Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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 4935 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

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

.

 

 

D_arkTrooper,

 

You need to create your own thread in the legal forum for this as you'll need to separate it from this thread which is general responses to the ACS letters.

 

If you post up the POC then people can help and advise on a response and the next steps with this claim.

 

S.

Edited by the_shadow
Link to post
Share on other sites

my mum recieved a letter from these people saying that she had not replied to their previous letter about d/l this Scooter CD, we never even recieved a first letter, so we composed a letter back using the template and edited it to say we never even recieved a first letter so how were we able to respond, being sent recorded delivery today, our CAB wasnt much help to be honest, got more help by reading these forums.

 

The template letter is here http://beingthreatened.yolasite.com/resources/Writing%20a%20Letter%20of%20Response%20to%20ACS.pdf

 

if anyone wants to see the letter I composed as we never recieved the first one, i'll be happy to email it to you. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting and relevant article here :

 

http://beckermanlegal.com/Lawyer_Copyright_Internet_Law/virgin_thomas_090303DeftsExpertWitnessReport.pdf

 

The legal aspects may be different , but the technologies and the arguments thus forwarded would be common .

 

I do not know if the link will be removed . What is the criteria that is applied such that wiki is allowed but the template .pdf address must be removed ? Well, all I can do is post this pdf, if it is removed so nobody else can read it , I have tried at least .

 

Is there any kind of directive anywhere regarding this I can read ? , so I do not need to waste anymore time with links that will be deleted at a later stage ?

Edited by Drexl Spivey
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick update.

 

The pack includes a 6 page Claim Form stamped with the Central London County Court seal.

 

It has a box saying "Ammount Claimed" and the answer being "Not more than £3000"

 

The rest of that document is the stuff printed in the original letter about the IP address etc and the Scooter album.

 

The other document is a questionaire.Its asking for all details about my income,bank details,outgoing expenses,debts etc and seems to be split into sections (Admitting the claim,defence and counter claim etc.)

 

The address given to send all correspondance is:

 

Miss K Rekhi (Clerk to Judge Fysh)

Room SD306A

St Dunstens House

133-137 Fetter Lane

London

EC4A 1BT

 

does this mean they are taking you to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

D_arkTrooper did you reply to any of the original letters? I must admit I would have thought that ACS would be careful to go only for people who had thrown the ACS letters in the waste paper basket, as I would have thought the last thing that Andrew Crossley would want is to go to court, unless he is hoping people will be panicked by the large brown envelope and is pushing his luck. All you have received is a claim form, this is not asking you to go to court and you can always counter claim.

 

I totally abhor what Andrew Crossley is doing to innocent people and the fear and worry he has caused.

 

I notice that in a comment to the Daily Mail on-line Andrew Crossley says:

 

As the owner and operator of the only law firm in the UK acting for copyright owners in identifying and pursuing illegal file sharers on Peer to Peer networks................. - Andrew Crossley, London, United Kingdom, 19/8/2009 22:04

Has he ever asked himself WHY is he the only law firm in the UK doing this!!!

 

Edited by piglette
Link to post
Share on other sites

In a way , it is a good thing he is doing it . By the looks of it from the interview above , they (the distributors) are posting these media on p2p networks for the sole purpose of deriving revenue from threat of prosecution and requirement of sums to avoid , of the so called perpetrators who are only guilty of having the same IP number as shown up by some unverified and unknown means of identification.

 

Yet this unknown means and this scheme in general has allowed them to ride roughshod over our court system and the information commissioner , and our ISP's . So much so , that pensioners are being accused of downloading techno grunge garbage german garage ghetto music , what next , when ordinary and vulnerable people cannot be defended against this kind of thing with the rules we have in place at the moment . Hopefully it will mean we adopt a more stringent form of IP protection in the courts in the future , along the lines of the other european nations that have turned these people away in the courts to ply their scheme in the only place left with the rules so archaic and the so called regulatory authorities as insouciant and inept as we have here in the UK .

Edited by Drexl Spivey
Link to post
Share on other sites

Zippy11, it is a comment to an article in the Mail on Mandelson wanting to criminalise one in twelve people in UK for illicit file downloading. Scroll down and it is currently the second comment.

 

Mandelson launches crackdown on file sharing... just days after meeting with record producer | Mail Online

Link to post
Share on other sites

ACS LAW have successfully found me of downloading a said game of which

I am now subsequently facing a nice hefty fine of over £665!!! (THE UPLOADER WAS FINED £16000!),

All Internet providers know all your traces and details AND WHEN ASKED BY RELEVENT PARTIES CAN AND

WILL pass on all evidence on.......!!!???

SO if you can afford to pay such fines please carry on? or if like me STOP NOW!!!!!

AND JUST DOWNLOAD LEGAL FILES WITHOUT ANY COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT ATTACHED.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ACS LAW have successfully found me of downloading a said game of which

I am now subsequently facing a nice hefty fine of over £665!!! (THE UPLOADER WAS FINED £16000!),

All Internet providers know all your traces and details AND WHEN ASKED BY RELEVENT PARTIES CAN AND

WILL pass on all evidence on.......!!!???

SO if you can afford to pay such fines please carry on? or if like me STOP NOW!!!!!

AND JUST DOWNLOAD LEGAL FILES WITHOUT ANY COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT ATTACHED.

 

Posts like that will just encourage them to continue doing what they are doing - I suggest you go back to page 1 and read the thread from the start.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,I DID reply to ACS with a slightly modified template letter after they sent me the first letter.

 

Quite a few weeks passed before I heard any response from them,but eventually around mid-August,I received another letter from them saying they would not accept my LOD as it was a template letter from the internet.

 

I responded with the second template letter (found through links from this forum) with a first paragraph in my own words.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4935 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...