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

[All at Sea]

Hello .......

 

 

I have been following this thread for almost 5 weeks now ..Yes you guessed it ....I received a letter from ACS:LAW saying i had downloaded Scooter and demanding over £500 ...After some panic and genuine worry and did some digging and thats how i found this site and the forum therein .

 

 

I read the thread through and it really did put my mind at rest ..i dutifully downloaded the LOD and sent it off ( Special Delivery) and i actually thought that was the end of it ..then on Saturday i had a second letter with the demand now down to £425 . I have no idea how to go about replying as i have no legal background at all ....I am completely innocent and i certainly go with the view that if innocent why should i pay a penny ....but the letter and it's terminlogy are surely designs to confuse the lay men .

 

 

Would it be too much to ask for another letter formatt to be published which i could alter ( as the first LOD ) ...I know it says just repeat the first letter but surely i should address the points they raise in relation to the CPR36.10 ......

 

 

Please help ......

[fisherman06]

Hi ALL at Sea

if you wish to do so you and anyone else who wants can adapt my reply letter on the previous page(41) and use itt to reply to ACS's second letter.

[pridewat]

i certainly go with the view that if innocent why should i pay a penny ....but the letter and it's terminlogy are surely designs to confuse the lay men .

Would it be too much to ask for another letter formatt to be published which i could alter ( as the first LOD ) ...I know it says just repeat the first letter but surely i should address the points they raise in relation to the CPR36.10 ......

 

 

Please help ......

 

you are right an innocent should not pay a penny. Although fisherman06 (on page 41)have made very valid points in his reply to them but i personally think that the minimum you say at this point the better. its better not to tell them what you are doing and these things should be saved to tell in the court (if they are foolish enough to take any innocent to court). i would just deny infringement . 2nd LOD says just enough and if you wish you can alter to suit you. I will just ignore if they say template letter in not acceptable.

And please dont worry too much . You are innocent untill proved guilty.

[patrickq1]

put up or shut up thats all i would write to them ....

[jpts33]

You know recently in my local paper there was an unrelated court case that took the prosecution side 2 years to start proceedings against the defendant. At the Court hearing the judge actually slammed the prosecution for the length of time they had kept the defendant waiting for this legal action to be taken. The judge stated it was wrong that the defendant had to endure such extra stress as this waiting period had caused him, he mentioned Human Rights. When I look at what ACS has said I did over a year ago now, one has to wonder if any Judge is going to be happy they are stringing people along for so long, causing huge stress upon people. I told them this in my 2nd letter of denial to them and stated that they should take me to Court sooner rather than later to get this over with one way or another, because of the stress. I also stated that as I was pretty much penniless that even if by some miracle they won, where would I get the money to pay them? I also made a point of telling them they would not win by default, I will defend to the best of my ability if I end up in Court. Anyway either I'll receive Court papers soon or yet another template letter from them....:-|

[All at Sea]

Hi ALL at Sea

if you wish to do so you and anyone else who wants can adapt my reply letter on the previous page(41) and use itt to reply to ACS's second letter.

 

 

Thank you Sir

 

I had read your reply and had thought about using it !! ( hoping that you wouldn't mind ..under the circumstances ....) I will be writing back over the week-end , but without Special Delivery costs this time . I do feel very sorry for the large amount of people out there that are just sitting at home worrying themselves sick ...i know i was until i found this site , i feel saddened that many people will have had the first letter and just sent off a cheque surely this form of speculative invoicing should be made illegal, if it not already ......

 

How the regulative boards have not seen fit to stamp this practice out is frankly beyond me.Has anyone had a letter from the SRA saying that ACS:LAW are now under investigiton or this that too much to ask .

 

 

Thanks again to the forum administors and many contributors for helping to at least help put my mind at rest .

[Nikkinooch]

well finally - I have received their 2nd letter (which is very intimidating) demanding more money and declining to take my LOD at face value due to it being a template letter. Feeling very angry, so I need to calm down a little before I write back to this pompus prat who insists on sending out template letters.

[mr.ton]

You (and everyone else) simply pays them nothing at all unless a court authorises you to & not until all your outgoings have been taken into account.

Report them to the OFT/trading standards & the SRA.

[richx45]

One word: REPORTED.

[mr.ton]

COMPLAIN COMPLAIN COMPLAIN..thats the only way everyone will beat this.

