Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • 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.
  • 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

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

I'd ignore them for now. It seems that those that respond to them start to get hounded, whereas those that have ignored them have been left alone. According to the link you gave, there have been no known proscecutions so far, besides just having an ISP address proves nothing anyway. I think they would have a very hard time proving anything & would rather rely on some poor smuck just coughing-up without a fight. ;)

 

It's all rather worrying, esp if events years back can be refered to..I have had various flatmate over the last few years and allow them to use my WiFi service, how on earth could I really be held liable for what they download, also |Im on Virgin media and I belive that they don't have staic IP's either so they are always changing :)

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

 

 

HHmm..It appears NOT to be a [problem] as such.

 

A [problem] would be just sending out completly random letters to anyone and ACS having no connection with copyright infringement.

 

It appears that ACS are working for a small number of companies and they track down people who they alledge are downloading their software..however it appears that the sytem is flawed, there are many other sites that list hundreds of people who appear to be completely innocent.

 

There are a few points to note:-

 

It appears that everyone who received a letter does have internet access installed at their home.

 

Many are with virgin media, however virgin media does not use staic Ip address, so IP address are liable to be changing all the time.

 

When pushed, ACS will claim that even if YOU didnt download the offending file if someone (i.e hack into your wifi, friend, family, flatmate, lodger) did using the account in your name then you are liable, of course this is complete testicles !

 

There are many people who say that the softawre was NEVER downloaded via their network at all, this means that ACS made a mistake or as people know, some P2P sites throw in random Ip address, or people can disguise their own or use one belonging to someone else.]

 

ACS appear to have never chased anyone through the courts (although there is mention of this happening in Germany).

 

Atari were a client but when they realised innocent people were being hassled they cancelled their contract.

 

Ive also just notice that ACS's (new) office is next to mine !. I may go and see if i can have a nose :)

Edited by andydd
Removing offensive language
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a [problem] as far as im concerned :mad:

Demanding hundreds of pounds upfront in return for legal action not being taken is scandalous in my view.

Only a court has the power to obtain monies off people..these rogues dont.

 

I agree, but by '[problem]' what i meant was that i could today send 100 letters out claiming that they have illegaly downloaded my latest album 'Andydd Sings badly', and they must send me £500, complete rubbish of course but many people are terrified of any sort of legal action and some may even pay up !

 

There is mention on one of the links in thios thread that there are 400 people who have banded together to fight this so will be interesting to see the outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looked on digital spy website and it would appear Virgin Media believe it bo be a [problem]. Of course no proof of court order issued with paperwork! I am inclined to believe they may be telling porkies.

 

But it would appear that Virgin Media have handed out IP address though. They are named on the court documents that ACs proudly show on their website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No-once will convince me otherwise that this isnt a [problem].:D

Trying to obtain money off people without going through the proper court process first, is simply a [problem] to me..no matter how you dress it up.:mad:

 

I think what me and SEK above are trying to point out is that it may be a ploy to get money off people it really shouldnt be refered to as a [problem] as they quite clearly are real solicitors working for real clients, although their case my be legally flawed, if people are contacted by ACS they shouldnt just ignore it as a worthless [problem] (like we all do with fake nigerian lotteries, etc), they should be on their toes and be aware that although unlikely court action MAY follow.

 

Watchdog did indeed do a feature on this (featuring Davenport Lyons) some time back I also belive that it involved a US porn company and they claimed that their films were involved, although when this porn company were approiached they said they didnt give Davenport Lyons/ACS permission to chase anyone.

 

Now..I also think that what they actually did was to upload games/films themselves onto P2P sites and then just sat there fishing for victims, so instead of seeking compensation for film/games 'illegally' downloaded what they are actually doing is running a money building scheme, maybe coz the films/games involved are such rubbish that no-one wants to buy them anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

‘New’ Anti-Piracy Lawyers Chase UK File-Sharers | TorrentFreak

 

Seems the coverage is picking up ... starting to get square eyes and bad head now with all the reading up on Davenport and ACS:Law Ive done over the past 24 or so hours now. (not including sleep time of course :p)

 

Very informative link..heres the juiciest bits..

 

The next step was to write to the individuals and threaten them with legal action, unless an amount ranging from £450 to £700 was paid. Somewhere between 40 and 60% of recipients panicked and paid up, while the rest engaged in ‘letter tennis’ with Davenport, corresponding back and forth and getting nowhere - literally - those who stood their ground have not been taken to court.

