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

[MrShaun]

Hi All,

 

I have received my third letter today asking me for the original amount and 'if you decide not to accept the Offer Sum we will rely on CPR 36.14 if the matter proceeds to court and a judgement is obtained at or in excess of the amount claimed'

 

Is anyone recommend I do anything else? To send a third letter of denial?

 

Many thanks,

[jpts33]

If it was me, and it probably will soon be me, I would just write back to them telling them to read your first and second letters. Also tell them they are not going to win this case by default - you will defend yourself in Court.

[Huff&Puff]

Is anyone recommend I do anything else? To send a third letter of denial?

 

In my view, playing letter ping-pong is an excercise in futility. You've stated your position twice, so I'd advise leaving it at that. Ignore them unless they actually do send court papers - and there's a snowball's chance in hell of that happening IMO.

[teddylorry]

Hi All,

 

I have received my third letter today asking me for the original amount and 'if you decide not to accept the Offer Sum we will rely on CPR 36.14 if the matter proceeds to court and a judgement is obtained at or in excess of the amount claimed'

 

Is anyone recommend I do anything else? To send a third letter of denial?

 

Many thanks,

hi,but did you notice they said{ IF} the matter goes to court I think this says it all.do not pay.

[mr.ton]

I personally wouldnt even give them the satisfaction of receiving a letter of denial.

To ignore completely would be suitable for these rogues.

[JHLIV123]

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.

 

 

 

Thankyou, your response has made me feel a lot better. I will send the second LOD template as there is no way I will pay money I haven't got for something I know I didn't do. As for amo, I dont even know if my ex partner did do this either, but he is the only other person who had access to the internet in my home. Saying that it still doesn't make him guilty, as there appears to be a lot of innocent people receiving these letters.

How can they say as the internet bill payer, I am supposed to monitor usage of my internet whilst i,m working full time and looking after a child. This just isn't possible!!

As for the song they are saying I downloaded!!! Scooter!!!

Are they having a a laugh??? That is nearly a bigger joke than ACS LAW!!!

I,m not amused but my friends still keep laughing at the thought of me wanting to listen to that rubbish!

[babybear39]

Thankyou, your response has made me feel a lot better. I will send the second LOD template as there is no way I will pay money I haven't got for something I know I didn't do. As for amo, I dont even know if my ex partner did do this either, but he is the only other person who had access to the internet in my home. Saying that it still doesn't make him guilty, as there appears to be a lot of innocent people receiving these letters.

How can they say as the internet bill payer, I am supposed to monitor usage of my internet whilst i,m working full time and looking after a child. This just isn't possible!!

As for the song they are saying I downloaded!!! Scooter!!!

Are they having a a laugh??? That is nearly a bigger joke than ACS LAW!!!

I,m not amused but my friends still keep laughing at the thought of me wanting to listen to that rubbish!

 

Sue ACS for defamation

[mr.ton]

I agree that the game of letter ping pong needs to stop

[jpts33]

I agree that the game of letter ping pong needs to stop

 

 

I agree. The only thing I was thinking about was that there have been previous cases where the defendant has lost because of not bothering to defend their case. What I'm thinking is that after the first two letters of denial any more letters should just be kept very simple, stating they should read one's first and second reply and that one will be prepared to defend in Court if necessary. Just send the letter by standard 2nd class post with a free proof of posting certificate. At least this will inform ACS you haven't forgotten about them and you will defend. That way I believe they will be less likely to ever consider taking the harder cases to Court. My guess is they may take people to Court that don't seem to be too bothered and win by default. Just my opinion.

[car2403]

If you have reason to deny the accusations, you must send a letter of denial outlining it - should they take you to Court, and you've ignored the letter before action, the Court may still order costs against you even if you successfully defend. Even a potential Defendant has a duty to save Court costs and time. For the price of an A4 sheet of paper and a stamp, it has to be worth it to save you paying Court fees and costs later.

 

If they reply to your LOD, I'd say you're safe ignoring it so long as they don't bring anything new to the table - if they change the accusations, you should deny them also if you have good reason. I suspect this won't happen, however.

 

Remember that, should it get to Court, you need to be seen to have been reasonable in the circumstances. I suggest anyone effected by this takes their individual response to this, what seems automated, process very seriously - that could mean starting a new thread and providing a link to it here.

 

Please don't get carried along by the "this won't happen" theory, as this is an accusation against you, not the individuals posting those theories.

[mr.ton]

With respect Car...its not in their interests to take anyone to court. (not saying they deffo wont)

It will cost them money & chances are they'd only get a token amount back as that is what the court system does - it takes into account all your essential expenditure before ruling on a monthly amount to be repaid.

They are simply relying on people paying the full amount out of fear.

[car2403]

With respect, Mr Ton, we've both stated our opinions and we clearly disagree, but I'm all for giving readers options - they have to make their minds up, when they are capable of making a fully informed decision as to what is best for them in their circumstances.

