Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, the vehicle went to Audi Chingford on Thursday 13th May. I did state beforehand that I only wanted a diagnostic. The technician out of courtesy opened the drain letting huge deposits of water escape the seals. Video evidence was provided via AUDI cam. The link for the audi cam has been forwarded to BMW and Motonovo. I spoke to branch manager explained the situation and he stated he would sent me an email outlining the issue. Audi state this is not really an issue and more of a design flaw. However, the seals still have water ingress. I purchased the vehicle with £0 deposit on a 60 months HP plan for £520.00. The vehicle total was £21000. I did not go for any extended warranty. I live almost 70 miles away from the aftersales centre in Peterborough. I have previously uploaded the document I forwarded to BMW however it was in word format. I have had to buy a new tyre almost three days after purchasing vehicle. BMW still have not compensated me for the v62 cost as they said they would. 
    • I would suggest that you stop trying to rely on legal theory – as you understand it. Firstly, because we are dealing with practical/pragmatic situations and at a low value level where these arguments tend not to work. Secondly, because you clearly have misunderstood the assessment of quantum where there are breaches of obligations. The formula that you have cited above is the method of loss calculation in torts. In contract it is entirely different. The law of obligations generally attempts to remedy the breach. This means that in tort, damages seek to put you into the position you would have been in had the breach not occurred. In other words it returns you to your starting position – point zero. Contract damages attend put you into the position that you would have been had the breach not occurred but this is not your starting position, contract damages assume that the agreement in dispute had actually been carried out. This puts you into your final position. You sold an item for £XXX. Your expectation was that you your item would be correctly delivered and that you would be the beneficiary of £XXX. Your expectation loss is the amount that you sold the item for and that is all you are entitled to recover. If you want, you can try to sue for the larger sum – and we will help you. But if they ask for evidence of the value of the item as it was sold then I can almost guarantee that either you will be obliged to settle for the lesser sum – or else a judge will give you judgement but for the lesser sum. This will put you to the position that you would have been had there been no breach of contract. I understand from you now that when you dispatch the item you declared the retail cost to you and not your expected benefit of £XXX. To claim for the retail value in the circumstances would offend the rules relating to betterment. If you want to do it then we will help you – but don't be surprised if you take a tumble.  
    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
    • amusing that 'bad economic judgement on behalf of prior party ISN'T a major reason to wingers to move to deform yet immigration is, where record levels of such has been driven by the right wings terrible brexit and the later incompetent dog whistle 'proposals largely driven to whistle to the right wingnuts Just seems to confirm the are clueless numpties 'wetting their own shoes   Has farage bought a property in Clacton yet?   yet concern for the NHS is listed as a major issue even by those saying they are moving to deform  
  • 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 
        • 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

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 4980 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

When I first received my letter of claim I stupidly rang them up to ask what it was all about, they said I shared it with x amount of people.

How can they prove this?

 

i can't see how they can know who your computer is 'talking' to regarding this, so how can they possibly know how many people you have shared it with? i'd say they have either;

 

* counted how mant ppl are sharing the file and used this

* counted how mant ppl are sharing the file and guessed a proportion of this

* lied, and picked the number out of their arse

 

i believe number 3 to be most likely

 

no way for them to tell who you have shared with. they can only know that you shared with their computer

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

So to recap

Tilly Bailey, Irvine. Ceased

Davenport Lyons, Ceased (but transferred clients/work/staff to ACS)

ACS: Law, continuing but referred to SDT

Gallant Macmillan, initial and follow up letters sent. No court cases listed and no 3rd letters sent (but would be due sometime soon)

 

I have two questions.

1. If you send a Lod, receive a 2nd letter from GM and decide not to respond is it possible for GM to get a default judgement? Or would you have to receive a summons sent by the court itself?

2. Which quoted £75000 to defend one of these allegations (http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/03/file-sharing-accusations-from-tilly-bailey-irvine-205193) can anyone verify or counter this? I thought small claims court claims were limited, even if you added "costs" on after a failed defense, surely £75k is high!

 

And a final random thought.

If ISPs are not held liable for what passes over their network, how can an end user? Be it encrypted or open WiFi.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One LOD is all that is required - They cannot get a default judgement if you have sent a LOD.

I have received a second letter from ACS saying they do not accept internet template LOD - they can say what they like, but it remains a valid LOD. I am sending today a second LOD in my own words, stating clearly : 1. I did not download / upload the track in question 2. I did not authorise anyone else to upload / download the track. Hopefully this will stop the letters.

But remember : they have to prove that you did what they claim - it is not up to you to provide them with any evidence. Do not enter into discussions with them about your wireless security, (eg you turned it off one day to let your kids use their Ds), or about other people staying in your house etc. this just gives them more to write to you about.

