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.
  • 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

I do not know if its been mentioned here or not but The One Show is running their piece on ACS:LAW on friday 16th July apparently. Tune in.[/quote

 

 

I will definitely be watching this, lets hope that they are shown to be complete and utter [problem] artists. The more bad publicity for them the better. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes you can but it can indicate you potentially have no understanding of the content and can be seen as weak by them and cause them to pursue you more. (This is only where a solicitor can really help who specialises in IP law. If they receive a letter from them they know they are up against somebody who has had alot more education than their selves in this field)

 

Its best you research all the flaws in their evidence and put it in your own words why its terrible. Do not include any personal information or excuses as they mean nothing. Unless ofc you don't have a phone line to your house and some crazy mistake has been made by the ISP.

 

A letter written by yourself will indicate knowledge within the area and potentially will make them more likely to leave you alone in the future, you need to prepare you self for a 2nd letter at least though as no mater how good your initial letter you will almost certainly get one, maybe even a 3rd and 4th.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Caimbeul,

 

Thanks for your reply to my post :)

 

I understand your POV and agree, it is the same with newsgroups there is a lot of legitimate files out there and yes you may only use it legally.

 

However, and please correct me if I'm wrong... All these letters are stating the said user has downloaded an illegal file via torrents

Albeit one that seems to have been planted with the view to further potential legal measures.

 

If my assumption is correct, then it has to be said how many of the people who have the letter/s have/are using torrents?!?! I can't recall anybody saying they have not used torrents (I'll have to re-read the whole thread)

 

It is important to understand that this company are not saying you have just downloaded any old file, you have specifically downloaded A file. You don't accidentally download a torrent, legal or otherwise.

 

Furthermore copyright theft, piracy et al are all criminal offences, and whilst the measures and fines might be unjust.. get caught you will feel the brunt of the industry in question.

 

To all people getting these letters, are you, do you have you used torrents in the past? if not send the LoD if yes, still feel free to deny the claim but there is always a chance if you do a lot of downloading

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also any wireless security can be hacked unsecured or not. In the IT world we use terms like piggybacking where your relying on someone elses connection to browse and download. Or you can interrupt data packets and capture logon details. Please also bear in mind there next to no chance of someone bothering with your wifi if it is security protected.

Why target yours when lots of others cant be bothered to secure their connections.

Also I will point out it can be deemed an offence not to have a password as you are deemed to be broadcasting.

 

 

Didnt realise that not having password protected security was a criminal offence. It might be contrary to most ISP's terms and conditions, but how many have read these?

Also, how many have been informed by their ISP's of wifi security and have advised them to change their passwords on a regular basis? Wouldn't this be admitting that their security was c**p.!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

8of9 it isn't the responsibility of the ISP I wouldn't have thought, it would be the consumer.

 

Personally I regard having a secured connection being in the same league as having an anti virus/firewall.

 

However let's say someone is piggybacking your connection, the IP of that machine would be different to the IP of your machine.

Also if you had your hdd forensically check tests would prove that the file wasn't downloaded on your machine.

 

But come on, how many people would pull up outside someones house just download an mp3 from a torrent file?!?! but also 7000 odd people all doing the same thing, I don't think so.

In the past when I have done this with my mobile phone was just to check mails and browse when bored, especially if you don't want to pay extortionate hotels internet fees.

I don't see the point in changing your wifi password on a regular basis, ordinary people wont waste their time trying to guess somebody's password, especially if you pick up several connections in the area.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I have a question, I have recieved one of the letters. but under the copyright infringement title it states the work I supposibly have been caught torrenting.. which i didnt do.. is for the uk top 40 singles chart... I have no clear indication as to what works I have suposebly infringed is this not a fatal flaw in the arguement from acs?

 

I checked around in regards to who apparently holds the uk top 40 singles chart 27-09-2009 it is not registered to any copyright holders can any confirm this for me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

About the Software used to identify IP addresses. This was posted back in April. Cheers Whereswally (Page 118 # 2350)

You dont get a lot for $750 these days, no mention of Deep Packet inspection here. The question is have they moved on from this?, because Terrance Tsang certainly has. Who would be their UK expert now?

 

posted by Terrance Tsang (TT) way back in 2008.

 

ipaddo.png

 

 

So much for the "evidence" ... I have quoted from their templated letters:

 

 

ACS:LAW's "client" has retained forensic computer analysts (Advert above??) to search for and identify internet addresses from which our clients members' copyright works (including the Work) are being made available on so called "peer to peer" networks which are then able to be downloaded by third parties with out our clients consent or license."

 

"The processes and methods employed by our clients IT experts (Advert above??) to produce the evidence which is then submitted to the ISP's (to get our details), has been the subject of a number of detailed investigations and reports prepared by a qualified information technology consultant including a UK expert (Terrance??)

