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

[ryedonny]

ACS law on BBC One Show if you missed it

[baffledbygm]

Just got a very sympathetic e-mail from my MP. She states that many people have brought this to her attention, that this issue will be discussed further in parliament and that she will be complaining to the SRA on my behalf. I know this has been discussed in the House of Lords already as well, but I feel quite reassured that our politicians can see what a problem this is and how serious and endemic it is.

[stupiditto]

Just got a very sympathetic e-mail from my MP. She states that many people have brought this to her attention, that this issue will be discussed further in parliament and that she will be complaining to the SRA on my behalf. I know this has been discussed in the House of Lords already as well, but I feel quite reassured that our politicians can see what a problem this is and how serious and endemic it is.

 

Was this for ACS or GM?

[baffledbygm]

Was this for ACS or GM?

 

GM

[stupiditto]

thats one good thing!!!! Thumbs up... Im just waiting for a template letter from them saying mine was a template so we are not excepting it........... Guess what it wasnt copied from any where apart from my head....

[NO REPLY]

This may seem a little silly, but do yous think the I.S.P could have some think up there sleeves, for example if i was them (ISP) and i start loosing customers in there thousands and lots of money because of the actions of the likes of ACS etc, I think i would let them do there work (BUILD A BIG POT OF MONEY UP) then when they have made lots of money i would be suing them for loss of funds what they have caused to my business what they have lost me. Well if i was the head man of a ISP company thats what i would be doing, i bet there share holders will not be happy what is happning im sure i wouldnt.

[Caimbeul]

It's so annoying, I phoned them up and argued about the lod and he said write back in your own words. I don't understand why he couldn't take my denial over the phone. Has anyone actually sent a second letter of denial and had a third letter off acs law, if so is that when they issue court proceedings or has no case gone that far?

 

I sent a second LOD, got a third letter back, send a third more abrupt and final response to them got a reponse to that which i have not responded to based on its vague non commital content but have not heard from them since then which was a good few months now. I have never received a questionaire. I also never got the 33 page pre action protocol giude thing they were (according to others on this thread) were obliged to include. Also for what it is worth, layers at the Royal Court of justice actually (and this is the truth) laughed at large portions of the letters they sent to me when i visited the CAB there.

[Caimbeul]

Was there any outcome to the investigation of ACS Law by the SRA? I seem to recall the result being due at the end of July.

[8of9]

Was there any outcome to the investigation of ACS Law by the SRA? I seem to recall the result being due at the end of July.

 

Reply I received from the SRA

 

Thank you for your email of 5 August 2010.

I can confirm that we are still investigating ACS Law and we will contact you with the outcome once the investigation has been closed

.

[the_shadow]

Please dont ANYBODY pin your hopes on the SRA doing anything....

 

If you look at some of the "shady" practices that the DCA's solicitors for rent use like directing court papers to previous addresses in the hope of getting default judgements and the fact these practices have been going on for years and years even whilst complaints have been made you'll realise that the SRA is an old boys club that doestnt like to rock the boat.

 

By all means people must complain but dont expect anything to come from it until the complaints get into significant numbers and the press start asking questions of the SRA themselves.

 

S.

[johnsmith999]

Yes i agree about the SRA, they say they cannot come to a conclusion about ACS Law as they are still receiveing compaints!

 

I think we should all write to our MP's regarding this matter, it really doesnot matter what party they belong to, or where they stood on the Digital Economy bill, even whether they believe you or not. If all the MPs start to get these letters, something will be done, I have written to my MP numerous times and initially i got the party line, however after asking the same questions many times, i finally got him to see that this whole thing with the Norwich Pharmacal Order being used to farm IP addresses was wrong. I have asked him to bring up the matter in parliament and I am confident he is on our side!

 

You can write to your MP by using this great service "They Work for You" http://www.theyworkforyou.com/

(if you want to see how your MP voted in the Digital Economy Bill fiasco, look here http://debillitated.heroku.com/

 

If you get the party line, continue to press your case, also write to a couple of Lords, again it doesn't really matter which one however Lord Lucas has stated "If the SRA wont do anything (about ACS Law) then we will"

and Hansard transcripts of the whole debate can be found here

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/cgi-bin/newhtml_hl?DB=semukparl&STEMMER=en&WORDS=ac%20law&ALL=&ANY=&PHRASE=%22acs%20law%20%22&CATEGORIES=&SIMPLE=&SPEAKER=&COLOUR=red&STYLE=s&ANCHOR=100126-0003.htm_spnew4&URL=/pa/ld200910/ldhansrd/text/100126-0003.htm#100126-0003.htm_spnew4

 

Make no mistake, the Government knows exactly what is going on and is doing nothing about it, it is complicit in making ACS Law a lot of money by allowing the use of the NPO in this way. If enough people write and let the MP's know that we the public dont appreciate being blackmailed by this and other law firms, they may do something.........just dont hold your breath!