 

 

Of course, due to the weakness in their system and poor evidence gathered against alleged file-sharers, it wasn’t long before Davenport accused the wrong people of file-sharing, including pensioners erroneously accused of downloading gay porn. One of Davenport’s clients, Atari, found it all too much, and withdrew from chasing file-sharers through the company. The mountain of bad publicity continued to grow culminating in the respected consumer magazine Which? reporting Davenport Lyons to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority. Then everything went a little quiet. Until this week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasnt having ago at you Sek in any way shape or form..sorry if it came across like that, i didnt suggest that you were dressing it up - that was just a generalised comment.

The law is genuine like you say, the letter might be genuine - but obtaining monies without court authorisation 1st is not & therefore is a [problem] in my book.

 

Well..Yes and No....Obvioulsy the letters sent out are offering an out of court type of settlement,and it what appear that many people have paid it, or at least they did when DL were in charge, after all many DCAs send letters out asking for payment prior to any court proceedings and thats not illegal, its the general legal threatening tone that DL adopted before that got them in trouble and it would appear that ACS are following the exact route...I still think the word '[problem]' should be avoided.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There after the 60% who paid up at £700 a time no doubt. Ultimately everything points to them not daring to go near a court to persue this. Why would they bother with such easy pickings about. Nothing I have read today (and plenty of it!) would suggest they are likely to risk trying to deal with in court. They would know their accusations are based on flimsy & legally debatable evidence.

 

Andyd - yep just looked at the ACS website and virgin appear to be guilty. Strangely enough my 'pack' stated NTL had provided the info, fairly certain they didn't exist in 2008 as taken over by Virgin.

 

I think if i had proof that Virgin had handed over my details I'd cancel my package instantly and tell them exactly why i am doing so via phone and letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Essentially, when it comes down to it ACS have no foundation for a case and the list of reasons (all posted by CAG members - what great folk!) is endless. To summarise just a little of what members have helpfully pointed out:

 

1) No court authorisation (ie innocent until proven guilty - letter assumes guilt)

2) Only proof is based on IP address (these can be faked, they can change - often as frequently as every 24 hours - and lastly Wi-Fi security can be compromised. The last point is not supposed to be a defence but this is thorny issue and can be debated either way. If someone steels your car and has a crash - you wouldn't be liable, so why would you be if someone decides to hack into your Wi-Fi connection!)

3) The receipt of people's personal details from IP addresses without permission from the internet provider (in this case Virgin(NTL) is illegal in itself - (1998) Data Protection Act.

4) Permission to obtain personal details from IP addresses would only be given in criminal cases (court orders) not in civil.

 

....the list goes on.

 

But further to point 4)..On the ACS site they have court orders in pdf format where it appears they did force ISP's to hand over names and addresses, so what is going wrong here ?

 

The following is from the FAQ you can download from ACS's site...

 

Ive put the whole thing as an attachment

ACS FAQ.doc

Edited by andydd
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can well imagine that alot of very angry people will be turning up at their headquarters on Monday morning...

 

Ha..Im in the office next door ...The building they are in has recently been renting out office space and In think ACS are a new tenant, although I cant verify they are actually present, Ill try and have a nose on Monday. couple of pubs round the corner (Bonds & Duke Of York) should you get thirsty :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

they must come from cloud cockoo land if they think that this is true

 

QUOTE

 

8.How do I know someone has not “faked” my IP address and I have been caught in error?

Whilst we understand it is possible for an individual to create a false IP address, we have received advice from our experts which has confirmed that it is not possible using the methods employed by our clients’ investigators for either a user or our client’s monitoring software to enter into a successful transaction on a peer to peer network whilst using a fake IP address.

 

maybe their expert is a well know PPC only an idiot would state that

 

Surely in a court case all u would have to do is throw some doubt about fake ip addresses in and the whole cases(s) would collapse...there is lots of info on the web about the previous DL cases which show almost certainly that the people accused were innocent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i too received on of these comedy letters , at first i was shocked like everyone else but later on under more scrutiny things just didn't add up firstly im 41 years of age and i ve never even played a computer game let alone downloaded one and one that apparently is rubbish anyway , the date of the offence feb 2008 is so long ago that could anyone remember that day anyway, the isp provider was named as cable internet ltd , instead of virginmedia , asc: law website looks very backstreet solocitors , no letters of qualifications after andrews name either, no-one can seem to get in touch with him via telephone bringing on the remainder of this 21 day period of payment which will panic the wavering payer into action , the back of the letter asking people to submit details of payment ie credit card details and to insert a bank transfer request i think would never be asked by a legitimate law firm..i do belive that this is a [problem] and not a good one at that but i do belive there will be people paying up too because they cant remember if they did download the game or if their children did . i hope as many pepole as possible visit their offices and voice their outrage...also i though that the first line of action for download violation was a stiff letter from their own genuine isp?

