Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I feel that people are focusing too much on the OPs property being a council house and putting responsibility on the council to resolve this.   imagine for a moment that the OPs house is privately owned, now what powers would they have to take action on the trees? Pretty much none without taking the tree owner to court right. Well as the trees are privately owned, that is the same power that the council have right now.   the information with the £375 will be inline with high hedges legislation as this will be the only power the council will have and it is common for there to be a charge for this.   this is not a social housing issue, but a neighbor dispute with a private homeowner.   i used to work as a tree officer for a local authority and from experience have seen that people’s idea of dangerous and what is actually dangerous are two different issues. A councils power to enforce tree works are also limited and will usually only be where a private tree poses a risk to the highway, not to another property as that is a civil matter (even where the council own the 2nd property).    With regards to risk to underground pipes, this is something you will be unlikely to successfully argue as various studies have found that unless a tree is planted on top of the pipe and crush it, the roots will not cause damage, but rather only enter through already damaged areas as they are opportunistic, any tree roots in drains are usually a secondary issue where a pipe had existing damage and to resolve it will require a permanent repair to the pipe to prevent recurrence.   the only options i see here are to calculate the height allowed under high hedges legislation (it varies depending on what direction the property faces , the location of hedges etc) and try to enforce that which will involve the fee. Otherwise there is little you can do as the private homeowner has a right to have trees in their garden although they may be liable if they were to cause damage to your property (such as a shed) or the councils property in the future.
    • Served on 16 Feb.   On reviewing the MCOL website today for an updated, I noticed that 1) Hermes has aknowledged the claim, but not yet filed a defence, and 2) that I there was a glitch / error on the form. Essentially, it looks like I had accidentally left the "I will send detailed particulars of claim" box ticke (I thought I had unticked it), with the result that the claim section has been truncated, and some extra text has automatcially been added - in red below):   "...Claimant seeks £XXX, plus I will provide the defendant with separate detailed particulars within 14 days after service of the claim form. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of..."   This is obviously not ideal. Is it better to try to amend the claim somehow, or to just submit a brief POC that a) clarifies that I am seeking £XXX plus costs (which was automatically truncated), and b) sets out my calculation of the £XXX?  
    • Hi   It amazes me how they pass the buck as they don't want to deal with a private homeowner but if the shoe was on the other foot they would be hammering down on you for breach of tenancy.   As this is council housing you need to make a Formal Complaint in writing to the Council Housing about this (as a social housing landlord they have a complaints process they have to follow). you need to exhaust their complaints process. Make sure and title your letter Formal Complaint.   From what you have posted this tree is not just a nuisance but also a Health & Safety risk:   1. The tree being overgrown is now a danger to the occupants/Guest/Visitors to your property   2. The tree has overgrown into the Council Housings Boundaries your property causing damage/endangerment to the occupants/guest/visitors.   3. As the roots of the tree are also overgrown into your property you have concerns that these may be causing/damaging to any underground pipework that may be within the boundray of the property.   4. So far the Councils actions have been to treat their Council Housing tenant as a third class citizen with a private homeowner aloud to cause endangerment/possible damage due to these overgrown trees which are encroaching on your council house property/bounderies.   You also require clarification why you were sent the Healthy Neighbourhood Information which states I have to pay £375 to make a complaint. (make sure and attach a copy of the response that states this cost)   You also require copies of the following:   1. Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Customer Service Standard (not the leaflet) 3. Health & Safety Policy (not the leaflet) 4. Public Liability Insurance Policy. (not the leaflet) 5. Clarification from you if their is any underground pipeworks running through the bounderies within the garden area (you should have full knowledge of this it being your property/plans) 6. Compensation Policy (not the leaaflet) 7. Equality & Diversity Policy (not the leaflet)   When you get the above policies sit with a pen/pencil/highlighter and take you time reading them and just think to yourself 'DID THEY DO THAT' if not mark it then leave it for a while then do the same again this way you can basically throw/write back stating the haven't followed x policy with which part of that policy and your reason. (you are building evidence to use against them using their own policies. I would also like to refer you to The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provision) Act 1976: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1976/57/part/I/crossheading/dangerous-trees-and-excavations     You need to remember yes it is the Council but the Council Housing is a separate entity and is a Registered Social Landlord (RSL)   Is the Council Housing classed as a registered Charity? (what is their registration number whether charity or RSL?)   Also have a wee look at this CAG link:     
    • @rocky_sharma   Fame at last!!   Dunno how much help it would be in your case, but I could try digging out the txt of my defence if you think it might be relevant to your defence. We might hafta do this via PM, then e-mail though if ya wanna go down that route.   Good luck with yours anyway mate.
  • Our picks

hugo777

I have a goldeneye 2015 letter - help

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1316 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I haven't I should add.

