Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons or ACS? - Page 25

cook1984 · 30-01-2009, 21:03

Basically, as long as you write them a letter saying you didn't do it, you can't loose.

So far, in 100% of cases where people wrote back, they have dropped the matter.

**Matt D** · 30-01-2009, 21:03

Very interesting

And

btw

M2PW · 30-01-2009, 22:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt D

Very interesting

And

btw

YW & Thanks :-)

If you find Tapps' postings a little dubious, then try "Norman Wells" at uk.legal
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.le...tchdog+Report#

and/or Metoo @ Slyck.com
http://www.slyck.com/forums/search.p...keywords=metoo

Pre-warning - On topic - Long reads, but "interesting" if you've got a "minute or two" to while away

Regs

M2PW

Tapps · 11-02-2009, 03:26

But my friend also wrote back and had telephone conversations but they still sued him.

**Russ** · 11-02-2009, 09:27

No. They didn't.

TheDaddy · 11-02-2009, 21:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tapps

He had written to Davenport Lyons a few times but had to leave the country due to an emergency for a short while. Davenport Lyons issued proceedings and got a default judgement. My friend then applied with his solicitors to have the default judgement set aside saying that he had a reasonable prospect of winning and gave his reasons why but was unsuccessful.

Your full of it mate, not being in the country is a valid reason to have the case heard again, as is DL not sending the proceedings document through recorded delivery

cookie_365 · 12-02-2009, 23:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Your full of it mate, not being in the country is a valid reason to have the case heard again, as is DL not sending the proceedings document through recorded delivery

Not true, and not true.

**Chris** · 12-02-2009, 23:24

I thought these sorts of Court proceedings could only be issued in person to the one being sued?

cook1984 · 12-02-2009, 23:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by cookie_365

Not true, and not true.

If you are on holiday or away for some other reason so you cannot know you received the letter, that is a good enough reason.

Although not exactly the same as a normal court, I didn't receive a letter from the court telling me a hearing date for a Small Claims Court procedure I was taking against Royal Mail. I told them and they simply rescheduled it.

PS. As expected, DL tried to arrange a re-hearing during the time I was away. The court has now moved the hearing to June.

TheDaddy · 13-02-2009, 01:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by cookie_365

Not true, and not true.

Or alternatively

4. Did you receive the summons? They are not sent by recorded mail.

5. Maybe you were unable to attend court and defend yourself

11. It could have been that you were away from the time between the issue of the summons and entry of the judgement?

http://www.insolvencyhelpline.co.uk/...id-reasons.php

And that is why they should send the details by recorded delivery, to make sure you recieve them and the link says set aside, which isn't guaranteed by any means, an actual hearing with you present is certain though.

Bammyj · 17-02-2009, 01:34

Hi all

I've just read this thread from front to back and theres some good sound advice in here (amongst the heated debates

)

I've received a letter from them stating they want Â£604 damages for my sharing the game "Pinball" for the wii. I haven't and I've told them so via an email.

I also stated that I was unaware that this game was being downloaded via my IP address. I did have suspicions of who it may have been, and mentioned I will try and find out for them.

I received a new letter saying that they will grant me more time until such time as I can run my own 'investigation'. That's when I discovered this thread. I replied with:

Dear Sir/Madam

I cannot prove without doubt who was responsible for this download for the fear of getting it wrong, or even if it really did happen. For all I know it could have been via my wireless.

I do however have a solicitor helping me and he has asked me to request some information from yourselves:

1, I need a full break down of the damages you are claiming.

2, Why is this case Â£604 when other case examples are around the Â£300 mark?

3, How long was this file being shared by my IP address?

4, He needs the log from you're program showing my ip address and exactly what I was uploading and for how long. (This will also help me find who was using my pc because I'm never away from the pc for very long)

I look forward to your speedy reply

Kinds Regards

The question is, have I said too much already?

LSainsbury · 17-02-2009, 10:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bammyj

I also stated that I was unaware that this game was being downloaded via my IP address. I did have suspicions of who it may have been, and mentioned I will try and find out for them.

You are screwed then as you've basically admitted it.

Regardless if it was done via Wi-Fi if you're the bill payer of the ADSL connection, it up to you to make sure your equipment is secure.

**Kymmy** · 17-02-2009, 11:02

This arguements been done before in this thread...

The bill payer does NOT have to make sure that thier connection is secure.. Whoever uses a connection without permission is the one commiting the crime...

Even if the T&C's specify that the account holder is responisble for the line security that doesn't make them responsible to a third party..

Bammyj · 17-02-2009, 11:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by LSainsbury

You are screwed then as you've basically admitted it.

Regardless if it was done via Wi-Fi if you're the bill payer of the ADSL connection, it up to you to make sure your equipment is secure.

Thats the thing though, who I thought may have done it, couldn't have possibly done so.

According to what the people have dug up and posted on this thread, there is no legal requirement to secure my wireless. I live in a terraced house, and all the houses are kinda concentrated around me

I also don't own a wii! lol

LSainsbury · 17-02-2009, 12:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

This arguements been done before in this thread...

The bill payer does NOT have to make sure that thier connection is secure.. Whoever uses a connection without permission is the one commiting the crime...

Even if the T&C's specify that the account holder is responisble for the line security that doesn't make them responsible to a third party..

Fair comment - but it could be argued if it got to court...