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

[baffledbygm]

Hi, I'm about to write my first LOD to GM. (I KNOW for a fact that I did not download what they said I did, so am pretty sure my wireless connection has been breached, or someone's made a mistake somewhere).

 

As far as pre-action protocol is concerned- 1) would I be breaching it if I simply denied downloading/uploading the file and didn't give a long winded reply about what I think might have happened (its all spectulation anyway!)? I know the current advice is to give a LOD with very little detail in but has this bitten people in the bottom at all?

 

2) Have GM breached pre-action protocol at all? The letter I recieved makes no mention of it. It was basically "pay £350/£375 or we can take you to court", which in itself I feel is a breach, but I have no legal knowledge on which to base this assumption. I would love to be able to trip them up on the very points they are trying to use to their advantage. There's more of us- we should be able to think of something.

 

This whole farce has caused me to lose sleep and weight. The stress is causing problems concentrating and enjoying my life. These people are **** in my opinion- they know full well that there will be some margin of error in all this and that innocent people will be caught up in it. And even if it were about "stopping people downloading" what's wrong with a reasonable settlement and a warning. I know people who download cos they think they won't get caught. I've told them about my letter (ironic or what?) and its stopping them doing it right away, so well done GM you've done your bit, but I refuse to let you pin the blame on and penalise me for something I simply haven't done.

[kilotango22]

Hi, I'm about to write my first LOD to GM. (I KNOW for a fact that I did not download what they said I did, so am pretty sure my wireless connection has been breached, or someone's made a mistake somewhere).

 

As far as pre-action protocol is concerned- 1) would I be breaching it if I simply denied downloading/uploading the file and didn't give a long winded reply about what I think might have happened (its all spectulation anyway!)? I know the current advice is to give a LOD with very little detail in but has this bitten people in the bottom at all?

 

2) Have GM breached pre-action protocol at all? The letter I recieved makes no mention of it. It was basically "pay £350/£375 or we can take you to court", which in itself I feel is a breach, but I have no legal knowledge on which to base this assumption. I would love to be able to trip them up on the very points they are trying to use to their advantage. There's more of us- we should be able to think of something.

 

This whole farce has caused me to lose sleep and weight. The stress is causing problems concentrating and enjoying my life. These people are **** in my opinion- they know full well that there will be some margin of error in all this and that innocent people will be caught up in it. And even if it were about "stopping people downloading" what's wrong with a reasonable settlement and a warning. I know people who download cos they think they won't get caught. I've told them about my letter (ironic or what?) and its stopping them doing it right away, so well done GM you've done your bit, but I refuse to let you pin the blame on and penalise me for something I simply haven't done.

 

All you have to write is, I didn't do it and you have satisfied the rules as far as I'm aware, they won't accept it no matter what you write.

 

As far as pre-action protocol goes, this is what it says about the letter of claim they have sent you:

 

3. LETTER OF CLAIM

3.1 An intended claimant (hereafter referred to as “the claimant”) should

generally send the intended defendant (hereafter referred to as “the

defendant”) a letter of claim as soon as is reasonably possible after

coming into possession of the relevant facts complained about.

3.2 The letter of claim should:

(a) state that the letter follows this Code and that the defendant should

also do so;

(b) unless the letter is being sent to the legal advisors of the defendant,

enclose a copy of this Code;

© identify the claimant;

(d) list the remedies that the claimant seeks;

(e) give details of any funding arrangements entered into.

 

I would bet money they didn't send you a copy of the code as they are required to do, its 22 pages long and would add a fortune to their postage costs, so they actually breach the code themselves but expect you to play by its rules.

[baffledbygm]

BINGO! That's just what I'm after.

 

I really want to send them a nasty letter full of rude words and sarcasm. But I won't. I'm playing the game by the book- don't want my letter to stand out from all the others.

[londonukguy]

also got my second letter saying they don't accept my LOD as it is a template.

 

i dont think i will write another letter back. how long before they will write to you again asking for money?

[cerberusalert]

I wonder what they would say if you wrote back stating you did not accept their letter not accepting your LOD because their letter is a template?

[panther12]

I wonder what they would say if you wrote back stating you did not accept their letter not accepting your LOD because their letter is a template?