 

I wish people would stop saying this is a [problem]... ACS are very real and people should take this seriously.

 

Im pointing this out because previoulsy Davenport Lyons DID succesfully win some court cases against 'downloaders'..one for 16 grand.

 

They won because the people concerned ignored the letters and didnt turn up in court, so DL simply won by default, easy money for them, anyone who DID threaten to go to court quickly found their case dropped.

 

So all DL (and now ACS) do is legally obtain peoples IP addresses from their ISP (the court docs for this are on the ACS site) and send out letters, apparently at least 50% paid up !. DL then went on to pursue some of the people who didnt reply through court, in the hope that they wouldnt turn up..in which case they win by default without having to explain any of their dubious practises to the court.

 

It would appear if you receive a letter the best thing to do is reply and deny the allegations..DO NOT add any further detail like you had an unsecured wifi network or anything.

 

Perhaps a letter under CPR or even DPA/SAR rules could be in order, is there anyone who could comment on this ?

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

.. also only courts can determine what amount of compensation is forthcomming not acs law....maybe i will send a letter of denial , will monitor what the majority of other people will do as i believe theres a lot of milage left in this one...

 

Alas in one case the court DID decide and the person involved was given a bill for 16,000 !. ACS claim that the amount they are asking for to settle this BEFORE court action is very low in comparison, they can quite legally ask for whatever they want at this stage, its like entering into a contract, this is what the gist of their letter explains. You dont have to enter into this contract BUT if you don't then they reserve the right to start court proceedings, although as has been pointed out elsewhere, IF you do pay up this could be seen as admission of guilt and they could bring proceedings anyway !

 

Yep, many miles left to run, DL gave up because it all became to much, I wonder what will happen to ACS ?

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should anyone not say it is a [problem]?

Thats exactly what it is :mad:

ACS have no legal powers whatsoever to demand monies off an individual, only the county courts do.

It will cost them money to take anyone there & wouldnt be worth their while just to get back £1 per month if anything at all.

What is there to take seriously about a bunch of jumped up clowns threatening people & trying to obtain money by deception effectivley?

Its this lot who should be taken to court & money screwed out of, not the public.

Just because they reside in a posh London office no doubt & proberbly wear expensive suits means nothing.:mad:

 

I say it shouldnt be called a [problem] for the reasons I outlined....It risks people ignoring the letters, IF they are then issued with court proceedings and they ignore them too then they WILL LOSE (by default) and they will get a bill of many thousands.

 

I certainly think it is outragous and is pushing the limits of what is legal to the limit..BUT if you were to end it court then simply proclaiming 'Its a [problem]' will not help you. I think your anger is clouding your judgement, try to think sensibly about this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else sniff a troll around here somewhere? :cool:

 

If you are suggesting its me then I'm afraid you are very wrong but Ive just been looking at sites discussing this topic and have been worried at the duff advice handed out, mostly along the lines of 'Its a [problem], ignore it'. This is very foolish as it has lead to a few cases where Davenport Lyons won by default when the accused didnt turn up to the court cases, I would hate that to happen to anyone here, this hasnt been helped by Virgin Media, who in many cases have told people who phone up conflicting informatiion.

 

If anyone has received one of these letters the following links may help.

 

Slyck.com • View topic - DL/ACS:law - I've received a letter, what should I do?

 

Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons? - Page 35 - Cable Forum

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect, you seem to be ignoring the basic principle of how the county court system works. :roll:

I personally dont think they will take anyone anywhere near a court....but anyway,if what you describe above does actually happen - have you not not heard of legal/human rights in this country?

Even if a bill for a squillion pound was sent out...if would be repayable at an amount the individual could afford (if anything at all) & even then, the person would have gone through so many legal hoops to get the thing overturned/reversed/saught their own advice from the likes of CAB etc...

If ACS want to play the legal system, then they shouldnt be too suprised when the public know how to play it back.

Please try not to let your trolling get in the way of reality here ;)

 

Unfortunatly DL did take about 5 people to court, the most high profile case is listed here..