 

'Nuff said, I think.

[the_shadow]

Remember that, should it get to Court, you need to be seen to have been reasonable in the circumstances. I suggest anyone effected by this takes their individual response to this, what seems automated, process very seriously - that could mean starting a new thread and providing a link to it here.

 

Please don't get carried along by the "this won't happen" theory, as this is an accusation against you, not the individuals posting those theories.

 

Sound advice as always

 

S.

[mr.ton]

Car - i am simply explaining how the court system works in this country, if you've worked for them yourself or ever been through 1 yourself then you'll know exactly what proceedures they have when it comes to issues of money/debt etc...

Of course some people may want to avoid them, i accept that fully....

But even so, you cannot be told at a court there & then to just hand over x hundreds or x thousand pounds etc....there is a proceedure that has to be gone through.

The 1st obvious proceedure is finding out if you owe money or not.

Once thats decided upon, if you do - then court officials have to work out all your outgoings & decide upon an amount leftover to repay, which can be anything down to a legal minimum of £1 per month...

Thats not me thinking im right for the sake of it or trying to argue with anyone for the sake of it - thats simply how it all works in a nutshell.

So if ACS think its any benefit to them taking people to court - then on reflection, is really isnt - given what ive said above & that it would cost them money to take someone there before hand.

[brokebutnotbeatn]

As its virtually impossible to prove anyone downloaded this file, I'd be astonished if this ever went to court. If I end up with one of these letters I will send a rigorous denial and advise that I will defend myself robustly should they decide not to accept that denial...I agree with Mr Ton, it's extremely unlikely but also with Car in that you can't bury your head in the sand and assume it won't be tried...as a means to get funds by default!

[car2403]

Car - i am simply explaining how the court system works in this country, if you've worked for them yourself or ever been through 1 yourself then you'll know exactly what proceedures they have when it comes to issues of money/debt etc...

Of course some people may want to avoid them, i accept that fully....

But even so, you cannot be told at a court there & then to just hand over x hundreds or x thousand pounds etc....there is a proceedure that has to be gone through.

The 1st obvious proceedure is finding out if you owe money or not.

Once thats decided upon, if you do - then court officials have to work out all your outgoings & decide upon an amount leftover to repay, which can be anything down to a legal minimum of £1 per month...

Thats not me thinking im right for the sake of it or trying to argue with anyone for the sake of it - thats simply how it all works in a nutshell.

So if ACS think its any benefit to them taking people to court - then on reflection, is really isnt - given what ive said above & that it would cost them money to take someone there before hand.

 

I'm not really sure what your motives are, Mr Ton, as I've seen such comments throughout these forums, and I've said that we disagree on how to approach this - there isn't much more I can add to that here.

 

I would point out, though, that any payment terms on a Judgment granted would come as a secondary consideration to the fact as to whether they have a claim that a Judgment could be issued on, or not. I'm confused why you'd say don't pay them until a Court tells you what to pay, as they will only make you pay what you can afford, when the whole of this thread hinges on these allegations been completely unfounded. Why do you think they will get Judgment, meaning the Court will order you to pay anything at all?

 

My concern is your comments are going to get those receiving these letters thinking in the wrong direction. The Claimant must have a case, be able to state it clearly, argue against any defence the Defendant enters and convince a Judge that the claim is well founded. Only then will they turn to how you'd pay the amount ordered. Lets address these things in the order in which we need to, rather than scaremonger and frighten.

 

BTW - have you received one of these letters? Or, have you ever gone to Court to tell the Judge how much you are able to pay without considering whether you have to or not? If so, why? I'm trying to understand your position, here and would appreciate it if you could clarify for those reading this thread.

 

I'm hoping we have the same goal, we're just choosing different methods of getting there.

[mr.ton]

I'm not really sure what your motives are, Mr Ton, as I've seen such comments throughout these forums, and I've said that we disagree on how to approach this - there isn't much more I can add to that here.

I would point out, though, that any payment terms on a Judgment granted would come as a secondary consideration to the fact as to whether they have a claim that a Judgment could be issued on, or not. I'm confused why you'd say don't pay them until a Court tells you what to pay, as they will only make you pay what you can afford, when the whole of this thread hinges on these allegations been completely unfounded. Why do you think they will get Judgment, meaning the Court will order you to pay anything at all?

My concern is your comments are going to get those receiving these letters thinking in the wrong direction. The Claimant must have a case, be able to state it clearly, argue against any defence the Defendant enters and convince a Judge that the claim is well founded. Only then will they turn to how you'd pay the amount ordered. Lets address these things in the order in which we need to, rather than scaremonger and frighten.

BTW - have you received one of these letters? Or, have you ever gone to Court to tell the Judge how much you are able to pay without considering whether you have to or not? If so, why? I'm trying to understand your position, here and would appreciate it if you could clarify for those reading this thread.

