Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Here is my final draft: I, XXXXXX, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in the claim and further to my set aside application dated 1 November 2022. The claimants witness statement confirms that it mostly relies on hearsay evidence as confirmed by the drafts in person in the opening paragraph. It is my understanding they must serve notice to any hearsay evidence pursuant to CPR 33.2(1)(B) (notice of intention to rely on hearsay evidence) and Section 2 (1) (A) of the Civil Evidence Act.   1.        The claimant failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis on the 2 February 2024 'The Claim shall be automatically struck out at 4pm on 3 April 2024 unless the Claimant delivers to the Court and to the Defendant the following documents.' None of these documents were received by the court nor the defendant by that date.   2.        I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment.   As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights.  This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information).  The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.   3.        The alleged letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address.  I have attached a copy of my tenancy agreement which is marked ‘Appendix 1’ and shows I was residing at a difference address as of 11 December 2018 and was therefore not at the service address at the time the proceedings were served.  I have also attached an email from my solicitors to the Claimants solicitors dated 14 July 2022 which was sent to them requesting that they disclose the trace of evidence they utilised prior to issuing the proceedings against me.  This is marked ‘Appendix 2’.  The claimants solicitors did not provide me with these documents.   4.        Under The Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017 a Debt Buyer must undertake all reasonable enquiries to ensure the correct address of a debtor, this can be as simple as a credit file search. The Claimant failed to carry out such basic checks. Subsequently all letters prior to and including ,The Pre action Protocol letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 and the claim form dated 14th February 2020 were all served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018.   5.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020.   6.        Upon the discovery of the Judgement debt, I made immediate contact with the Court and the Claimant Solicitors, putting them on notice that I was making investigations in relation to the Judgement debt as it was not familiar to me.  I asked them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.   The correspondence to the Claimant Solicotors is attached and marked ‘Appendix 3’   7.        I then sent a Data Subject Access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided. Details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 4’and the copies of correspondence between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 5’.   8.        The claimant relies upon and exhibits a reconstituted version of the alleged agreement.   It is again denied that I have ever entered into an agreement with Barclaycard on or around 2000.  It is admitted that I did hold other credit agreements with other creditors and as such should this be a debt that was assigned to Barclaycard from another brand therefore the reconstituted agreement disclosed is invalid being pre April 2007 and not legally enforceable pursuant to HH Judge Waksman in Carey v HSBC 2009 EWHC3417.  Details of this are attached and marked ‘Appendix 6’.   The original credit agreement must be provided along with any reconstituted version on a modified credit agreement and must contain the names and address of debtor and creditor, agreement number and cancelation clause.   9.        Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to disclose a true executed legible agreement on which its claim relies upon and not try to mislead the court.   10.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. Until such time the claimant can comply and disclose a true executed copy of the original assigned agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim they are not entitled while the default continues, to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. Signed                 ………………………………………………….. Name                  XXXX Date                     30 April 2024
    • Only trying to help.  Ain't being nasty.  Some
    • Hi folks, I've just found previous documentation. I thought it had gone missing. I'd forgotten that I did appeal it through POPLA but I can't find the thread on here that, I assume, I posted for help. Appeal letter is dated 27/10/2020 with a rejection. I genuinely had forgotten about this so apologies for misleading you. A lot has happened in the years since the ticket was issued. We closed down a couple of businesses and moved to the opposite end of the country to retire. The documents I have are scanned copies. I no longer have the originals. The NTK is also in there. If there's anything you'd like to see, please let me know and I'll post them, although it probably won't be until tomorrow now, but I'll be looking in on this page tonight. Thank you for the responses so far
    • Hello! After emailing them I received this reply:   I have drafted the following, please would you be able to comment as to if you think it is correct/sufficient? "Thank you for your email.   Thanks you for confirming that the vehicle does not have these features as stated in the advertisement.    I am sure you are aware that the Consumer Rights Act 2015 provides the short term right to reject within 30 days. Statutory rights cannot be taken away from a consumer, and any attempt to do so is illegal.   Please can you advise how best to return the vehicle?" Thanks in advance!
    • I find that highly disrespectful Sir/Madam just so you know.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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 
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

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 4934 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

There's a very good article in the Telegraph here.LINK

 

Lord Mandelsnakeskin has been toadying up to the movie and music industry moguls and has apparently been 'succesfully lobbied' (probably a non job after the next election :|) to bring in new legislation to stop internet piracy.

