Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This time you do need to reply to them with a snotty letter to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did try court. We will help this evening.  
    • Hi, I just wanted to update the post and ask some further advice  I sent the CCA and CPR request on the 14th May, to date I have had no reply to the CCA but I received a load of paperwork from the CPR request a few days ago. I need to file the defence today and from the information I have read the following seems to be what is required.  I would be grateful if some one could confirm suitability   Claim The claim is for the sum of £255.69 due by the Defendant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a PayPal account with an account reference of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)  The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 15-09-21, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £0.00. The Claimant claims the sum of £255.69   Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had financial dealings with PayPal  in the past but cannot recollect the account number referred to by the Claimant. 2. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor the Claimant refers to within its particulars of claim.  3. Paragraph 3 is noted. On the 14/5/2024 I requested information related to this claim by way of a Section 77 request, which was received and signed for by the claimant on 20/5/2024. As of today, the Claimant has failed to respond to this request, and therefore remains in default of the section 77 request and therefore unable to enforce any alleged agreement until its compliance. 4. Therefore it is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and: (b) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice Pursuant to s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 5. Paypal (Europe) S.A.R.L is out of the juristriction of English Courts. 6. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed, or any relief.
    • Thanks @dx100ukI followed the advice given on here... then it went very quiet!  The company was creditfix I think then transferred to Knightsbridge (or the other way around) The scammer independent advisor was Roger Wallis-having checked his LinkedIn profile just this morning, it does look like he's still scamming vulnerable people... I know I was stupid for taking his advice, but i do wonder how many others he has done this to over a longer period of time (it came as a  massive shock to him when our IVA suddenly failed). Lowell have our current address (and phone numbers if the rejected calls over the past couple of days is anything to go by!) No point trying the SB because of the correspondence in 2019? Thanks
    • I have received the following letter from BW Legal today.  Also includes form if I admit the debt and wanting my income details.  Do I reply to this LETTER OF CLAIM please?  Looks like they are ready for court now??  Thank You BW Legal - Letter of Claim.pdf
    • According to Wikipedia - yeah, I know - the site is owned by Croydon Council. It's at least worth a try to contact the council and ask for a contact in The Colonnades. You could then lay it on thick about being a genuine customer and ask them to call their dogs off. It's got to be worth a try  https://www.croydon.gov.uk/contact-us/contact-us  
  • 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

Dessault Systems Solidworks/CJCH sols - copyright infringement threats


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2029 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 replied with pretty much exactly the same email but this bugger wouldn’t give up, ringing twice a day and emailing incessantly using a lot of capital letters.

 

Perhaps worth instructing them to read the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and then for them to consult a qualified lawyer versed in such matters.

 

In the meantime, I can recommend HeeksCAD as a worthwhile alternative for 3D CADCAM and it won't cost you a penny.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Another update:

 

After a week or more of silence I got a letter, registered post from the lawyers, STILL banging on about commercial misuse. Within this letter was a connection between a mac address and my domain. It is indeed the mac of my network adapter, but they can't know that.

 

I emailed a response (as invited) in which I asked them how they made this connection, in accordance with PAP. Apparently the software sniffs out non-personal information and reports it in accordance with EU law (which I checked).

 

Then it gets more interesting.

 

A reply email tried to suggest that a cad package could be used for parts management (ie like a shop - my little on-line shop offers about 15 items for sale) which is daft, and that their connection with my domain was sufficient to prove commercial use. Then something really laughable: They pointed out my email header and their software had logged the same machine IP address, and cited a 192.168 address. As a former IT engineer, this was immediately preposterous and is somewhat akin to the use of 555 phone numbers in american movies. Most home routers serve 192.168 addresses, and many will serve the same address to the first/only machine on the network.

 

This is somewhat moot as I haven't tried to deny the use of their software, just truthfully letting them know it hasn't been for commercial use. But maybe this will be useful to future visitors.

 

I replied saying that all they had was evidence of a shared machine being used to collect email. I stated again that I wasn't using SW for commercial use, that they were wasting their time yet there didn't seem to be anything I could do to convince them otherwise. I told them I couldn't afford the software and that it isn't of much value to me other than to learn it (true). Also politely suggested that they should avoid citing 192.168 addresses in future.

 

Silence now for 2 days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps worth instructing them to read the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and then for them to consult a qualified lawyer versed in such matters.

 

In the meantime, I can recommend HeeksCAD as a worthwhile alternative for 3D CADCAM and it won't cost you a penny.

 

Much obliged on both counts :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They pointed out my email header and their software had logged the same machine IP address, and cited a 192.168 address.

 

Priceless.... Checking my IP address, I get:

 

root@home:~$ ifconfig eth0

eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr
[redacted]

inet addr:192.168.0.4 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0

inet6 addr: fe80::221:85ff:fe18:6edc/64 Scope:Link

UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1

RX packets:13467 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0

TX packets:12999 errors:9 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0

collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000

RX bytes:10689136 (10.1 MiB) TX bytes:1497817 (1.4 MiB)

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Stunned_Monkey .

 

 

Am i glad that i have found this thread after a week of searching the web .

 

 

I have had the same e mail from the company above about Solidwoks .

I am in a bit of a state about it .

I run a small drawing service as a sole trader working from my house .

I just work in the evenings and it is just a bit of pocket money .

 

 

I had the email about solidworks being detected ,

i responded telling them that i don't use it and on do 2D work.

 

 

I have had a weeks worth of sleepless nights worrying about it can you help ?

They sent me an email back saying that i should contact a guy at Solidworks if i wanted any info .

 

 

I havent sent anything else since .

You seem to be alot more in the know than me .

