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

[Scooby Doo69]

Heads up guys!

 

Just had a text from my wife - she has received a reply to our 1st Letter of Denial this morning.

 

As expected, this is another ACS Template letter, stating that they do not accept *our* Templete Letter , and giving us 7 days to explain how our personal circumstances allowed my wife to let her internet connect be used for sharing files (which it most certainly was NOT!).

 

Of possible interest, is that she is saying they have enclosed a 'Questionairre' for her to complete, which I believe is a new tactic?

 

Not at home til tonight, so haven't had sight of this as yet - will report back later...

 

Rob

 

NB - Which? Computing are coming to see us next week, to take photos and details for their upcoming feature

 

Rob,

 

If that is your real name I'd suggest you delete your username and re-register under a different alias. It has been known for ACS to trawl the net to try and get a "dossier" upon their defendants. I'd also suggest you delete any posts under the current username.

 

Also be advised that this is a public forum and if you found it, you can be certain that ACS Law and others are reading it!

 

Sounds like ACS are fishing. Would be good if you could scan the questionnaire in (removing all personal references) and post it here, but more import, send a scan into beinghtreatened.com.

 

I'd strongly advise against replying to them with to much information. If you didn't do it, then tell them so, you have no knowledge of who has, will not be reply to further correspondance, end of story. If it was me, I wouldn't be filling out any questionnaire. This new ploy will only serve opening an individual up to more questions, letters, "legal" threats, etc.

 

Of course take your own legal advice.

[robstanley1]

Hi Scooby,

 

Thanks for that; I rather suspect it's a little late for me to be changing my user name and or deleting posts, as I suspect that ACS has already picked up on one of my previous posts, regarding my wife being disabled, and consequently coming back to us with a follow-up letter far, far quicker than has previously been seen.

 

I'll certainly be posting details of their new template letter, and questionairre over this weekend, and it goes without saying that they can go whistle, in terms of us providing them with additional personal information.

 

We're not guilty of file-sharing, haven't given permission for anybody else to do so, and that's the end of it

[Scooby Doo69]

Hi Scooby,

 

Thanks for that; I rather suspect it's a little late for me to be changing my user name and or deleting posts, as I suspect that ACS has already picked up on one of my previous posts, regarding my wife being disabled, and consequently coming back to us with a follow-up letter far, far quicker than has previously been seen.

 

I'll certainly be posting details of their new template letter, and questionairre over this weekend, and it goes without saying that they can go whistle, in terms of us providing them with additional personal information.

 

We're not guilty of file-sharing, haven't given permission for anybody else to do so, and that's the end of it

 

Hi Rob,

 

Apologies, no offence intended. If you haven't done it, then I'd guess you don't want to pay the monies demanded!

 

Put an end to it now then. Explain no one in your household has committed the alledged offence, you don't know who would have and consider the matter closed. You will not be entering into any further correspondance. This puts the ball firmly in their "Court" then.

 

Makes your situation very clear. They would have to take you to Court then, otherwise any other correspondance could be considered harrassment.

[robstanley1]

Hey Scoobie

 

No offence taken whatsoever - that wan't directed at you

 

...And, yes - I will be sending them a final letter on my wife's behalf, politely asking them to prove it, or to stop harrassing somebody who they see as an 'easy target'.

 

EDITED TO ADD: **Which? Computing are actively-seeking other victims of ACS' - can everybody who's received one of these letters take five minutes, and drop them an email (at [email protected]) - it's likely that they will want to gather as much additional detail as possible from us all for their forthcoming feature on this whole fiasco**

Edited February 5, 2010 by robstanley1

[Chrisash]

Has anyone had one of these letters between say 6months/year ago?

 

If so how has it all been left? ie last letter you received or sent?

[Shaggy123]

The questionnaire looks like a classic case of clutching at straws to me. They cannot provide the evidence you asked for so now they want you to provide the evidence for them.

 

I would have thought the only time you need to answer the questions are in court.

[Shaggy123]

Has anyone had one of these letters between say 6months/year ago?

 

If so how has it all been left? ie last letter you received or sent?

 

Mine is a new case.

 

Is it a long time since you last recieved any correspondence? What was the last correspondence you sent to them?

[ccsnet]

3) ccsnet: Gawd's sake, don't vanish from here forever. I get the feeling you know far more about Internet technology than you let on.