Exactly, I’m still flabbergasted by all this. It’s nothing more than the Nigerian [problem] but operated by unscrupulous solicitors manipulating our legal system for quick financial gain. The ambulance chasing compo claims sector must be a bit thin on the ground for these **** so trying a new approach to make easy money!

[daylight_robbery]

I wonder what they would say if you wrote back stating you did not accept their letter not accepting your LOD because their letter is a template?

 

This is one point I had to make in my letter, it's just outrageous that hey think they can be as hypocrtitical as this!!! Really gets my back up!!

[slammer74]

Got my 2nd letter of the awesome solicitors todays...stating that the letter i sent them is a template...funny thing is the letter i actually sent them was all in my own words....it clearly stated that i was not responsible for downloading the crappy dance album etc......i am gonna write them another letter, telling them exactly the same and that i am now seeking legal advise about how they are harassing me. Was thinking along the lines of popping into there offices and delivering the letter personally...but don't think they would take too kindly to the letter being attached to a brick!! Actually finding it funny how the letters are signed by a Gallant MacMillan....his/her parents must have a sense of humour with that name! lol

[baffledbygm]

Well I was going to send a letter in my own words but if they say it's a template anyway I'll just send the template!

[chrispacket]

Evening all,

 

I've been reading this thread since my first letter from GM dated 27/09.

 

I responded using a modified/personalised version of the template LOD on here (thanks for making that available), and have today received the same second letter as a few posts ago (word for word).

 

I've just drafted a second letter - before I send it, how does this sound?:

 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am in receipt of your second template letter dated 9 August 2010. I see that in this second template letter, you state that

“…your letter takes the form of a standard template response obtained from the internet.”

If you had actually taken the time to read this letter properly, you would see that it was merely based upon a standard and freely available template letter (unlike the letters you are sending), and was in fact largely rewritten.

In that first letter, I stated my position quite clearly, and I will state it again one final time; I categorically deny the offence of which you are accusing me.

Unless I am very much mistaken, in this country, you are innocent until proven guilty, and I cannot see how guilt can be proven in this case, as there are only your assumptions and ‘speculative’, as opposed to concrete, evidence. As I stated before, I can only conclude that if this infringement has actually occurred, then I have been a victim of foul play, as researching the subject online shows that IP addresses are very often ‘faked’ by users of P2P networks, meaning the actual offender can easily hide behind an innocent person’s IP address, which appears to be the case in this instance.

This is my second and final letter in this matter, and no further correspondence will be entered in to. I trust that in the absence of any concrete evidence to substantiate this claim, this will be the end of this matter and you will no longer be harassing me.

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Does that sound OK?

 

 

 

[wittzend]

Evening all,

 

I've been reading this thread since my first letter from GM dated 27/09.

 

I responded using a modified/personalised version of the template LOD on here (thanks for making that available), and have today received the same second letter as a few posts ago (word for word).

 

I've just drafted a second letter - before I send it, how does this sound?:

 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am in receipt of your second template letter dated 9 August 2010. I see that in this second template letter, you state that

“…your letter takes the form of a standard template response obtained from the internet.”

If you had actually taken the time to read this letter properly, you would see that it was merely based upon a standard and freely available template letter (unlike the letters you are sending), and was in fact largely rewritten.

In that first letter, I stated my position quite clearly, and I will state it again one final time; I categorically deny the offence of which you are accusing me.

Unless I am very much mistaken, in this country, you are innocent until proven guilty, and I cannot see how guilt can be proven in this case, as there are only your assumptions and ‘speculative’, as opposed to concrete, evidence. As I stated before, I can only conclude that if this infringement has actually occurred, then I have been a victim of foul play, as researching the subject online shows that IP addresses are very often ‘faked’ by users of P2P networks, meaning the actual offender can easily hide behind an innocent person’s IP address, which appears to be the case in this instance.

This is my second and final letter in this matter, and no further correspondence will be entered in to. I trust that in the absence of any concrete evidence to substantiate this claim, this will be the end of this matter and you will no longer be harassing me.

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Does that sound OK?

 

 

 

 

Very nice,could this be the future template letter for a second reply?

 

would it be OK with you to copy some of this for my letter

[chrispacket]

Very nice,could this be the future template letter for a second reply?