 

 

Any help would be much appriciated as i am quite frankly scared to death by it all .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Stunned_Monkey . Am i glad that i have found this thread after a week of searching the web . I have had the same e mail from the company above about Solidwoks . I am in a bit of a state about it . I run a small drawing service as a sole trader working from my house . I just work in the evenings and it is just a bit of pocket money . I had the email about solidworks being detected , i responded telling them that i don't use it and on do 2D work. I have had a weeks worth of sleepless nights worrying about it can you help ? They sent me an email back saying that i should contact a guy at Solidworks if i wanted any info . I hav nt sent anything else since . You seem to be alot more in the know than me . Any help would be much appriciated as i am quite frankly scared to death by it all .

 

Hello and welcome to CAG. I'm pleased that at least you have found someone with the same problem here.

 

If you have other questions, it would be better to start a new thread of your own and monitor stunned_monkey's to see how they get on. Hopefully some moral support will make you feel a bit better, we're all here to help. :)

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you ignore them

nowt they can do.

 

 

dx

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

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you ignore them

nowt they can do.

 

 

dx

 

 

Probably, but that's not always true as we don't know very much detail.

 

Sparty, are you categorically denying ever downloading, installing or using a trial or full version of their software? Even just for "fun" and not for business use?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sparty. What follows is my opinion -please take my advice with due caution. I'm no legal eagle!

 

Firstly, you're in the right place. Just try and ignore those who basically say "well, you made your bed, you lay in it" because the advice from others will have value that you wouldn't even get from a solicitors. I speak from past and present experience. I wouldn't have known to look up exactly how many times they've actually taken anyone to court over this (zero - see previous post on this thread), and also knowing examples of successful, big cases resulted basically only in forcing the infringer (is that a word?) to buy a license. Someone else further up very helpfully explained how heavily weighted the law is in (y)our favour.

 

It's also pretty common knowledge that SW is easy to pirate and isn't available for a reasonable cost to people like you and me - I certainly would buy it if it were. They aren't interested in chasing down the little guy, but I think they're taking the approach of pushing as many scary buttons as possible to make you cough up.

 

If they put you in touch with their UK reseller, that guy is a total so-and-so. He acts just like a debt collector and I blocked his email and phone numbers after the first day (I use call control for android to deal with the phone calls). If you have admitted using it, just make it very clear that the software has little value to you - ie you've generated little of value with it - this is something they need to show in order to claim damages - and that you couldn't afford it anyway. You may wish to do this n writing, although I did it over email with the solicitors after they sent me a copy of all the emails in the post.

 

Read up on pre-action conduct, what they must tell you and when. Ignore the "you must reply within 3 days" as this is clearly outside that law. I asked them to tell me how they'd made the connection with my business, and they had to admit all they had was a shared machine being used to collect email. He also tried to tell me they already had adhered to PAC but it's right there in black and white what they need to do and they hadn't. That and the citation of a 192.168 address pretty much confirmed for me that they were just employing scare tactics.

 

If you've told them you aren't using it, stick to your guns and force them to tell you why they think you are. All they';ll have is a mac address collected by their software and your domain. They can't prove it's your mac address, and they won't know how many people have email addresses attached to your domain. It could be anyone, right?!

 

I've also now blacklisted the solicitors email domain so they can't contact me other than in writing. I suggest you do the same. There;s a reason for insisting things are done in writing and that is because by law you can consider it as having arrived if sent. I have found this to take the pressure off considerably. If they really care, they'll write.

 

[i've mentioned debt collectors a couple of times now - this is how I originally found CAG several years back and the people on here were invaluable and empowering me in dealing with them. Eventually I had many thousands written off by following the advice here and forcing my creditors to stick to the law. I'm now comfortably in the black and finding my experience then has apparently left me with a healthy level of cynicism towards legal threat-o-grams! If you come through this as a result of CAG, please do as I did and drop them a donation :) ]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou for making me feel better about it all . I thought it was a scare tactic but you never know . I think they know that anyone receiving an e mail from a soliciter with panic people . I do have an unsecured wifi router that many people have used including customers with their laptops . As I thought they have to proove that it is your machine which I'm assuming they can't ?

 

So you would recommend just not replying to either the soliciter or the sw chap when he starts on me ?

 

Are you still getting letters from them then ?

 

And I will def make a donation if I don t get cleaned out by solidworks ha ha

Edited by sparty0_0
Link to post
Share on other sites

So far I've had only the one letter from them. I recommend you force them to tell you exactly how they've connected you to the use of their software. If, like me, they've sniffed an email connection and went after the owner of the domain, you have an easy argument that many people have emails on that domain.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they emailing or sending by post? If email, block it. Theyre phishing for a bite.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

phishing trip ignore

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

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spanish number but English Chap, right? Was it to the number on your website or the number you have in the phone book stacked to the address to which your domain is registered?

 

He then passed me to the ****er at their UK reseller

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a spanish number , And he would have phoned my number on my website . it re directs to my mobile . It is the same as my home number .

 

I did nt answer but he sent me an e mail saying that he can talk to me about bringing my company in to complience . I dont have a company , its just me under a name .

Edited by sparty0_0
Link to post
Share on other sites

If theres nothing by post, so far, ignore it. Block the email, block the phone number.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldnt say anything. Just ignore it . If youve had NOTHING by post, then theyre phishing and hoping to trap you into an admission or corner.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

But you havent had one yet. Dont fall for their trap. It's a massive phishing expedition theyre on.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok will do ,Ill save the email for then .

 

One other thing . Have there been any other people who have had this ( apart from stunned Monkey ) ? My Private work name Starts with an "A" Im just wondering if they are starting at the start of the alphabet and going through it . This might explain why there have been no cases taken to court yet ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2029 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...