I'm not saying but I wont be going either

 

Re the questionairs - I'd love to know what they are asking.... and I would point out there is no reason you HAVE TO fill it out other than more 'evidence'. As some one said to me this week - tell them to Foxtrot Oscar

 

Terran

[robstanley1]

Many thanks for that, Terran - exactly my own feelings on the whole Questionairre issue

 

As promised, the questionairre will be scanned and uploaded (presume a .pdf is the best way on these forums?) over this weekend

[Scooby Doo69]

Has anyone had one of these letters between say 6months/year ago?

 

If so how has it all been left? ie last letter you received or sent?

 

I'd say unless someone has left themselves wide open for potential prosecution, ACS have moved onto harvesting their new set of defendents to see who will pay up. The chances of being contacted again from last Year diminshes with each day. ACS could revist them at a latter date, but from correspondance around the end of the Year, indicates to me that they had one last bash at getting people to pay up.

 

In a way, it works in everyones favour if they don't contact this batch again as it proves them to be unreliable and could be construed to be bullying. Of course, this also costs money in postage, etc.

[Scooby Doo69]

The questionnaire looks like a classic case of clutching at straws to me. They cannot provide the evidence you asked for so now they want you to provide the evidence for them.

 

I would have thought the only time you need to answer the questions are in court.

 

Talk about giving them the noose to put around your own neck with this questionnaire.

 

I suspect they will focus on whether

 

1) You admit the claim or have knowledge of anyone else that has?

2) Who has access a computer at the time of the alledged claim?

3) If yes to 2, did the computer have wireless capability

4) If yes to 3 was wireless network secured?

5) If it was secured, by what method of security?

 

Of course, those that are clued up know that even if a wireless network is secured, it is hackable within minutes and there are no current leglisation requiring an individual to do so.

 

If I am right about any of the above questions, of course, they open an avenue for further correspondance and can be seen to be an admission of guilt. Crossley admitted the account holder may not be the person sharing files illegally. As a result, he said, the letter, would also invite the recipient to name the person they thought was responsible. If you don't know as I've said before say you have no knowledge and are ending correspondance.

[robstanley1]

Just noticed this - what the hell???

 

moneysupermarket.com community - ACS Law - Letter of claim

 

Poor chap at the bottom of the page appears to have received a TELEPHONE CALL from 'Jonathon' at ACS, asking him to pay his '£400 damages' in ten, easy monthly instalments of £40.00!!

 

Rather makes ACS:Law sound like some kind of dodgy catologue firm, than anything else

[Scooby Doo69]

Nothing unusual Rob, a Court would do the same if they dished out a fine. Each case would be discussed on it's merits. I guess the person pleaded poverty. This closes that avenue to the defendent of the claim.

[robstanley1]

Thing is, though, ASC's letters aren't fines - merely 'offers to settle', as I understand it.

 

Previous tactics we've seen, to secure payments from the accused letter-recipients have included varying the amount being 'requested', issuing highly-suspect 'news' items on their web pages, indicating that actual litigation was imminent etc., but this is the first time I've seen mention of settling via instalment

Edited February 5, 2010 by robstanley1

[jakehtesnakeuk]

if you give someone an offer to pay in installments, that is equal to begging for money (please pay me therefore admit you are guilty)

how many more cheap tricks we are going to hear about acs:[problem] ?

[Scooby Doo69]

Fine/Settlement is a play on words. If you have a debt that is passed to a collection agency they will add on their fee and then attempt to collect the amount on behalf of their client. It's normal in such circumstances when the debtor pleads poverty to arrange payment by installments.

 

At the end of the day, this isn't about putting the World to rights, but making money for a business. The leaked DL business model showed that the Artist/Artist company got less than 10% of money received with the majority going to the law firm.

 

I doubt whether ACS Law want to win the fight against piracy as their revenue stream would dry up. After all their is no statememt on their web site in reply to BPI hanging them out to dry....

[Shaggy123]

received a TELEPHONE CALL from 'Jonathon' at ACS, asking him to pay his '£400 damages' in ten, easy monthly instalments of £40.00!!

 

That's very generous of him isnt it.

[BARFLY]

I'd send ACS a questionnaire. Ask whether anyone within the 'organisation' has ever been prosecuted for attempted fraud or 'passing off'. That you want to make sure you're dealing with a reputable company. Ask for details of any court cases that have arisen as a result of similar accusations. Ask what P2P you were meant to have used in relation to this 'offence'. Ask for a copy of their complaints procedure. Then tell them to f**k off. These people are sub-human ****. They will get what's coming to them sooner or later. The SRA should hang their heads in shame. After denying any liability inform them you will answer any questionnaires under CPR when the court papers turn up, and that you'll expect them to do the same.