[andydd]

The SRA didnt conclude their investigations into Davenport Lyons untill after they had long since stopped their 'copyright claim's, i expect the same will happen withe ACS Law.

 

Andy

[8of9]

If anyone has been following the posts on the PLUSNET Forum, http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,85908.480.html, you will know that they are entitled to a report from ACS Law detailing how many of the disclosed names were sent Letters of Claim and against which persons legal proceedings were issued.

Plusnet are asking for more information from their subscribers...

 

what we are looking to do is to gain as much information about the issue as we can, including any correspondence to our customers from the NPO of the 19th. This information is useful to us in both the current NPO and any future NPOs from ACS Law.

If you are with PLUSNET, please help if you can.

 

Also in the same order, BE UN LIMITED & TELEFONICA O2 UK LIMITED are included as ISP's who are also entitled to a report containing the same information.

Are there any subscrbers to these ISP's who have received Letters of Claim? and if so have they or any other concerned subscribers asked them if they have received this Report from ACS Law?

 

The use and exploitation of the NPO in this [problem] must be revealed for what it is and halted.

 

Other means of obtaining evidence is usually available to identify a defendant and those means ought to exhausted before resorting to the Norwich Pharmacal jurisdiction. A court will not exercise the jurisdiction unless the result would be that the claimant is left in a position where proceedings cannot be commenced against a named defendant. The person seeking the court order must have a genuine intention of commencing proceedings.

It should not be used as a way of obtaining names and addresses for a speculative invoicing [problem]. There is not a genuine intention of commencing proceedings.

 

It is the ISP's who can do this but they might need a little reminder as to where their income is coming from and it is not in their best interests to sell their customers down the river.

Other ISP's realise this.... http://newteevee.com/2http://newteevee.com/2010/01/29/uk-isp-talktalk-vows-to-fight-p2p-lawsuits/010/01/29/uk-isp-talktalk-vows-to-fight-p2p-lawsuits/

 

Subscribers to BRITISH SKY BROADCASTING LIMITED, ENTANET INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, KCOM GROUP PLC, THUS LIMITED, ZEN INTERNET.

 

I BET YOU CANT FIND OUT HOW MUCH YOUR (TAME, SPINELESS, GREEDY) ISP IS CHARGING ACS LAW TO REVEAL YOUR DETAILS AND HOW MUCH THEY HAVE RECEIVED FROM THEM FOR DOING SO.

 

You should ALL ask your ISP what they intend to do when they receive the next one ( and they will) because no matter what happens between the Government , the ISP's and any review of the Digital Economy Bill, the NPO remains.

 

UK LAW dont you just love it!!

[julesbon70]

I had letter almost a month ago from Gallant and Macmillan, I've not taken any action on it, I am not guilty,so I have not sent a denial letter.

I was told to ignore the letters otherwise it puts evidence in their mouths etc,has anyone else ignored the letters ?

Julesbon70

[johnsmith999]

Not a good idea, if you don't reply then you have not complied with the "pre action protocol", and acs law or GM can get a uncontested judgement against you. You must reply and tell them only that you did not do it, nothing else, tell them that you exspect this to be the end of it, and any other correspondence will be treated as harassment. Don't worry when they send you a second letter saying you have used a template (even if you haven't) you can then ignore anything else as you have now complied with the pre action protocol and acs law or GM cannot get default judgements against you. I suggest you read this thread from the beginning as all the info you need is in here

Edited August 21, 2010 by johnsmith999
Added GM

[car2403]

Not a good idea, if you don't reply then you have not complied with the "pre action protocol", and acs law or GM can get a uncontested judgement against you. You must reply and tell them only that you did not do it, nothing else, tell them that you exspect this to be the end of it, and any other correspondence will be treated as harassment. Don't worry when they send you a second letter saying you have used a template (even if you haven't) you can then ignore anything else as you have now complied with the pre action protocol and acs law or GM cannot get default judgements against you. I suggest you read this thread from the beginning as all the info you need is in here

 

This isn't quite accurate.

 

The pre-action protocols require the parties to correspond with each other regarding any potential court claim, in an attempt to settle. They also require a letter of notice of intention to take court action (letter before action) to ensure that the defendant isn't dragged through the process unknowingly. If this isn't followed, the Court won't be happy and may award costs against any party it feels appropriately deserves it - that may even be the Claimant!

 

IMHO, there's sufficient evidence in this thread alone to justify ignoring all correspondance from these idiots. We are yet to hear of anyone being taken to Court for this, so it's clearly just a [problem] that will have unwitting folk paying up and those ignoring it/denying it being left to suffer while they wait for something that isn't going to happen.

 

Should someone be taken to Court, who ignored the letters, it's arguable that the Court will consider the Claimants actions as unreasonable in the circumstances and dismiss the fact that the Defendant ignored the pre-action notices.