 

UK File-Sharer Has To Pay £16,000: Historic Background : Digital-Lifestyles

 

I'm not for one minute saying anyone should pay up BUT people should be aware that they shoulldnt just ignore it, the best advice for people who have received a letter is to go here

 

 

and follow Micheal Coyle from Lawdit's advice.

 

Also you are incorrect about the county court system, as the letters sent out are 'offering' an out of court agreement it has nothing to do with ability to pay, if you read the letters sent out it does waffle on a bit but it is basically asking you to agree to a contract, ie..you send us 600 quid and we wont take you to court.

 

Of course ACS havnt got a leg to stand on and its highly unlikely that their IP evidence would stand upo in court, BUT bare in mind they have won some cases purely by default which is why Im trying to inform people, I certainkly am not a troll and am offending you would post such a thing, a quick click on my name will show I have been a member a while and have contributed to many discussions on here.

 

Andy

Edited by IdaInFife
removed external link
Link to post
Share on other sites

While I sympathise with you points, I'm sorry, but this is bordering on dangerous.

 

Although you're right that they have no powers to enforce any kind of money collection at this point, this is not a debt enforcement matter. It is a "warning shot" for alleged copyright infringement.

 

Although you don't have to pay a penny at this stage there is a very real risk of being taken to court for this. They state in their letters that if you don't pay, they'll take you to court. If you reply and deny it becomes a very small risk (nobody who has replied and denied have been taken to court in the last three years).

 

I don't know what people are saying about the phone numbers not working. They have been for other people. The ones on the letters are the same as for the entry in the law society database.

 

There are very real questions to be asked about this whole palaver, but immediately screaming [problem]!!! does not help one iota.

 

As rubbish as the copyright and data protection laws are in this country, the copyright holders are allowed to protect their rights. Sure, this isn't the way to go about it (I find it utterly abhorrent, myself) but such histrionics are not helpful at all.

 

Thanks..At last someone else talking sense :)..And also explaing far better than i could have.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Incorrect about the CC system...ive been through it enough times to know how it works inside out :D

I do not encourage anybody to take up their "out of court offereing" - it is pure simple blackmail/deception - no matter how its dressed up.

The reason behind what the payment is for is irrelevant - copyright or whatever else....

I fully hope each & every person who has received this letter will say to them "Go ahead punk make my day" as a famous person used to say & let them take their court action.

The whole court system is designed in favour of whats best for the individual & ACS will find that out to their cost hopefully :)

Apologies if you are not a troll...but you are doing nothing but putting the fear of God up people on this thread so far in my view, when it is uneccessary & couldnt be any furthur from reality.

 

The whole point is that you (or anyone else) is NOT in the CC system yet, it is a 'warning shot'.

 

Of course I dont want to scare people but knowledge IS power, burying your head in the sand or ignoring letters is not the way foward BUT writing to them with an itelligent informed letter is.

 

Anyone who turns up in court armed with only a belief that they are right and that the courts ALWAYS do whats best for the individual would be rather foolish.

 

PLEASE anyone who has received such a letter go to

 

Slyck.com • View topic - DL/ACS:law - I've received a letter, what should I do?

 

It has the best advice and has many links to the Lawdit site which goes into the legal points in great detail.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed ,I for one will not be renewing my contract with them when its up in a month or so due to this little fiasco.

 

The Data Protection Act allows companies to obtain information for criminal matters ..If you google for it, i think its section 35.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont worry..im sure many other "new sign ups" will be along soon also to defend you as well :cool:

 

I'm trying to help people and provide valuable advice, all you have done is rant n rave and offend people.

 

Im not a new sign up, i joined a few months back mainly to investigate Credit Agreements and have obtained invaluable advice and am now clearing my debts and am only paying back my credit cards at 10 a month instead of 100s.

 

Hey..If you want to believe I was someone planted here many months ago by ACS and that Ive been waiting all this time for some bizarre reason that upto you but I think you will soon make a fool of yourself.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't a criminal matter :)

 

But yes, there are massive holes in the DPA for the release of data for "the pursuance of justice" or words to that effect.

 

Other EU countries have tightened it up to only allow release for criminal matters, but the UK still allows it for civil matters.

 

You're broadly correct, tho ;)

 

Thats what I thought yesterday so i did look at the DPA but I couldnt really get my head around it, its not really clear (to me anyway) wether it applies to civil matters, anyway a judge thought it was ok hence the reason why ISPs began dishing out the info, although some have now claimed that they would/should of sent a letter to the customer too, this clearly hasnt happened.