 

Apparently, a company called GoldenEye have got a court order to get my name because I've been illegally filesharing.

 

Funny thing is if you go to the goldeneye website it seems more concerned with fighting piracy than anything else. I can smell a [problem].

 

Awaiting a speculative invoice now. Sounds very fishy to me. I'm guessing they do very well out of people who get scared and just pay up.

 

Looks like they do porn films as well. Obviously, they know that if they sent letters in the post demanding payments for downloading porn then this may carry more weight. Can just imagine it. Husband gets letter and thinks flipping heck better pay this before wife sees it.

 

Absolutely scandalous behaviour. Should be illegal.

 

As someone who works in IT, know that an IP address can in no way be used as absolute proof. Its just too easy to spoof. I can't see how they've got a leg to stand on unless they come into your house and find said downloaded file on your computer.

 

Hi

 

I got this letter too. I have sky broadband at home used by the whole family, friends, guests

 

I haven't downloaded any of their material and have no recollection of ever downloading their material. Having done some research, I believe for any official legal action to be taken there must be evidence with regards to who the copyright infringer is. As I've said, my internet is used by a lot of people, so how would this ever be possible?

 

Since you work in IT, you think this whole issue is something that will gain any official legal momentum and one should worry about? Or simply ignore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi

 

I got this letter too. I have sky broadband at home used by the whole family, friends, guests

 

I haven't downloaded any of their material and have no recollection of ever downloading their material. Having done some research, I believe for any official legal action to be taken there must be evidence with regards to who the copyright infringer is. As I've said, my internet is used by a lot of people, so how would this ever be possible?

 

Since you work in IT, you think this whole issue is something that will gain any official legal momentum and one should worry about? Or simply ignore?

 

In the test cases which were held in front of a Judge who had specialist knowledge of this area of law,

the ruling was that a claim could not be brought against the person who paid the bill for the internet connection

and under current law the claimant had to try to find out who carried out the copyright infringement.

 

 

The copyright holder could obtain the details of who owns the IP address and write to them, but that was about it.

And before you ask i don't have these details to hand, but you will find it covered on forum pages going back a few years.

 

If you genuinely have no knowledge, you could write back to whoever is chasing this, saying that you have no knowledge of this

and have asked family who share the connection, who also say they do not know anything about this.

Advise that you will not engage in any further communications about something which have no knowledge about.

Or you ignore and you may hear no more.

 

 

Whether the new firm chasing will try to take cases to court, i cannot answer.

A bit doubtful, particularly against households with numerous people using the internet connection.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pers I'd ignore and not enter into silly letter tennis

 

 

they'll think they've found a mug that awaits fleecing

 

 

dx

 

 

we could do with seeing one of these new breed of letters


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DO ignore the letter

 

This comes up time and time again and noone is ever prosecuted or taken to the civil courts.

 

For a criminal action they have to prove it was you that downloaded it.

 

In a civil case they have to use the balance of probabilities and would still struggle. That they would also have to prove loss (Which they cannot do) and would have their expenses severely limited to the rules afforded by the small claims track which would leave them far more out of pocket than the paltry "penalty" they will try and impose

 

Ignore Rule Of Law, he is using legal bluffal to try and intimidate and scare you. No defence is needed unless you are prosecuted (Wont happen) and/or receive an N1 Claim form.

 

If either of those happen return here for advice.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So to summarize, and correct me if I'm wrong

 

This whole thing is a scare tactic to get misinformed internet users who aren't well read or aware of the wider spectrum of how the internet, downloading, IP addresses etc works to feel ashamed/scared, contact Goldenshi*, admit/give them more details so that they can have leverage and subsequently demand some form of payment.

 

The company has an infamous track record of trying this tactic since around 2010. In reality an IP address is not enough to actually gain any legal momentum for them as it does not identify the actual infringer with any real certainty.

 

The ideal course of action is to ignore the correspondence, and if subsequent letters are received from Goldenshi*, reply along the lines of; I deny their accusations, inform them that an individual's broadband is used by a wide range of people - family, friends, guests etc and they need to identify the infringer as I have not viewed their content and have not given anybody consent to download or view their content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore do not reply

 

Dx


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So to summarize, and correct me if I'm wrong

 

This whole thing is a scare tactic to get misinformed internet users who aren't well read or aware of the wider spectrum of how the internet, downloading, IP addresses etc works to feel ashamed/scared, contact Goldenshi*, admit/give them more details so that they can have leverage and subsequently demand some form of payment.