 

Which kind of gives the game away that there isn't such legislation at the moment.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

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

Commissar Mandelson is aiming to criminalize what is in effect a civil action in order to swell the government's coffers at £50,000 a throw. :rolleyes:

 

Surely music/film piracy cannot be singled out? What about other copyright infringements?

 

Obviously they don't pay enough to be 'succesfully lobbied', maybe we can expect any legislation forced through by our morally bereft leaders to be drafted thus:

 

The internet Piracy Laws 2010.

 

(The internet Piracy Laws 2010 have been brought to you by Sony)

 

 

Sec 5

 

(1) It shall be an offence to download or upload in whole or in part, any restricted goods as defined within this Act.

(a) For the purposes of this Act restricted goods are the following: Any film from the studios of Time Warner, HBO, Pixar, Disney or any subsidiary company, any music on the Sony, EMI or Virgin labels, and Harry Potter books both digital or audio copies, recordings originating from programmes broadcast by the BBC, channel 4, Sky and the National Geographic channels, Microsoft Xbox, EA Sports, Activision and playstation 3 games.......:|

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

Note the comments re "repeated offenders" with a warning desist letter and graduated punishment - slowing down connect being the first! Clearly even if ACS had a case then then they'd still ahve an uphill battle to get any compensation! I think one simple denial and desist harassing me letter sent recorded delviery should more than suffice...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there an ethics/corrruption department that Mandy can be reported too? its a bit suscpicious.......

 

I wonder how they are going to square disconnecting children from the internet with their policys that everyone should have the internet and it is basically a utility now.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there an ethics/corrruption department that Mandy can be reported too? its a bit suscpicious.......

 

I wonder how they are going to square disconnecting children from the internet with their policys that everyone should have the internet and it is basically a utility now.

 

:confused:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

:confused:

 

The goverment has all these plans to put broadband into every home in Britain, they have said they pretty much consider it a utility like gas, water, electric, phone.

 

If they are going to disconnect internet connections under mandys proposals (which I thought had already been thrown out) then its a fact they will be disconnecting children and depriving them of valuable study tools.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I better get rid of my VHS recorder & Sky+ recorder then. :(

 

After all, I wouldn't want to infringe copyright would I? :rolleyes:

 

one only wonders what they expected us to record without infringing copyright when the VCR came out....

 

Actually I can answer that for you because I recently learned that a camcorder with a DV in facility is classified under EU regs as a Video recorder not a camcorder and as such attracts a cost surcharge of approx 15% which is paid supposedly to the copyright organisations to offset any perceived losses. Just as the copyright organisations also received a micro payment for every blank audio cassette, blank vhs tape and blank cd and DVD sold.

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello All,

 

I have sent my letter refushing the offer under section 36.

 

Is anyone else doing the same?

 

 

Hi, I sent my letter refusing to accept the part 36 offer also.

I posted this a couple of days ago and will keep you updated

on anything I recieve back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as the copyright organisations also received a micro payment for every blank audio cassette, blank vhs tape and blank cd and DVD sold.
If that's the case how can downloading mp3's be a copyright infringement as long as they are stored on the above? ;)
Link to post
Share on other sites

If that's the case how can downloading mp3's be a copyright infringement as long as they are stored on the above? ;)

 

One of the problems facing the music industry is that they are no longer being stored on these media but on ipods and other players with hard drives or flash memory hence no steady consumption of the consumables on which to make a few pence.

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the problems facing the music industry is that they are no longer being stored on these media but on ipods and other players with hard drives or flash memory hence no steady consumption of the consumables on which to make a few pence.

 

Me theory is that its not the "piracy" that the RIAA and its UK equivelent see as the problem or a threat, its the technology behind it.

