Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The case against the US-based ride-hailing giant is being brought on behalf of over 10,800 drivers.View the full article
    • 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  
  • 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

What is MCOL and who is Bryan Carter?:???:

 

Thanks to Cerberusalert for responding sooner.

 

Although ACS and GM etc are getting the headlines there are thousands of unsubstantiated cases causing misery for people pushed through the County Court system every day in this country, many using the MCOL service which has the rather handy feature of not requiring the claimant to serve supporting documentation (ie proof of debt).

Northampton Bulk centre runs at a rate of approx 90% default judgments ie undefended judgments.

the unscrupulous litigant can use these services as a far more effective speculative invoicing operation than anything Crossley and Co could come up with.

As of 03/03/12 please do not under any circumstances wait for my further input or guidance on any current thread or defence of a court claim I might have been involved in on or through Cag.

Jasper1965

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is an interesting read from the USA do we have somthing similar.

Downloading music track is not a performance but a stream is US Court rules

 

3 October 2010

 

Yahoo and Real conceded that they owed monies in respect of licensing revenues when users made copies when they downloaded music tracks. However Real and Yahoo sought to dispute ASCAP's claim that downloading fell within the definition of a performance under US copyright law.

The court found that "...we turn to section 101 of the Copyright Act, which states that to perform a work means to recite, render, play, dance, or act it, either directly or by means of any device or process...a download plainly is neither a dance nor an act. Thus, we must determine whether a download of a musical work falls within the meaning of the terms recite, render, or play."

The court concluded that: "the downloads at issue in this appeal are not musical performances that are contemporaneously perceived by the listener...they are simply transfers of electronic files containing digital copies from an on-line server to a local hard drive. The downloaded songs are not performed in any perceptible manner during the transfers; the user must take some further action to play the songs after they are downloaded."

The court went to on to draw a distinction between a download and a stream finding that: "...stream transmissions, which all parties agree constitute public performances, illustrate why a download is not a public performance. A stream is an electronic transmission that renders the musical work audible as it is received by the client-computer's temporary memory. This transmission, like a television or radio broadcast, is a performance because there is a playing of the song that is perceived simultaneously with the transmission".

This clarification draws an importance distinction between what constitutes a performance under section 101 of the Copyright Act in the context of online peer to peer file sharing, with an increasing volume of handheld mediums being available to consumers at a relatively cheap price on to which users can download or stream as the case maybe users should be aware that streaming will constitute a performance within section 101.

PHOTOBUCKET TUTORIAL IS NOW DONE HERE IT IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Proceedings Before the Masters – Chancery Division

 

 

ROOM TM7.08

Before CHIEF MASTER WINEGARTEN

Monday 4th October 2010

 

At 3 o’clock

Ministry of Sound Recordings ltd v Plusnet Plc & others

 

3 hours to go !

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is before things started to even go really wrong:

 

"there are presently over 500 complaints against me thanks to the internet campaign and Which. Each complaint is essentially the same and they are borne out of a determination by some to stop legitimate steps bing taken to curtail illegal file sharing. However, I do not know how I can avoid being found guilty of something, with 500 complaints to choose from.

 

If I stop this work my business will fold and my clients will be big losers, but if I carry on I fear that it will be worse for me in the long run. Have you any view either way, as I have run out of ideas. Presently I feel defeated by it and feel I should shut up shop, which will cause me to go bankrupt for certain"

 

Big loser hmmmm.

My heart bleeds for the cretinis little oik. Should have realised this was going to be his downfall before trying to rip-off the masses with his doomed plan to rake in millions.

 

“...How heart warming it is to see that a man who as a result of being clinically depressed in 1999 suffered a stroke which in turn caused temporary complete blindness which in turn caused him to be unable to file his solicitors accounts on time or even at all for FIVE separate periods totalling FORTY-EIGHT months between periods ending 31st Dec 1999 and 31st December 2003, a period during which coincidentally this poor man was forced to enter into an IVA (Individual Voluntary Arrangement), was fined and ordered to be suspended indefinitely by an SRA tribunal in 2002, a man who had to face the further ignominy and trauma of a second disciplinary hearing in 2006 has recovered from this clinical depression and blindness enough to not only rebuild a career but a career as a successful* solicitor no less...”

 

With any luck his recent shenanigans will tip this useless bloated sweat gland of a human over the edge altogether!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My friend's girlfriend was one of AC's 'victims'. She was accused of downloading hard porn and could not stop crying. She had three 'threatening' letters and in the end paid to stop the harrassment. She is a junior doctor and was worried silly that the NHS would find out that she had been accused of watching such films.

 

By paying up she's admitted guilt. That looks far far worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i got a letter back from gm declining my offer of £100 and still want £370 i dont know what to do as i stupidly admitted it before i found this site :( they even have the cheek to give me the option of paying in instalements

should i pay i am at my wits end :(

 

You've done it therefore you should pay. If you havent done it and admitted to doing it then you have learnt an expensive lesson.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I keep expecting to read newflash.."Lawyer found hanging in Hanover square park" :)

 

yes and his death it not suspicious even thou they alledgedly found 8,040 ropes near by :lol:

Edited by huggy41

PHOTOBUCKET TUTORIAL IS NOW DONE HERE IT IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

ACS:Law chase church elder accused of sharing Cascada pop song

ACS:Law have targeted a church elder after accusing him of sharing a pop song by dance act Cascada, as well as others who have claimed they are innocent. http://www.metro.co.uk/tech/842891-acs-law-chase-church-elder-accused-of-sharing-cascada-pop-song

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...