 

If you didnt do it, tell them that - then its up to them to PROVE that you ( and you alone as the recipient of the letter) DID do it. This is something they cannot do and they know this. They just keep writing to you in the hope that you eventually pay them some cash. Remember, they have taken not one person to court as they know they cannot prove you did it.

 

What they are doing is legal but relies on you being scared into paying them cash - dont pay them as this gives them more cash to scare more people into paying them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

i can't see how they can know who your computer is 'talking' to regarding this, so how can they possibly know how many people you have shared it with? i'd say they have either;

 

* counted how mant ppl are sharing the file and used this

* counted how mant ppl are sharing the file and guessed a proportion of this

* lied, and picked the number out of their arse

 

i believe number 3 to be most likely

 

no way for them to tell who you have shared with. they can only know that you shared with their computer

Completely agree with you - the amount of cash they claim from you is based on a random number of people they THINK you have shared the file with.

Again this has never been tested in court.

Also, the copyright law they claim to be relying on states that the copyright has to be "wholly or substantially" infringed.

Even if you did download / upload the track, bit torrents work by uploading tiny fragments (bits) of the file : Is this wholly or substantially ? Again, this has never been tested in court, for good reason as ACS and GM could well lose this argument, meaning the amounts of cash they claim off you would be questioned !

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why it would cost £75,000 to defend yourself, if that's the case then we will all be paying up innocent or guilty. No wonder none have ever gone to court if it costs that much to defend yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2. Which quoted £75000 to defend one of these allegations (http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/03/file-sharing-accusations-from-tilly-bailey-irvine-205193) can anyone verify or counter this? I thought small claims court claims were limited, even if you added "costs" on after a failed defense, surely £75k is high!

 

Copyright claims are not heard in small claims, I beleive they come under multi-track rules hence the no limit on costs but stand to be corrected :smile:

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why it would cost £75,000 to defend yourself, if that's the case then we will all be paying up innocent or guilty. No wonder none have ever gone to court if it costs that much to defend yourself.

 

You might read this first......

 

http://torrentfreak.com/wrongfully-accused-of-file-sharing-file-for-harassment-100831/

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a reply of GM within 3/4 weeks and have sent a further LoD as their reply didn't offer any proof or conclusive evidence that I did or authorised any file-sharing. It simply added another IP address which they claim strengthens the "inference of wrongdoing".

 

What did you put in your LoD to make them go away? :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a reply of GM within 3/4 weeks and have sent a further LoD as their reply didn't offer any proof or conclusive evidence that I did or authorised any file-sharing. It simply added another IP address which they claim strengthens the "inference of wrongdoing".

 

What did you put in your LoD to make them go away? :-)

 

 

My LOD was pretty much the same as everyone else's.I'm just hoping recent developments with ACS has them deciding to drop the [problem].

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a reply of GM within 3/4 weeks and have sent a further LoD as their reply didn't offer any proof or conclusive evidence that I did or authorised any file-sharing. It simply added another IP address which they claim strengthens the "inference of wrongdoing".

 

What did you put in your LoD to make them go away? :-)

 

Nothing different to anyone else.Thats wy I'm curious to know if there has been any other letters delivered.May'be theve quietly given up.

Edited by wittzend
spelling mistake
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone heard from ACS since the tribunal announcement in regard to a new claim? The deadline for BT to supply the names from the November 2009 NPO was 19th August or thereabout. 10 000 names supposedly! Not like ACS to hang around...

Anyone know whether ACS can trade any names that they obtain through their NPOs? When DL ceased their actions did they pass on their information to ACS?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing different to anyone else.Thats wy I'm curious to know if there has been any other letters delivered.May'be theve quietly given up.

 

Ahhh if only :-) I doubt it very much yet. You probably just confused their tickboxes. Maybe they only have 2, paid, or not paid.

They're having to redesign their xls now to add a line in for "offered lower sum".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone heard from ACS since the tribunal announcement in regard to a new claim? The deadline for BT to supply the names from the November 2009 NPO was 19th August or thereabout. 10 000 names supposedly! Not like ACS to hang around...

 

 

Anyone know whether ACS can trade any names that they obtain through their NPOs? When DL ceased their actions did they pass on their information to ACS?