 

Of course, there's always the argument that these letters are not pre-action notices, as they disclose no chose of action in the first place, so again is an abuse of pre-action protocol process. This is why the SRA is involved.

 

The best advice, though, is to issue a letter of denial in response, saying that you won't correspond any further in any case, then ignore the blighters.

[stanwixman]

I received a letter from Acs law in June sent my LOD off and to date have not heard anything back? then in July I received a letter from GM , my wife sent my LOD off as I was at Scout Camp in Finland. That was over the 21 days to reply. I have not received nothing back from either ? people in these forums are receiving second and third letters from these solicitors - should i expect mine anytime soon. I havent done anything wrong and I am at my wits end with all this not knowing etc and law threats hanging over my head? Both my lods were just simple affairs and not from the internet so will this have any bearing on this? I saw the bit on the One show when I got back from Finland any news on this?

[Mattyhatty]

I recieved my second letter in about 3 weeks of my first. but it was a rejection letter saying my letter was a template.

 

After a good read i dont think any one should feel worried any more. when i got the second letter i felt no panic and read what they had to say with amusement. i was eager to send my 2nd letter that day.... but ive decided to wait til the last minute to send it off.

 

10-50,000 people are in the same boat. When you feel worried... just think youre not alone and you wont loose.

 

Dont expect it .... just let it come otherwise you'l be panicking over every morning postal delivery. when it does. just jump back on here to get a guide for a new response.

 

There was a PDF with a scoring system of how they will respond to individuals. Use that against them

 

SIMPLEZ *SQUEEK*

[baffledbygm]

I'm expecting my 2nd letter any day now. Don't know what it'll say because it was a template but I put "yeah I know this is a template but it's legally binding regardless so TOUGH and yours wasn't exactly getting any prizes for originality was it???". Also on the date I was "accused" without going into too much detail I know my computer wasn't even switched on (but I can't prove it- how can you??), but I wasn't sure whether to mention this in my next letter. I've decided to play my cards close to my chest and save my explanations and alibis for the courtroom.

 

Do they read this thread? I hope so! If they do I hope you are proud of yourselves- causing so much stress and sleeplessness to innocent people. I believe in Karma- they'll get what's coming to them eventually.

Edited August 22, 2010 by baffledbygm

[kilotango22]

. Also on the date I was "accused" without going into too much detail I know my computer wasn't even switched on (but I can't prove it- how can you??), but I wasn't sure whether to mention this in my next letter.

 

Feel free to say that, all they will say in reply is, that proves nothing, your PC does not need to be turned on for someone else to be using your connection without your knowledge or authority.

 

Their initial letter is designed to scare the s*** out of you when you read it and pay up to make it go away. Thats the reaction I had. My initial thought was this must be true, I didn't do it but as its in my name I must be responsible as they must be respectable lawyers who don't make mistakes.

 

I'm so glad I didn't pay up as the CAB advised me to do.

[panther12]

This is what we sent to these [causing problems] chancers, not even the courtesy of an acknowledgement!

-----------------------------------------------

 

To whom it may concern

 

I am in receipt of your letter dated 6 August 2010. Although you refer to a letter of 6 July 2010, your letter dated 06/08/2010 is the first and only communication I have received from Gallant Macmillan.

 

Given the poor quality photocopy reproduction and second class postage used to communicate such important correspondence, I’m sure you can understand my initial concerns over the authenticity of such correspondence.

 

However, as you do appear to be a genuine firm of solicitors regulated by The Law Society, albeit not to the same professional standards that I am accustomed to in my dealings with solicitors, my response to your letter is as follows:-

 

I refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell vs. Pressdram (1971).

 

Any further correspondence, save for service, will be filed unanswered. Should it be necessary for me to spend any more of my time dealing with this matter, restitution will be sought.

 

Also, let me give you a little tip (free of charge). When sending out correspondence stating that court proceedings may commence if no response is received within seven days, at least use a form of postage that ensures correspondence reaches its chosen destination and gives adequate time for a response to be received. Relying on the cheapest form of second class post to convey such important communication is not the actions one would associate with a reputable firm of solicitors. As such, the chance of you receiving this letter within your chosen timeframe is very unlikely indeed; especially as today is the 12/08/2010 and is being returned using your preferred method of postage – 2nd Class.

 

I trust this clarifies the situation for you.

 

Kind regards,

[Mattyhatty]

Amazing reply!!!!!

[citizenB]

If this has already been posted up, my apologies.

 

 

 

Consumers who believe they have been wrongly accused of illicit file sharing are under no legal obligation to complete questionnaires asking them to submit their computers to a forensic examination, as well as confirming details about their internet connection.

 

 

http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/05/acs-law-uses-questionnaire-to-chase-pirates-215346

[baffledbygm]

" I refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell vs. Pressdram (1971). "

 

 

Love it!

[BARFLY]

just back off holiday. great news about the tribunal!!! every dog has it's day...