Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • NewsBot
      Shein set to file for £50bn London listing - reports

      By NewsBot · Posted

      Shein has been linked to unethical business practices, including forced labour allegations.View the full article
    • stu007
      Are There Any Social Workers on CAG ?

      By stu007 · Posted

      Hi I have to agree with @unclebulgaria67 post#3 For the funding side of moving to a new area and it being private supported accommodation I would also suggest speaking to private supported accommodation provider about funding but also contact the Local Council for that area and have a chat with them about funding because if you are in receipt of Housing Benefit certain Supported Accommodation that meets a certain criteria is treated as ‘exempt accommodation’ for Housing Benefit purposes but you need to confirm this with that relevant Council in your new area especially since it is Private Supported Accommodation as each Council can have slightly different rules on this. If you have a certain medical condition look up the charities and also have a wee chat with them as they may be able to point you to different Grants to assist with moving costs and your question about funding for private supported accommodation as well.
    • stu007
      Advice needed regarding Eviction

      By stu007 · Posted

      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).     
    • stu007
      Eviction Time Again - Twice In 7 Months

      By stu007 · Posted

      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)
    • Debt_Collector
      Summons to court for a S87 (1) offence

      By Debt_Collector · Posted

      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

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

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

Delta82
 Share
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

Billpayerr

Billpayerr

Posted
Posted

For those new recipients of claims who are still deciding what to do… here is snippets of advice from the Lawdit Solicitors reading room.

 

It should be noted that we have taken instructions from over 200 clients and not one of them have actually been sued, but it is by no means concrete evidence that Acs: Law will not issue a claim against you if you completely deny infringing the work (whether you have committed the infringement or not). Therefore, careful consideration of you legal position should be made before denying or seeking to settle the allegations in a letter of claim.

 

What should I do?

 

If you have not done the act alleged you should strongly deny the same.

If, and only if, you have downloaded or uploaded the work you will have committed an infringement of copyright. In this instance it is advisable to pay up and get rid of the matter as soon as possible. However, if you have decided to settle the matter and pay up you may want to consider negotiating the settlement figure down.

 

Also, when settling it is important not to sign any undertaking.

 

Will the matter go away if I ignore the letter of claim?

 

No. The simple point here is that you should not ignore any letter of claim. Ignoring and allowing the time limit under the letter to expire may result in a sealed claim form being sent to you

 

Will the matter go away if I ignore the claim form?

 

No. If you do receive a sealed claim form again the position is simple, do not ignore it. If you do ignore it and fail to file an Acknowledgement of Service or a Defense this will entitle the Claimant to apply for judgment in default for the below remedies under Part 12 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

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

seymourtitty

seymourtitty

Posted
Posted
Lawdit Solicitors advice for those that admit to file sharing:

 

If, and only if, you have downloaded or uploaded the work you will have committed an infringement of copyright. In this instance it is advisable to pay up and get rid of the matter as soon as possible. However, if you have decided to settle the matter and pay up you may want to consider negotiating the settlement figure down.

Also, when settling it is important not to sign any undertaking.

 

Im contemplating negotiating the price down.

 

But what does this mean - not to sign any undertaking? With the letter there is a link to a secure site on which you use to settle the claim, and I'm sure there will be something on there to admit liability...

Link to post
Share on other sites
captain-123

captain-123

Posted
Posted
Im contemplating negotiating the price down.

 

But what does this mean - not to sign any undertaking? With the letter there is a link to a secure site on which you use to settle the claim, and I'm sure there will be something on there to admit liability...

 

If I was going to do this without the help of a solisitor I would not sign the form or admit to any wrong doing but say that to remove the stress and hassle of this hanging over me I would be prepaired to negotiate on the cost.

 

Not sure if this would be the right thing to do though

Link to post
Share on other sites
BARFLY

BARFLY

Posted
Posted

the silence from plusnet is deafening!

 

i don't think ACS have supplied the report. if they have, they've probably revealed that nobody has been taken to court. if that's the case, plusnet have suddenly found themselves spearheading the counter-attack. only problem is, they don't want this role. they never objected in the first place like talktalk. they are probably trying to come up with some statement that absolves them from taking any further action against ACS but at the same time makes them look like they have tried for their customers; they're sitting on the fence. besides talktalk, the only participant to these orders that has shown any frustration with ACS is Chiefmaster Winegarten(?). that's why he placed the caveat in the november 09 order. to give the isp's a reason for objecting. unfortunately the isp's dont want to know! it's been the plusnet subscribers that have pushed and pushed for this today. as yet, they, and we, have nothing. i would have thought it be straightforward - they either got the report or they didn't. what's the problem? get ready for a major climbdown by another spineless isp.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Billpayerr

Billpayerr

Posted
Posted
.... I'm sure there will be something on there to admit liability...

 

That'll be it i expect.

 

I see no reason why you can't try to negotiate a lower claim amount without signing anything that states you admit liability. The whole purpose of pre-action protocol is for both parties to come to an agreement and avoid costly court fee's.

 

I wouldn't sign anything amitting liabilty and i guess a Judge would take a dim view on any solicitor that pushed a claim through the court process just because someone wouldnt sign it:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites
BARFLY

BARFLY

Posted
Posted

plusnet, plusnet, where art thou....? some have greatness thrust upon them....

 

you can be our saviour. or it might be that you just don't care about your subscribers that are being blackmailed. it's easier to turn the other way and let others do something about it.