[Huff&Puff]

There's no harm in posting this link again, for those that have missed it:

 

How to Complain

[Nikkinooch]

Well still haven't calmed down yet .......... I have written a 2nd LOD (not used a template letter this time) although really peeved that it is ok for them to use a template letter (one that DL used which they say they are not) but not me. They have also put the charge up to £625 now from £500.07.

 

After everyone complaining why the hell has SRA, ICO etc not done anything about these bloody idiots!!!!! (as you can tell - really angry):-x

Edited August 6, 2009 by Nikkinooch
typo error

[mr.ton]

Dont get angry...just reduce the charge to £0.00

[andydd]

Dont get angry...just reduce the charge to £0.00

..and whatever happened to SRA investigating DL, that was yonks ago !

[fisherman06]

I have just recieved a reply from SRA this morning,in it they state that they wil not be investigating as a single case but will be conducting an investigation that encompasses all the reulatory issues raised.

[the_shadow]

I have just recieved a reply from SRA this morning,in it they state that they wil not be investigating as a single case but will be conducting an investigation that encompasses all the reulatory issues raised.

 

Hmm sounds like the number of complaints was sufficient then Wonder how long their investigations normally take?

 

S.

[fisherman06]

The letter i got said they could not give a timescale for the investigation but would keep me informed.Whatch this space.

[JHLIV123]

I have just got my second letter from ACS:LAW also a template. This time the demand for payment has droped from £500.07 to £425 aas there client was droping there claim for costs, this I found very strange.

This is my reply to them.

Dear ACS:LAW

Further to your letter dated 28/7/09 stating that you do not accept at face value the reply I sent you with regards to infringement of copywriter ,as it appears to be a template letter. As I understand things it is not against any laws in this country to use any means at my disposal to make my point. As I am not a solicitor or have a vast knowledge of legal matters I used the internet to acquire the relevant information that I needed so as to deny you claims in the strongest way possible. The fact that someone else had done all the hard work for me is neither here nor there.

Further more the fact that you do not accept template replies seems a bit odd to me as the fist letter sent out by you appears to be a template that was sent out to thousands of other people ,also the letter that I received today also appears to be a template, does this mean there is one rule for you and another for me.

Anyway I again categorically deny any offence under sections 16(1) and 20 of the CDPA 1988.I have never owned nor made available for upload a copy of the work in any shape or form. Section 16(2) of the 1988 act requires me to have directly infringed copyright or authorise someone else to do so. I have not done neither, therefore I will not be making any payment nor sign the undertaking as provided by you.

This will be my last communication on this matter as I find your continues threats of court action to be no more than harassment and as such if you want to take the matter further feel free to do so via the court process.

As stated I found your letters to be no more than bullying tactics and have referred this matter to the relevant authorities. That is the SRA, ICO and my local MP who has referred it on to Jack Straw.

I look forward to receiving the court papers so that I can defend the allegations made against me.

 

 

 

 

Hi, I too received my second letter from ACS Law, and they have also increased the amount from £500 to £625.

I dont know what to do about this, as i,m being accused of downloading

a scooter song!! I dont even like this type of music, and would certainly not download it!

I know I am completely innocent, but I have an ex boyfriend who was the main user of my internet connection. I do not know if he is responsible for this. I,m a single mum and worrying about this now, as I cant afford to pay for expensive solicitors or court costs.

Any advice would be appreciated.

[cashins]

but I have an ex boyfriend who was the main user of my internet connection. I do not know if he is responsible for this.

This would seem to be relevant to your circumstances. If you have not authorised him to do so, then you have commited no offence.

David

I again categorically deny any offence under sections 16(1) and 20 of the CDPA 1988.I have never owned nor made available for upload a copy of the work in any shape or form. Section 16(2) of the 1988 act requires me to have directly infringed copyright or authorise someone else to do so.

[JHLIV123]

 

This would seem to be relevant to your circumstances. If you have not authorised him to do so, then you have commited no offence.

 

David

 

 

 

Thanks for your response. I,m not sure of the best way to deal with this,

I have used a template to respond the first time, and now have a letter saying they are disinclined to accept at face value what I have said as it is a generic response. They have increased the Offer Sum to £625, and advise if I do not accept the offer sum, they will rely on CPR 36.14 if the matter proceeds to court.

Does anyone know what this means?

Also I know people have advised to keep your reply to a minimum, but do I need to advise my ex partner regularly used my internet, or do I wait untill they try and take me to court to bring this to light?

[cerberusalert]

The New Part 36

As from April 6th 2007, payment into court no longer plays a role in the Part 36 settlement offer procedure. Instead, where an offer is or includes an offer to pay a sum of money, that sum must be paid within 14 days of the date of acceptance, and if not so paid judgment may be entered for the unpaid sum (see CPR 36.11(6) and (7)).