 

They oppose the technology because in that technology they see their End. They have been robbing artists blind since the 1950's and they are expecting to continue with a business model that was the height of sophistication in 1950 in the 21st century digital age.

 

Its a fact the real money in music is in live gigging and concerts. Why on earth would a tech savvy band want to sign up to an incredibly restrictive contract with Sony or somebody, where every single little item will be logged and charged, and where the Company takes the vast lions share of the profit?

 

Why do that when the alternative is, clubbing together with wages from their day jobs, and paying £3-£500 for a perfectly reasonable and professional recording session in a local studio, then using digital means, both free and charging to distribute their music, and make a name, they are already forging with their live music.

 

The industry is screwed,and is grasping at straws, and speeding its own demise by alienating its consumers and criminalising them.

 

As an example of Industry largesee, I saw an interview with Meatloaf last year. He has had some BIG albums, he has been around for 30 plus years, has released lots of albums, does huge live concerts and is known worldwide.

 

January 2008 was the first time he ever actually made any money from his music he had been screwed to the wall by his restrictive and legalised robbery contracts for 30 years. :eek:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone.

 

My husband received a letter from ACS Law a couple of months ago saying he had illegally down-loaded a XXX title in May of last year. I know he didn't do it (it's not that I'm very trusting we were out of the country on holiday at the time when they alleged it happened!). I sent a reply letter to ACS based on the template I found here and we didn't hear anything back from them until the other day when we got the standard second letter about "generic responses"

I've drafted another letter to them now pointing out that it doesn't matter if the letter we sent them was a template it doesn't change any of the facts and I've included the emails for our hotel and flight bookings for the date they say the movie was downloaded.

I'm so annoyed about the whole thing to be honest, it feels like utter harassment. I've decided if they write back again rejecting what we've said I'll just send them a letter telling them to take it to court. I'm seriously considering taking legal advice on counter claiming for harassment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are far too many posts that I've seen similar to Niniel's above - it is clear that their "method" of identifying alleged downloaders is deeply, deeply flawed. Cases like that, where a person can prove their innocence, should be another line of defence or those that can't. If they can get one IP address wrong, they can get them all wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone.

 

My husband received a letter from ACS Law a couple of months ago saying he had illegally down-loaded a XXX title in May of last year. I know he didn't do it (it's not that I'm very trusting we were out of the country on holiday at the time when they alleged it happened!). I sent a reply letter to ACS based on the template I found here and we didn't hear anything back from them until the other day when we got the standard second letter about "generic responses"

I've drafted another letter to them now pointing out that it doesn't matter if the letter we sent them was a template it doesn't change any of the facts and I've included the emails for our hotel and flight bookings for the date they say the movie was downloaded.

I'm so annoyed about the whole thing to be honest, it feels like utter harassment. I've decided if they write back again rejecting what we've said I'll just send them a letter telling them to take it to court. I'm seriously considering taking legal advice on counter claiming for harassment.

 

Quite clearly its unlikely they will reply further and of course court action is rather unlikely, you certainly do seem to have a lot of proof that you were not using your PC at that time, was the PC turned off whilst you were on holiday, it would be interested to see if you could get further information from your ISP proving that your PC wasnt even online, I agree counter claiming for some damages would be a great way forward, surely if ACS knew that every time they falsey accused someone if could end up costing them money then surely they would think more carefully, as it currently stand they can accuse almost anyone, often causing them distrees, is there someone more knowledgeable who knows about counter caliming for harrassment ?

 

I find their response about generic responses absolutely amazing, they are equally valid wther they are a generic response or an individulaised one and as pointed out before all of their letters are just geeneric ones, lets hope this saga draws to an end soon.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find their response about generic responses absolutely amazing, they are equally valid wther they are a generic response or an individulaised one and as pointed out before all of their letters are just geeneric ones, lets hope this saga draws to an end soon.

Their next complaint will be that people have the audacity to use consumer groups for advice. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

my MP has sent that to secretary of state for culture,Media and sports in JUNE have not heard anything so far

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4934 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...