 

The company has an infamous track record of trying this tactic since around 2010. In reality an IP address is not enough to actually gain any legal momentum for them as it does not identify the actual infringer with any real certainty.

 

The ideal course of action is to ignore the correspondence, and if subsequent letters are received from Goldenshi*, reply along the lines of; I deny their accusations, inform them that an individual's broadband is used by a wide range of people - family, friends, guests etc and they need to identify the infringer as I have not viewed their content and have not given anybody consent to download or view their content.

 

A fair summary.

 

Worth reading ACSBore wordpress blog and Slyck.

They have uncovered quite a lot of information on the various people involved in the latest invoice project.

 

 

It is exactly what they tried before and this time they apparently don't have any firm of Solicitors officially handling anything,

apart from the IP address info requests.

 

 

The American Lawyers mentioned back in Summer in relation to copyright claims has had their company dissolved.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

own thread created

 

 

could we possibly see the letter please

 

 

follow the UPLOAD

 

 

dx


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite true they wont take action, individuals have been taken to court and lost and had to pay large amounts, although not in the UK as far as Im aware.

 

Legal action HAS also taken place in the Uk although not successfully as far as Im aware.

 

I do believe though that it is theoretically possible to take an individual to court with enough information and prove to a Judge that the individual did indeed download a film in question and ask for a reasonable amount of damages (£20 ? for the loss of a DVD sale ?) I dont believe we should dismiss it out of hand, after all the Beavis Supreme Court Case surprised a lot of experts, as did the original banking charges case.

Edited by Andyorch
removed quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry to tack a reply onto a thread from last year, but I have some additional questions around the technical aspects of this.

 

In the majority of cases consumer internet connection equipment makes use of dynamic IP addressing,

in other words each time your router is restarted you may be issued with a different IP address from your ISP.

This is in contrast with the majority of commercial equipment that uses static IP addressing.

 

 

The former means your ISP would need to establish not who's currently using the IP address used to download the content,

but who was using at the time of the alleged offense.

 

 

I gather ISPs are now required to keep records of that, so it's not impossible, but certainly more difficult and time-consuming to establish.

Do ISPs have the right to make a charge to the solicitor attempting to gain this information which could in theory be passed on to the alleged offende

r should the matter come to court?

 

My second question is around WiFi. It's never responsible to operate an 'open' wireless network onto which anyone within range could connect

, but would doing so bolster a defense of not knowing who downloaded the content?

 

 

For example, if the consumer were to have realized that their wireless network was 'open' and then closed it at a later date,

would it be more difficult to appoint blame for anything that was downloaded in that time frame,

after all it seems the 'owner' of the connection cannot be held responsible for what's downloaded using it.

 

Finally, if a firm chasing a consumer must prove specifically who downloaded copyrighted content

and in a dynamic IP environment your ISP will only ever hold the IP address of your gateway (in other words your router)

and not that of any equipment inside your network, how could they ever prove who actually downloaded it?

 

 

All they could ever prove is that your connection was used to do it, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its a load of old willy waving to fleece people anyway.

none of the money they would get would ever go back to whomever suffered the 'loss'.

straight to their pockets and down the local club with it.

 

nearly every Broadband router, esp any of the BT ones have free wifi to anyone with a BT login that is nearby

so whom to say it wasn't done by someone parking outside a house and doing it

the occupants wouldn't know nothing about it.

 

 

dx


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
its a load of old willy waving to fleece people anyway.

none of the money they would get would ever go back to whomever suffered the 'loss'.

straight to their pockets and down the local club with it.

 

nearly every Broadband router, esp any of the BT ones have free wifi to anyone with a BT login that is nearby

so whom to say it wasn't done by someone parking outside a house and doing it

the occupants wouldn't know nothing about it.

 

 

dx

 

Yes I noticed this, it would kill any claim stone dead if you have a similar router, just by BT ?, havnt looked into much but I know its used by BT, my dad has one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats the advice on this now? I see citizens advice say you should respond.

 

I've had two letters in one envelope from them.

 

 

One saying I ignored a recent letter dated 3rd may - I never had this.

 

 

And the other which looks like a cease and desist agreement.

 

Im wondering if the cease desist is a trick.

Get me to sign something say I promise to not share and delete it

- surely this implies I'm admitting to having it?

 

Worth replying saying no idea what your on about and I've never downloaded etc anyway so can confirm I dont have a copy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same advice as every other time.


Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do wiki search for ben dover (uk porn star) it explains all about his goldeneye [problem].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...