 

Also check out the previous page (117 #2326) for info on NG3 Systems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Incredible,

 

I think the answer to your question is as follows:

 

On some websites where torrent files are available to download, some of the downloads will be the current top 40 songs in the charts.

 

This won't be a compilation album you find in the shops as it changes all the time, it will be something somebody has put together by ripping songs from the radio, albums or other means, hence the date.

Each song in the top 40 will be copyrighted to the record label each individual artist belongs to.

 

Does that make sense?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that but in that compilation. the fatal flaw to there arguement would be they have not stated the correct facts in terms of my case? whats to say for example a user downloaded the torrent decided they didnt want a certain song and removed it from the torrent download list?

 

potentially that means the information listed civil suit could have no relevance to the the copyright holders?

 

am I wrong in saying that by just stating a download name and not any specific material there information is/could be totally incorrect?

 

i'd just like to know as I would like to point out there flaw (which im sure they'll refute) In my Letter of denial. as a result im sure the evidence thats supposebly against me is not listed correctly.? which could work in my favour in terms of court rulings etc. i've seen companies lose a case due to lack of provided information in the past

Edited by mr incredible
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again,

 

Not necessarily, it all depends on the file you have downloaded.

 

If the torrent is for the whole uk top 40 then that is what would download, you would have the whole chart, there would be no way to remove an individual song unless you downloaded it track by track

Link to post
Share on other sites

What appears to be happening though, is a torrent file has been 'planted' on a or a few sites with the intention of catching people sharing.

This is how bundles of IP addresses are being collected.

 

What remains to be seen though is how accurate this data capture software is and is it accurate enough to enforce further action.

 

Again it appears as though every letter is based around the use of torrents, so if you have downloaded with torrents and got the letter something is working i guess.

 

It would be interesting to maybe have a poll, showing how many people are using torrents and have the letter as oppose to the people with the letter and not.

The IP addresses have to have come from somewhere, otherwise a court ruling for the ISP's to hand over information would not have happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok im an IT Technician and I know you can go through and remove particular parts of torrents as I use them for legal filesharing at work.

 

However the arguement is If i theoretically have downloaded a whole album which isnt registered under copyright? but by some interjection contained the said copyright material?

 

Surely the file I have supposedly infringed upon should have been listed as the infringing copyright file. not the whole album? as I doubt ACS:LAW hold all rights on every song in the said album? would acs's case still stand if the original claim information was and is incorrect and inacurately listed?

 

im not trying to pick holes in things here but I figure if they can't provide the right information that it shouldnt stand?

 

as I say I am an innocent and I am applying examples.

 

Cheers again for all information provided.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Snap, I am an IT Engineer, work in a workshop... i'm more hardware based though.

 

Yes I see your point, and it is an interesting point however if the user who added the torrent always had the intention of using the torrents against the users that shared it, just to prove you did in fact share and download it would you not be at risk of copyright theft regardless, as the intention was there when you clicked download?

It is for the to prove it though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Stevo779

 

The point I was making is that it is not a criminal offence to have an open Wifi connection. If it was then "the information Police" would be doing their rounds in the footsteps of Google Street Maps Google WiFi privacy row: Eric Schmidt admits search engine 'screwed up' - Telegraph because its that easy.

 

I didnt mention anything about "piggybacking" etc but seeing as you have brought the subject up....

But come on, how many people would pull up outside someones house just download an mp3 from a torrent file?!?! but also 7000 odd people all doing the same thing, I don't think so.

In the past when I have done this with my mobile phone was just to check mails and browse when bored, especially if you don't want to pay extortionate hotels internet fees.

I don't see the point in changing your wifi password on a regular basis, ordinary people wont waste their time trying to guess somebody's password, especially if you pick up several connections in the area.

 

Ordinary people might not waste their time trying to bypass someones security but the world is not just full of "ordinary" people.

How many "ordinary" people do you know who sit outside somebodys house using their wifi connection because thet are bored or dont want to pay for downloading or who want to hide their identity???

Link to post
Share on other sites

stevo7790

 

dont really know tat any of this would stand up in court as no cases have got that far as yet.

Would be interesting to know if GM are using the same gathering software as ACSL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats why I said lose the bits?

 

Anyway we are getting away from the main point I was trying to make, which was that as this is a civil case, people don't need to worry about destroying/formatting drives.

 

Indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a thread to read through.

 

Everyone who has had a letter stop panicking and do not pay them any money or this will never stop.

If everyone has a wireless router you have your ace card, Open network and someone must have used your internet connection.

Last year 90% of routers came with unsecured wireless networks configured and about 80% of people who bought/received a router didn't/don't change the security unless the internet provider is installing it for them.

 

I know as I work in IT and the amount of times I have to change router settings for people is amazing.

 

One word to everyone: USENET

 

George

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...