I'm hoping we have the same goal, we're just choosing different methods of getting there.

 

I personally havent received 1 of these letters no.

But if i do, i wont be losing a winks sleep over it.

I know the legal system inside out, but loads dont & they are the one's who are of concern to me - who think as soon as they get 1 of these letters,that they have to start parting with money right away etc..

Of course this thread hinges on the legal basis to the whole case in the 1st place, but with respect - there are many newbies posting in here worried sick & wondering what to do etc..

I am only putting their minds at rest by informing them that they wouldnt have to part with any monies whatsoever until the day a court ever ordered them to (via a legal proceedure)

Chew over the legalities of all this by all means, but in the here & now, people's concerns need to be put to rest

Edited August 9, 2009 by mr.ton

[car2403]

I'm hoping we have the same goal, we're just choosing different methods of getting there.

 

I personally havent received 1 of these letters no.

But if i do, i will not be wont be losing a winks sleep over it.

I know the legal system inside out, but loads dont & they are the one's who are of concern to me - who think as soon as they get 1 of these letters,that they have to start parting with money right away etc..

Of course this thread hinges on the legal basis to the whole case in the 1st place, but with respect - there are many newbies posting in here worried sick & wondering what to do etc..

I am only putting their minds at rest by informing them that they wouldnt have to part with any monies whatsoever until the day a court ever ordered them to (via a legal proceedure)

Chew over the legalities of all this by all means, but in the here & now, people's concerns need to be put to rest

 

Brill, so I think that's a yes then?

 

I still believe a LOD is appropriate for any challenge, then ignore them unless they put their money where their mouth is and issue a Court claim - in which case, it is easily defended. If the allegations change, deny those as well, then ignore until Court.

 

We're all on the same page, here.

[mr.ton]

I still believe a LOD is appropriate for any challenge, then ignore them unless they put their money where their mouth is and issue a Court claim - in which case, it is easily defended. If the allegations change, deny those as well, then ignore until Court.

 

We only went round the block a few times before getting there

[andydd]

Car - i am simply explaining how the court system works in this country, if you've worked for them yourself or ever been through 1 yourself then you'll know exactly what proceedures they have when it comes to issues of money/debt etc...

Of course some people may want to avoid them, i accept that fully....

But even so, you cannot be told at a court there & then to just hand over x hundreds or x thousand pounds etc....there is a proceedure that has to be gone through.

The 1st obvious proceedure is finding out if you owe money or not.

Once thats decided upon, if you do - then court officials have to work out all your outgoings & decide upon an amount leftover to repay, which can be anything down to a legal minimum of £1 per month...

Thats not me thinking im right for the sake of it or trying to argue with anyone for the sake of it - thats simply how it all works in a nutshell.

So if ACS think its any benefit to them taking people to court - then on reflection, is really isnt - given what ive said above & that it would cost them money to take someone there before hand.

 

You often mention this £1 a month, that is a minumum, there is no limit to a maximum amount...If you are employed though its very unlikely that a court will order payment as low as £1 a month, my only experience of this was a CCJ where I was ordered to pay £50, if you earning a reasonable wage it is likely to be higher. People shouldnt rely on ignoring letters from ACS and end up by default in court with the idea that it could cost them only a £1 a month.

 

Personally I'd reply to the letters from ACS but if I found I was repeated myself I'd inform them that letter ping pong would be a waste of my time and money but as suggested it would be a good idea to respond to any new accusations.

 

Andy

[ccsnet]

Just got a 2nd letter ( Scooter ).... you sent us a template blah blah blah.... which is ironic because thats how they contacted me in the first place and responded

 

Any way - considering I told them a) I didnt do it and b) own the CD it sounds like they are happy for me to show up in court with it.

 

Will send the 2nd out this week witch some extra narrative & photo.

 

Terran

 

PS Down to £450 on mine

[Nikkinooch]

it confuses me that I have sent the same template letter as other people have on the site regarding the 'scooter' file and yet some have had there amounts reduced but mine was increased - what the hell is the reason behind this?

[andydd]

it confuses me that I have sent the same template letter as other people have on the site regarding the 'scooter' file and yet some have had there amounts reduced but mine was increased - what the hell is the reason behind this?

 

ACS are soon to start a special offer IDOSSGOF - Illegally Download One Scooter Song Get One Free a bargain at only £650

 

Andy

[fisherman06]

Just a quick update with regards to the letter i sent to my local MP.As stated earlier in this thread she forwarded it to Jack Straw at the ministry of justice,I have recieved a reply this morning stating that it was not a matter for the ministry of justice and had been forwarded to the department for business,innovation and skills and that they would contact me direct concerning this matter.Will let you know of any further development.

[Nikkinooch]

ACS are soon to start a special offer IDOSSGOF - Illegally Download One Scooter Song Get One Free a bargain at only £650

 

Andy

 

LOL