Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Couldn't agree more, really wanted a true ruling on this just for the knowledge but pretty sure the Judge made some decisions today that he didn't need to?.. maybe they all go this way on the day? We hear back so few post court dates I'm not sure. Each Judge has some level of discretion. Their sol was another Junior not even working at their Firm, so couldn't speak directly for them! that was fortunate I think because if she would have rejected in court better, she might have  been able to force ruling, we are at that point!, everybody there!!, Judge basically said openly that he can see everything for Judgement!!!  but she just said "I can speak to the claimant and find out!" - creating the opportunity for me to accept. I really think the Judge did me a favor today by saying it without saying it. Knowing the rep for the sol couldn't really speak to the idea in the moment. Been to court twice in a fortnight, on both occasions heard 4 times with others and both of my claims, the clerk mention to one or both parties "Letting the Judge know if you want to have a quick chat with each other"! So, it appears there's an expectation of the court that there is one last attempt at settling before going through the door. So, not a Sol tactic, just Court process!. Judge was not happy we hadn't tried to settle outside! We couldn't because she went to the loo and the Judge called us in 10 minutes early! - another reason to stand down to allow that conv to happen. Stars aligned there for me I think. But yeh, if the sol themselves, or someone who can make decisions on the case were in court, I would have received a Judgement against today I think. She was an 'advocate'.. if I recall her intro to me correctly.. So verbal arguments can throw spanners in Court because Plinks dogs outsource their work and send a Junior advocate.
    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
    • Seeking further advice now. The 33 days in which the defendant has to submit a defence expires at 16:00 tomorrow. The defendant has submitted an acknowledgement of service but looking to get the claim awarded by default in failure to submit the defence. This is MoneyClaim Online and can see an option to request a default judgement but believe that is for failure to acknowledge the claim within 14 days??  So being MoneyClaim Online, how do I request the claim be awarded in my favour?
  • 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

Fat Playstation3s ability to run Linux removed.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2819 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

Older models of the Playstation 3 console had the ability to 
run another operating system such as linux allowing you to use the 
console like a computer. 
Although this wasn't mentioned on the box it was publicised and it 
helped  people choose the Playstation 3 over rival products such 
as the Xbox360.    

The most recent update removed this feature. 
If you don't install the update you lose access to the PlayStation 
Network and playback of games and Blu-ray movies that require 
the new software etc. 

Some people have said that you might be entitled to compensation
as they think it breaches the sales of goods act,some people 
mention small claims court other people have said that as you 
agree to terms and conditions it allows Sony to do whatever they 
want to the console.    

What are other peoples opinion on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

None.

It was not an advertised feature of the original unit. In the same way as software patches can give access to additional features, should you download new firmware and install it, it will reset the software to th specification decided by the manufacturer. As they did not confirm or support interoperability with third party bolt-ons, there's nobody to pursue. Roll back the upgrade and stay with the level of firmware you had previously.

 

There is also the possibility what you did broke the terms us use that covered using the device, making the chance of winning in court less than slim, AND the possibility of having to pay their capped fees for winning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am afraid I see that video as a 3rd party trying to jump on the PS3 band wagon.

Please help us to help you. Download the CAG tool bar for free

HERE and use the search option for all your searches. CAG earns a few pennies every time !!!

 

Please don't rush, take time to read these:-

 

 

&

 

 

This is always worth referring to

 

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by me are personal, are not endorsed by the Consumer Action Group or the Bank Action Group. Should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy, there are a lot of 3rd party aftersales outfits that think PS3 will not be the same without them. Tough, it's either endorsed by the manufacturer, or it's not.

Please help us to help you. Download the CAG tool bar for free

HERE and use the search option for all your searches. CAG earns a few pennies every time !!!

 

Please don't rush, take time to read these:-

 

 

&

 

 

This is always worth referring to

 

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by me are personal, are not endorsed by the Consumer Action Group or the Bank Action Group. Should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask a really simple question, did you use the 'Other OS' feature?

 

I've owned my PS3 for years and never bothered with the feature due to the cost of buying all the additional perriferals. It's a shame they felt the need to remove the feature but it is their perogative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter is that Sony have removed a feature I purchased. I can choose to not update but by doing so I cannot any longer run some Bluray discs or games. I effectively have no reasonable choice.

 

There maust be a legal stance as forum moderator of NeoGAF forums has successfully clawed back £84 from Amazon using the SOGA and EU directive 1999/44/EC as his defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask a really simple question, did you use the 'Other OS' feature?

Of course but not that it matters as Jamie has pointed out. Now I have a really simple question for you.Why would you ask such a question?

I've owned my PS3 for years and never bothered with the feature due to the cost of buying all the additional perriferals. It's a shame they felt the need to remove the feature but it is their perogative.

 

What peripherals are you talking about?You only need a mouse and keyboard and the ones on your PC should work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course but not that it matters as Jamie has pointed out. Now I have a really simple question for you.Why would you ask such a question?

 

 

What peripherals are you talking about?You only need a mouse and keyboard and the ones on your PC should work.

 

I ask because I was curious if you used the feature as I do not. As you say the peripherals are a keyboard and mouse, as I only use a laptop this would require purchasing them. You did after all as for people's opinions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

what you can do? very little.

 

it was never an advertised feature,

much like how putting linux on the original Xbox was never an advertised feature.

 

even if you bought the console with a view to do this, (by following instructions on a third party website it was never marketed by Sony as being able to do this.

 

Sony have modified the device, which yes, breaks an undocumented facility. but the device still performs well within the advertised specifications for the device when you bought it.

 

if updating the firmware had left the device unable to play certain games, or unable to view movies then you'd have a good argument that they broke the device, but the fact that you can no longer install linux isn't really a problem for Sony.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't you need to exploit something to put linux on original Xbox perhaps that's where you getting confused.

What I'm complaining about was a proper feature, it even has it's own section on the Playstations website and was mentioned in press releases.

http://www.playstation.com/ps3-openplatform/index.html

Kutaragi Details PS3 'Computer' Claim | Edge Online

Kutaragi: Sony aims to emulate Apple with PS3 - News at GameSpot

Edited by DigitalProduct
Link to post
Share on other sites

Out-law has an article on the issue that deals with the retailers side as well as consumers. Sony's firmware update shows how retailers can be exposed | Pinsent Masons LLP

Parkinson believes that the law is in the consumer's favour, though. "The Sale Of Goods Act says that if you sell something by description it's got to match that description and it's got to be fit for purpose," he said. "If the box or promotional material says it does something, that has got to be one of the fit for purpose elements."
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 year later...

I was looking through some of my old posts and remembered this one.

The legal case for america is still ongoing. You can have a look at it here. http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/3:2010cv01811/226894/1/

The very first entry sets out their case and the operative facts sections clearly point out what I was saying in this thread so I'm not sure why so many posters here were adamant Sony had done no wrong.

 

http://geohotgotsued.blogspot.com/ That guy who was hacking the PS3 got sued by Sony but it got settled.A german guy trying to get the otherOS feature back was also in trouble,sued by Sony for trying to get a feature back that they stole from us,fancy that.

 

Then shortly afterwords Sony got totally hacked and their services shutdown. :violin:

Edited by DigitalProduct
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...

Yep - luckily, in the 6 years since this happened, I've just about managed to let it go, haha! I remember how irritating it was getting fobbed off over this (not talking specifically about this thread) as people couldn't see that it was official and useful functionality that was removed, not some hack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...