 

would it be OK with you to copy some of this for my letter

 

Now you're making me blush

 

Yes - feel free to copy some if you like - I've just written it as I see it.

[wittzend]

Now you're making me blush

 

Yes - feel free to copy some if you like - I've just written it as I see it.

 

 

 

 

Did the same,modified and personalised a template letter,so I'm expecting the same response.

 

 

 

As a matter of interest,how many people have complained to SRA?

[8of9]

Evening all,

 

I've been reading this thread since my first letter from GM dated 27/09.

 

I responded using a modified/personalised version of the template LOD on here (thanks for making that available), and have today received the same second letter as a few posts ago (word for word).

 

I've just drafted a second letter - before I send it, how does this sound?:

 

 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

 

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

I am in receipt of your second template letter dated 9 August 2010. I see that in this second template letter, you state that

 

“…your letter takes the form of a standard template response obtained from the internet.”

 

If you had actually taken the time to read this letter properly, you would see that it was merely based upon a standard and freely available template letter (unlike the letters you are sending), and was in fact largely rewritten.

 

In that first letter, I stated my position quite clearly, and I will state it again one final time; I categorically deny the offence of which you are accusing me.

 

Unless I am very much mistaken, in this country, you are innocent until proven guilty, and I cannot see how guilt can be proven in this case, as there are only your assumptions and ‘speculative’, as opposed to concrete, evidence. As I stated before, I can only conclude that if this infringement has actually occurred, then I have been a victim of foul play, as researching the subject online shows that IP addresses are very often ‘faked’ by users of P2P networks, meaning the actual offender can easily hide behind an innocent person’s IP address, which appears to be the case in this instance.

 

This is my second and final letter in this matter, and no further correspondence will be entered in to. I trust that in the absence of any concrete evidence to substantiate this claim, this will be the end of this matter and you will no longer be harassing me.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Does that sound OK?

 

 

 

 

Wonderfully worded but, as you menion about your initial reply, they probably won't take the time to read it.

Take a look at this from a forerunner of GM. (I would think that they operate in much the same way given that Davenport Lyons are Partners of DigiRights Solutions who are collecting the data for GM):

 

http://www.wikileaks.com/wiki/Davenport_Lyons_and_DigiProtect_Actionpoints_for_filesharers,_14_Jan_2009

and the form (checklist?) :

http://file.wikileaks.org/file/davenport-lyons-and-digiprotect-filesharer-actionpoints.pdf

Note the line under Circumstances

"copied from fora" (Does this mean Fora as in the seldom used plural of Forum?)

 

I would imagine that the only form of reply that they would truly accept is one admitting the offence.

[car2403]

Evening all,

 

I've been reading this thread since my first letter from GM dated 27/09.

 

I responded using a modified/personalised version of the template LOD on here (thanks for making that available), and have today received the same second letter as a few posts ago (word for word).

 

I've just drafted a second letter - before I send it, how does this sound?:

 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am in receipt of your second template letter dated 9 August 2010. I see that in this second template letter, you state that

“…your letter takes the form of a standard template response obtained from the internet.”

If you had actually taken the time to read this letter properly, you would see that it was merely based upon a standard and freely available template letter (unlike the letters you are sending), and was in fact largely rewritten.

In that first letter, I stated my position quite clearly, and I will state it again one final time; I categorically deny the offence of which you are accusing me.

Unless I am very much mistaken, in this country, you are innocent until proven guilty, and I cannot see how guilt can be proven in this case, as there are only your assumptions and ‘speculative’, as opposed to concrete, evidence. As I stated before, I can only conclude that if this infringement has actually occurred, then I have been a victim of foul play, as researching the subject online shows that IP addresses are very often ‘faked’ by users of P2P networks, meaning the actual offender can easily hide behind an innocent person’s IP address, which appears to be the case in this instance.

This is my second and final letter in this matter, and no further correspondence will be entered in to. I trust that in the absence of any concrete evidence to substantiate this claim, this will be the end of this matter and you will no longer be harassing me.

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Does that sound OK?

 

 

 

 

Why without prejudice?

[baffledbygm]

Wonderfully worded but, as you menion about your initial reply, they probably won't take the time to read it.