Edited by andydd
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,

 

I (and the rest of the site team) have been watching this progress with interest.

 

It does seem very unusual, though you all seem to be on top of what is needed to deal with this effectively.

 

A few pointers from me;

 

 

 

Agreed, remember though that civil cases have a lower standard of proof than that required in a criminal case. Criminal cases require proof beyond reasonable doubt, but in civil cases that is on the balance of probabilities.

 

In other words, is it more probable that you did download this stuff and breach copyright that it is improbable that you didn't.

 

There's an important distinction to be made here - if (and this is a really, REALLY, big "if") they do have expert evidence showing that you did do this, you'd have to throw so many questions on that evidence to show that it is improbable (note, not impossible) that you did what has been stated.

 

 

 

I have to say, I agree somewhat with andydd, here.

 

This could be termed a "[problem]", or it could not.

 

The simple fact is, they could bring civil proceedings against you and you should be prepared to defend it - if you fail to reply to a letter before action and a court claim is issued which is ignored, you will find yourself with a CCJ against you. Yes, you could get it set aside, (if you can show that CPR Part 13 applies) but defending a claim would be far easier than setting a CCJ aside.

 

For me, this is a [problem], but one that you should all be prepared to battle against.

 

I've noticed a few members asking about templates for responses - as this is something new to CAG, we don't have those for these instances to my knowledge, at this time.

 

Cheers for that, my main point for avoiding the S word is that it tends to imply that it can just be ignored much like the pesky spam we all get all the time, but this shouldnt be the case here.

 

The Slyck site i linked to elsewere has 'almost' template letters if anyone is interested, I think they use info mainly provided by Lawdit, who were involved previously against Davenport Lyons.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

We sent a letter to the ICO trying to get them to issue guidance on the legality, and prevent the future release of data

 

The ICO responded with a "It's legal, complain to the ISP/MP/anyone but us no go away".

 

From their response letter:

 

God..The ICO are pretty hopless.

 

I wonder IF ANY requests to ISP's for data have ever been refused ?

 

Im sure I could think of a reason to obtain info because i MAY have thought a crime had been commited or that i was about to persue some kind of civil claim, I wonder if I would get the info i asked for.?

 

It seems the law is lacking in this area, or judges arnt paying enough attention, I wonder how much detail judge winegarten required before agreeing to force the ISP's involved hand over the info. ?

 

Andy

Edited by IdaInFife
removed external link
Link to post
Share on other sites

exactly...this whole matter stinks can you explain why there is no action being taken by the big corporations??? just some pokey little firm of east europeans, they are all in it together to rip decent people off financially and frighten them in paying for something they may or more likely didnt do, as im pretty sure couples in their 70s wont be downloading gay german porn let alone know how to file share anyway....

 

In the previous DL cases i believe that the companies concerned did only receive a small fraction of the money, i think it was the porn company who thought that the 'downloaders' were being asked for 50 quid or so and were suprised that it was hundreds.

 

One piece of advice from Micheal Coyle/Lawdit is that IF you do think you downloaded the item mentioned is to find out how much it costs and to agree to pay them that amount. Obvioulosy this would involve some sort of admittance so think carefully before doing this.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone here live in London? If so, is anyone planning on visiting the London office on Monday?

Let me know please!!

 

The wierd thing is when I checked the adress i found out my office is next door..!

 

Well..not actually next door coz the square numbering system is a bit wierd but I think no.18 is over the road opposite.

 

Its recently been takien over and has been advertising office space so I think ACS may be new tenants, there is a main reception downstairs by the looks of it and is prob like my building, ie.containing 4 or 5 companies..this is why previous posters said that typing in the postcode throws up more than 1 company.

 

If anyone wants any general info Ill be happy to help.

 

Tubes are Oxford Circus or Bond Street

 

Two nice pubs few yards away.

 

Loop club has nice girls on roller skates giving out flyers :)

 

Jalouse club is opposite, you may see some celebs fall out if ya lucky, but prob only if you visit at 4am !

 

Green Hut does cheap cooked food

 

Square has nice park to sit n have lunch (when sun comes out), its also ideal place to draw up ACS attack plan.

 

Ill have a look monday and see if there is any sign of ACS anywhere but i cant recall seeing one.

 

Andy

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...