[scooby555]

Has anyone had one of these letters between say 6months/year ago?

 

If so how has it all been left? ie last letter you received or sent?

mine was dated 8.1.2009

[robstanley1]

Hey all,

 

As promised, I've attached a .pdf of today's little missive from Mr. Crossley to this post.

 

In fairness, I was actually expecting something far more eloquent and searching - this looks to have been drafted either in a real hurry, or by somebody with no real idea of what they're actually trying to accomplish (Mr. Tsang? Is that you, knocking out questionnaires these days?!)

 

EDIT: Please note that the original questionairres, as sent, all seem to contain slightly different 'mistakes' in various parts (this mistake has been removed from the copy uploaded here); there is some speculation that ACS may be using these apparent 'errors' in an attempt to track people who post copies on forums back to their real-life identities.

 

Make of this what you will!

 

IMPORTANT NOTE TO THOSE WHO HAVE RECEIVED THIS SECOND ACS LETTER:

 

As has already been noted on another forum, ACS' demand that a response is sent WITHIN 7 DAYS is completely against the advice given in the Ministry of Justice's Practice Direction for Pre-Action Conduct: http://www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/practice_directions/pd_pre-action_conduct.htm#IDAVN2Q

 

If you have a letter from ACS, asking for a response within such a ridicolously-short time-frame, keep it VERY safe; it's likely that the SRA will want to see these!!

 

All thoughts greatfully received

ACS Law Questionairre -anonymised.pdf

Edited February 6, 2010 by robstanley1

[cashins]

As we all now, there is no need to reply/answer/fill in anything unless court action is actually impending, but that i mean it is actually happening in reality not in Mr Crossley strange imagination.

 

 

Yep.

 

If you have issued a letter of denial but they choose not to accept it - tough sh*t.

 

David

[Shaggy123]

Snipped personal info

 

That questionnaire beggars belief.

Edited February 6, 2010 by Shaggy123

[n11186]

Just a thought, but I'd advise anyone going to their Doctors claiming stress unless they are 100% genuine. For some life insurances, etc, you may find the premium going up somewhat or being refused, etc, if your medical record states you have been treated under a Doctor for stress.

 

Am not going to disclose how I know this for obvious reasons (this is a public forum, if you can read it so can ACS!), but food for thought.

Thanks for the advice scooby doo i will put that in my claim to ACS they can also pay my higher insurance premiums. WERE THERS BLAIM ; Edited February 5, 2010 by n11186

[Shaggy123]

So if a 2nd letter is received after replying with a template to the first one what happens then? Do people simply send the first response again or write their own letter?

[jpts33]

This questionnaire is unbelievable. These people (and I use that term very lightly) are playing with people's lives. God only knows what some of these nasty, unprovable claims are doing to people and their relationships with their partner/wife/husband. Personally that damn questionnaire would go straight into the bin (or keep for your own records), but it's clear to me they are doing their utmost to get you to hang yourself. As far as I'm concerned I have denied it twice, and made sure in the second LOD that no further correspondence will be entered into - unless it's through the Court system.

 

As far as being ill or depressed is concerned they DO NOT CARE! All they see is dollar signs$$$$$$$. Whilst I don't like to talk about it to strangers (Public forum) I myself suffer greatly with depression. I take higher than normal dose of antidepressants (issued via the hospital). I have not so long ago (Before all this from ACS started in my case) had a specialist team of psychiatric Dr's & nurses visiting me every day of the week because I became so ill. All this is making me very ill once again. Rightly or wrongly, I don't really know, I told ACS this in my letter, not as an excuse, but trying to tell them I did not do it and they should (as far as I'm concerned) look at people's circumstances before they continue to harass and chase people for unfounded, scabby evidence they say is infallible. The last letter I sent was six months ago (I had 21 days to reply or Court it would be). I've heard nothing since, but it still hangs over your head, is this going to carry on? Are they going to stop harassing now? Are they going to drop the case as they have done in some circumstances? Who the hell knows? All I know is if I'm still around and they take me to Court I will do my best to defend myself, and I would urge everybody else to stand firm against these people - hard though it is .