 

same old, same old

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jamuir

Jamuir

Posted
Posted
plusnet, plusnet, where art thou....? some have greatness thrust upon them....

 

you can be our saviour. or it might be that you just don't care about your subscribers that are being blackmailed. it's easier to turn the other way and let others do something about it.

 

same old, same old

 

plusnet have responded, theyve more questions to ask and theyve given acs a deadline of 10 August.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BARFLY

BARFLY

Posted
Posted

apparently they are seeking clarification whether the response is a report!? did they answer the points raised by the chiefmaster, yes or no? no need to analyse the structure of the response. unless it needs to be in report form for legal purposes

Link to post
Share on other sites
BARFLY

BARFLY

Posted
Posted

maybe that's the point. maybe andy has been evasive in his response but is maintaining he has fulfilled his obligations. maybe plusnet are endeavouring to show that his response is not a report and therefore in breach of the order.....

 

where she stops nobody knows...

Link to post
Share on other sites
8of9

8of9

Posted
Posted

ACS:Law have responded, and Plusnet have now sent additional correspondence to ACS:Law via our legal team to seek further clarity on specific points. We have sought to draw a line on this and have ask that our queries are answered by close of business on Tuesday the 10th of August.

 

There's an interesting line in a later post by Fletch

 

I think the best I can say is we are seeking clarity on whether the response from ACS:Law constitutes a report
.

Makes you wonder what a practicing Solicitor and sole proprioter of a law firm constitutes a report which is a response to a requirement in a court order.

Or then perhaps Plusnet were disinclined to accept the report at face value as it resembled a template :lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mb4014

Guest mb4014

Posted
Posted

Plusnet please do the right thing and end this nonsense. You are in a position to deal with this. ACS have shown their cards. There are thousands of people being intimidated by this company and you would gain major support if you stood up to this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Anonymous

Mr Anonymous

Posted
Posted

Before offering a payment, be sure that you did it and not someone else that may have used your connection with your consent but downloaded without your consent.

 

File sharing software is legal, i've had to install it to get certain game updates and other legitimate software.

 

ACS are being crafty, the file they accuse you of downloading is usually a whole album and not a single track, but they go on to say you downloaded a particular track, you could have downloaded the file (album) without that particular track included.

If you hold your hands up to it, you are saying i also downloaded all of the other songs too, you've given them everything they need to continue generating revenue from the other tracks too. (Say 1000 people admit to downloading the file (album), they just collect numbers and go to the other music producers offering a no win no fee copyright claim.

 

Their tactics are purely about making a fast buck, they are not interested in stemming copyright problems. Thay can hound you time and time again or share info with partners who take on the next batch of claims.

 

It's also worth considering that track may not actually play as it didn't entirely download (they have no way of knowing), therefore not a significant part of the track could have been downloaded or uploaded by you (no law broken). IT's highly unlikely that anyone person could have uploaded a significant part of a song to one user.

 

 

REMEMBER, If you quote another persons message please delete any admissions, better off just putting the other persons nickname in bold so they know you're talking to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Anonymous

Mr Anonymous

Posted
Posted

Before offering a payment, be sure that you did it and not someone else that may have used your connection with your consent but downloaded without your consent.

 

File sharing software is legal, i've had to install it to get certain game updates and other legitimate software.

 

ACS are being crafty, the file they accuse you of downloading is usually a whole album and not a single track, but they go on to say you downloaded a particular track, you could have downloaded the file (album) without that particular track included.

If you hold your hands up to it, you are saying i also downloaded all of the other songs too, you've given them everything they need to continue generating revenue from the other tracks too. (Say 1000 people admit to downloading the file (album), they just collect numbers and go to the other music producers offering a no win no fee copyright claim.

 

Their tactics are purely about making a fast buck, they are not interested in stemming copyright problems. Thay can hound you time and time again or share info with partners who take on the next batch of claims.

 

It's also worth considering that track may not actually play as it didn't entirely download (they have no way of knowing), therefore not a significant part of the track could have been downloaded or uploaded by you (no law broken). IT's highly unlikely that anyone person could have uploaded a significant part of a song to one user.

 

 

REMEMBER, If you quote another persons message please delete any admissions, better off just putting the other persons nickname in bold so they know you're talking to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BARFLY

BARFLY

Posted
Posted

hope all the pertinent answers are in the report. how many plusnet subscribers did you contact? out of that number how many did you take to court? AND, OUT OF THOSE THAT YOU HAVE NOT TAKEN TO COURT FROM HOW MANY ARE YOU STILL REQUESTING PAYMENT...

Link to post
Share on other sites
BARFLY

BARFLY

Posted
Posted

bearing in mind ACS are currently the subject of a long running investigation by the SRA, I hope that the legal team at plusnet update them on the response they have received from ACS. if ACS have breached a court order then i'm sure this will have a bearing on the SRA investigation...

Link to post
Share on other sites
8of9

8of9

Posted
Posted
bearing in mind ACS are currently the subject of a long running investigation by the SRA, I hope that the legal team at plusnet update them on the response they have received from ACS. if ACS have breached a court order then i'm sure this will have a bearing on the SRA investigation...

 

Good point. Anyone from Plusnet should remind them to inform the SRA of ACS antics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BARFLY

BARFLY

Posted
Posted (edited)

being that he used to be a DJ (that's disc jockey, not district judge) what do you think Andrew's favourite song is? i reckon "money for nothing" by dire straits..

Edited by BARFLY
spelling
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.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...