They will go down the template path as they know they have nothing else to accuse us of, so instead of reading the 1st LOD which is worded so well to the point that if they did take all LOD in, would suffice to stop all allegations going further, they try n reject it.

 

What could one say in defence regarding a template LOD for them to accept it after is has been refused....

 

Templates should be accepted in this case. As we are all being accused of the same infringement with the same defences with the same type of methodology. So why would our reply not be the same. ' YA GET ME!? '

 

its legally bound with a signature too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Everyone, after reading this forum for many months, i thought i should share my story (though it's the same as everyone else's!)

I recieved a letter back in april for allegedly sharing a porn film back in september 09. At first i was furious that SKY had given my details out, reading this forum it seems SKY have given a lot of details out. I was also scared as i have used PTP sharing networks but i honestly have no recolection of the file in question (I know that wouldn't sound good in court!)

Luckily for me, my brother is a law graduate and my mom works for a solictor. I enlisted the free advise of her colleague who specialises in copyright law. He advised me to throw the letter in the bin as ACS were under investigation by the SRA, he also pointed out that the main reason for this was that their letters are far too threatening and the evidence is purely circumstantial.

Well, i got a second letter at the end of May reffering to the previous letter and thought it best to respond to this, i used one of the many templates available online and tweaked it a bit, sent it off 3 weeks ago now and have heard nothing.

Has anyone recieved a 3rd letter this long after sending their LOD?

 

I find it astonishing that Media CAT can claim against us, saying they are losing money when all they've done is buy the rights and upload the files with NO INTENTION of selling the media, check out their site, obviously expecting a lot of hits since April! - www.media-cat.co.uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Gallant Macmillan are going to scrutinise every LOD and pass it on to MOS.

 

I thought it was the solicitors job to do all the work. I can't really see the MOS reading hundreds of letters.

 

 

they should /would insist on a drugs test on this as well but also test themselves just to be on the safe side as we know the E used to symbolise the internet but it also is a symbol for the /?////////////// sound say no more coke fueled idioits imo...lol

please note this is just an opinion perhaps the sales of MOS has dropped through the floor seeing as the rap crap has taken over ...getting old ,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I recived my 2nd letter yesterday saying the same ol' stuff "templete blah blah blah" but yet again they have the cheek to send me a templete lol oh well it says ive got 14 days to cough up my monies....fat chance as ive done nothing wrong. Has anyone got any other letters after the 2nd one? just wondering what to exepct...

 

I received my second letter from ACS Law at the end of May, sent off a second LOD. Currently have not heard anything more from them and I hope that it continues.;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you accused of downloading the whole album or just one track, and did the torrent contain the full album?

What I'm wondering is that if the torrent contained the whole album then there are many artists that appear on it, most signed to other labels. Ministry of Sound will obviously have permission to use their work on "The Annual 2010 but have these other artists given their permission for their work to be used in this way by MOS & ACSL and, if not, aren't ACSL guilty of making their work available for download themselves?

Do the other artists even know that this is happening? and if they did would they allow it?

(This has probably been answered elsewhere and if it has I do apologise)

 

8of9

 

I was accused of uploading/sharing the full album. presumably the individual artists licence the use of their tracks to ministry of sound? I'm not sure how it works from a legal point of view

 

I'm not sure of the legalities either but if the individual artists have given MOS permission to use their work then surely they are entitled to their cut? This then doesn't make any sense to me as another dozen or so in the share out wouldnt make it worthwhile.....unless the artists aren't aware what their work is being used for...!

Link to post
Share on other sites

last december my brother showed me how to get u torrent and he said i could download albums from sites to see if i liked them before buying them as i prefer proper cds but like to hear what i might like to buy

 

i downloaded an album in december 09 an 80s remix ministry of sound 80s album listened to it and didnt like it so deleted it

 

 

last thursday i open a letter from solicitors gallant and mcmillan on behalf of ministry of sound saying i was an illegal file sharer and would be taken to court unless i paid £370 sad.gif

 

i tried to explain i was naive and only wanted to listen before buying proper copy and had not downloaded any other album except that one and had got rid of u torrent as i was plagued by viruses

 

im angry at my stupidity and the fact i spent tens of thousands of pounds over the years on vinyl and cds i get done for wanting to just listen not copy but they said 7 other people downloaded it from me while i was downloading it sad.gif

 

also by admitting it over the phone i have no choice but to pay sad.gif within 21 days or go to court

 

can i still go to a solicitor to get a smaller amount paid to them or have i messed myself up by saying i would pay the 350

Link to post
Share on other sites

they should /would insist on a drugs test on this as well but also test themselves just to be on the safe side as we know the E used to symbolise the internet but it also is a symbol for the /?////////////// sound say no more coke fueled idioits imo...lol

please note this is just an opinion perhaps the sales of MOS has dropped through the floor seeing as the rap crap has taken over ...getting old ,

 

I'll sum up this whole thing.

 

It's a really bad joke that we have to laugh at.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it also says i used bit torrent which is crap as i use u torrent lol

 

Just send them a LOD. Do not try to be clever by being pedantic, all you're doing is giving them more ammo.

 

Imagine saying to a judge, "It wasn't me speeding, I don't drive a car your honour, I drive a Jaguar."

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4967 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...