 

I've not heard from them for a while and its a shame. I only get bills and junk so getting these demands from him makes me feel kind of important, its a bit like having a special friend :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not heard back from ACS law since i sent my lod off in june but i have had a second letter from GM saying they acknowledge my lod but as I didnt say why i didnt do it then they will still pursue this matter something about practice direction. they say i provided no alternative explanation as to who might have done so. They say mere denials are incompatible with practice direction and that in the absence of a proper explanation as to why i didnt do it then the inference of wrongdoing remains. They say that if i give them details of anyone over the age of 16 who may of done it then the letter of accusation will be channged to them and the case against me will be dropped. that is my wife an she certainly didnt do it. Its my birthday tomorrow so nice birthday im going to have !! how can i prove i didnt do it and what will happen next if i deny it again . i cant afford to pay the fine let alone any costs that might come of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not heard back from ACS law since i sent my lod off in june but i have had a second letter from GM saying they acknowledge my lod but as I didnt say why i didnt do it then they will still pursue this matter something about practice direction. they say i provided no alternative explanation as to who might have done so. They say mere denials are incompatible with practice direction and that in the absence of a proper explanation as to why i didnt do it then the inference of wrongdoing remains. They say that if i give them details of anyone over the age of 16 who may of done it then the letter of accusation will be channged to them and the case against me will be dropped. that is my wife an she certainly didnt do it. Its my birthday tomorrow so nice birthday im going to have !! how can i prove i didnt do it and what will happen next if i deny it again . i cant afford to pay the fine let alone any costs that might come of this.

 

You dont have to prove you didn't do it,THEY have to prove you did,if you didn't do it relax,have a great birthday try not to worry.Nothing is going to happen apart from the w@nkers sending you more letters.As long as you send a LOD youv'e done your bit.If you haven't already done so complain to the SRA and your MP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh if only :-) I doubt it very much yet. You probably just confused their tickboxes. Maybe they only have 2, paid, or not paid.

They're having to redesign their xls now to add a line in for "offered lower sum".

 

 

Or a new line for" told to F@CK OFF":lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not heard back from ACS law since i sent my lod off in june but i have had a second letter from GM saying they acknowledge my lod but as I didnt say why i didnt do it then they will still pursue this matter something about practice direction. they say i provided no alternative explanation as to who might have done so....... .

 

Have GM replied to the letter you sent to ACS Law or have you had a letter from both ACS Law & GM ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I havent had a reply from acs law yet? I got a letter from GM yesterday and its freaking me out. THey say that LODs cannot be accepted and that My reasons were not enough. They say if I cant prove it wasnt me or give good enough reasons it wasnt me then their clients will still pursue the case. I cannot afford the fine let alone court costs if it ever came to that. I am paranoid that my pc was compromised in someway for sky to show me as downloading the said tracks. How can I prove other wise? I was under my gp last year for depression and this is the last thing i need right now. I have written a second lod but havent posted it yet. I have said that I cant possibly prove it wasnt me and that I know nothing of file sharing etc and my health is suffering -and to ask them again to drop their claim> should i send this. I am also dreading anotheer letter from ACS law as its been three months now and no reply to my original lod. Please can someone advise me and help put my mind at rest thanks

Edited by stanwixman
grammar
Link to post
Share on other sites

I havent had a reply from acs law yet? I got a letter from GM yesterday and its freaking me out. THey say that LODs cannot be accepted and that My reasons were not enough. They say if I cant prove it wasnt me or give good enough reasons it wasnt me then their clients will still pursue the case. I cannot afford the fine let alone court costs if it ever came to that. I am paranoid that my pc was compromised in someway for sky to show me as downloading the said tracks. How can I prove other wise? I was under my gp last year for depression and this is the last thing i need right now. I have written a second lod but havent posted it yet. I have said that I cant possibly prove it wasnt me and that I know nothing of file sharing etc and my health is suffering -and to ask them again to drop their claim> should i send this. I am also dreading anotheer letter from ACS law as its been three months now and no reply to my original lod. Please can someone advise me and help put my mind at rest thanks

 

Read the "speculative invoicing handbook- what to do if you get a questionnaire". Though you didn't get a questionnaire it should reassure you. I haven't recieved a reply from my LOD yet but I've decided I'll reply once again and that will be the end of it as far as I'm concerned. They have to prove you did something wrong. Its not up to you to prove you didn't- how can you? You can't! Its impossible. It's something that supposedly happened 8-9 months ago. You might not have the same computer or hard drive. If you say you weren't in at the time they could say "well that doesn't stop your computer being on". If you say it could have been someone else in your house they'll say "well who?" and it you say your Wifi might have been breeched they'll say "it's your fault for not securing your connection" which is bullcrap because there is no law to back this up- I've been told you cannot be held responsible for someone else misusing your connection without your consent. Whatever you say they won't accept it and they'll know more about you so don't bother. If they do decide to drop your case they won't have the decency to let you know because they don't have to and they don't give a crap about the welfare of you and me. The fact that you cannot prove your innocence was pointed out in the House of Lords months ago and it's well known.

 

I've lost sleep and sanity over this too, but the longer I go without a letter from them the more relaxed I feel. I've complained to my MP about this and they know how much it stinks.

 

No court cases have happened yet that weren't default judgements or people who confessed. I can't honestly imagine this even getting to court for so many reasons.

 

I know I've repeated what a lot of people have already said (sorry!). But I'm coming as a scared newby who isn't worried anymore. This thread has been invaluable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4980 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...