 

The (new) costs consequences following judgment are set out in CPR 36.14 as follows:

 

(1) This Rule applies where upon judgment being entered –

(a) a claimant fails to obtain a judgment more advantageous than a defendant's Part 36 offer; or

(b) judgment against the defendant is at least as advantageous to the claimant as the proposals contained in a claimant's Part 36 offer.

 

(2) Subject to paragraph (6), where Rule 36.14(1)(a) applies, the court will, unless it considers it unjust to do so, order that the defendant is entitled to –

(a) his costs from the date on which the relevant period expired; and

(b) interest on those costs.

 

(3) Subject to paragraph (6), where Rule 36.14(1)(b) applies, the court will, unless it considers it unjust to do so, order that the claimant is entitled to –

(a) interest on the whole or part of any sum of money (excluding interest) awarded at a rate not exceeding 10% above base rate for some or all of the period starting with the date on which the relevant period expired;

(b) his costs on the indemnity basis from the date on which the relevant period expired and

© interest on those costs at a rate not exceeding 10% above base rate.

 

(4) In considering whether it would be unjust to make the orders referred to in paragraph (2) and (3) above, the court will take into account all the circumstances of the case including –

(a) the terms of any Part 36 offer;

(b) the stage in the proceedings when any Part 36 offer was made including in particular how long before the trial started the offer was made;

© the information available to the parties at the time when the Part 36 offer was made; and

(d) the conduct of the parties with regard to the giving or refusing to give information for the purposes of enabling an offer to be made or evaluated.

 

The significant change between the old and the new regimes is that to escape liability for the Defendant’s costs, rather than ‘beating’ an offer a Claimant must now obtain a result ‘more advantageous’ than the Defendant's Part 36 offer and ‘at least as advantageous’ to the Claimant as the proposals contained in the offer. The stated purpose of the change was to provide an incentive to Claimants to settle claims.

[JHLIV123]

If I do not pay this within the specified time, can they take me to court to pay this if i,m not guilty in the first place? I dont see why I should be forced to settle something i,m not guilty of in the first place.

[cerberusalert]

Why would anyone pay for something they are not responsible for? I know it's a bit long but have you actually read all this thread? All your questions will be answered if you do.

[mr.ton]

Why would you have to pay it in a court?

They would simply require you to pay a token amount...£1 per month if need be.

[jpts33]

Thanks for your response. I,m not sure of the best way to deal with this,

I have used a template to respond the first time, and now have a letter saying they are disinclined to accept at face value what I have said as it is a generic response. They have increased the Offer Sum to £625, and advise if I do not accept the offer sum, they will rely on CPR 36.14 if the matter proceeds to court.

Does anyone know what this means?

Also I know people have advised to keep your reply to a minimum, but do I need to advise my ex partner regularly used my internet, or do I wait untill they try and take me to court to bring this to light?

 

I wouldn't tell them anything at the moment. We need to remember that they are basing their case on their belief that it is the Internet account holder/Bill-payer that is responsible for securing their Internet or making sure that your Internet connection is not abused. I believe their view is flawed big time. I would say it is pretty much impossible to police your Internet connection/usage 100% of the time. Who of us actually watches every little thing our family, friends do online using our connections? Not to say how relatively easy it can be for your connection to be 'stolen' by a third party. I know other Courts in other lands have decided that the Internet Bill payer/Account holder could not be held responsible thus this is the reason why ACS have not so far taken anybody to court. If they loose, their entire network of claims would collapse. They would rather rely on people's fear to pay up rather than go to Court. After all, if most people were like me when they received their letters from ACS they would have either paid straight away or tried to make some sort of offer to them, which is what they want. Luckily after a short time I came to my senses, relaxed a little and paid nothing. I won't pay anything until a Judge in Court says so, I would advise everybody else to do the same thing too. For now though I would keep the fact that your connection may have been used to comitt the alleged uploading of the file to yourself - don't give ACS ammo. You know nothing of the file or the alleged upload of the file, but thats not what ACS are interested in - they just want you to confirm your connection was used. Stuff em I say. As Mr. Ton says on here, if you got no money, IF they win in Court (BIG IF they go to Court at all) then all you will pay is a token payment. Hold your nerve and reply to them telling them basically your not guilty and they won't get any money from you. It may be a good idea to tell them that IF they take you to Court they will NOT win by default - you will challenge them in Court. All the best.