Take a look at this from a forerunner of GM. (I would think that they operate in much the same way given that Davenport Lyons are Partners of DigiRights Solutions who are collecting the data for GM):

 

http://www.wikileaks.com/wiki/Davenport_Lyons_and_DigiProtect_Actionpoints_for_filesharers,_14_Jan_2009

and the form (checklist?) :

http://file.wikileaks.org/file/davenport-lyons-and-digiprotect-filesharer-actionpoints.pdf

Note the line under Circumstances

"copied from fora" (Does this mean Fora as in the seldom used plural of Forum?)

 

I would imagine that the only form of reply that they would truly accept is one admitting the offence.

 

I notice one of the circumstances is "credit card declined". I'll be honest. I got the letter and thought there was no way I could prove my innocence and I was scared of being taken to court and having everything taken off me and I tried to pay it. I just wanted it to go away- I've got enough to worry about as it is. I wasn't thinking straight cos I even tried to use an expired card! Rather naively I thought they wouldn't know because the money wouldn't have gone to them. I'm determined to fight this though cos I've done nothing wrong. I know I didn't download that file.

 

I don't know what to do now. Can't afford to pay the £350 and I don't see why I should when I've done nothing wrong.

[wittzend]

I notice one of the circumstances is "credit card declined". I'll be honest. I got the letter and thought there was no way I could prove my innocence and I was scared of being taken to court and having everything taken off me and I tried to pay it. I just wanted it to go away- I've got enough to worry about as it is. I wasn't thinking straight cos I even tried to use an expired card! Rather naively I thought they wouldn't know because the money wouldn't have gone to them. I'm determined to fight this though cos I've done nothing wrong. I know I didn't download that file.

 

I don't know what to do now. Can't afford to pay the £350 and I don't see why I should when I've done nothing wrong.

 

 

If you are definate you did not do it,send them a letter saying you have reconsidered your position and you are denying their claim,if they take you to court(unlikley)what proof do they have?

[panther12]

Well I don't think they can say my letter is a template...**** off!!! Sometimes few words speak volumes

[wittzend]

Well I don't think they can say my letter is a template...**** off!!! Sometimes few words speak volumes

 

 

Short and to the point.

[lostinspace333]

should we avoid ping ponging with the reply. got the usual template letter.

[boardtoday1234]

I received the ACS law letter for evacuate the dancefloor a couple of months back now.

 

Spoke to the CAB and they writ a LOD and sent for me, as yet nerver heard anything back

 

How long does it nomally take to get a 2nd letter from ACS or have they now given up

[8of9]

Well I don't think they can say my letter is a template...**** off!!! Sometimes few words speak volumes

 

Wouldn't we like to know what their response to a reply like this is ...

Could it be that..... " it bears a resemeblance to something that can be found on the internet" ....

You could say that every possible thing you could write in your reply could be found on the Internet !!

 

But be careful http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880027_en_1

[baffledbygm]

Offence of sending letters etc. with intent to cause distress or anxiety

(1) Any person who sends to another person—

(a) a letter or other article which conveys—

(i) a message which is indecent or grossly offensive;

(ii)a threat; or

(iii) information which is false and known or believed to be false by the sender; or

(b) any other article which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature,

is guilty of an offence if his purpose, or one of his purposes, in sending it is that it should, so far as falling within paragraph (a) or (b) above, cause distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person to whom he intends that it or its contents or nature should be communicated.

 

Well if they are sending 2000-7000 letters out they must know that a proportion of the people receiving them will be innocent. There is a margin of error involved.

 

But they'd wriggles out of it because they will say

 

2) A person is not guilty of an offence by virtue of subsection (1)(a)(ii) above if he shows—

(a) that the threat was used to reinforce a demand which he believed he had reasonable grounds for making; and

(b) that he believed that the use of the threat was a proper means of reinforcing the demand.

They seem to believe whatever they like don't they if pound signs are involved, in my opinion.

[citizenB]

You could also add to any letter where they accuse of using templates from the internet...

 

"The very fact there is a template letter freely available on the internet highlights the fact that many people have been inappropriately accused of wrongdoing"

[daylight_robbery]

Very interesting....It would appear that Kate Macmillan, co-founder of Gallant Macmillan has in fact left the business also......

 

http://www.collyerbristow.com/Default.aspx?sID=53&cID=626&ctID=43&lID=0