Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons or ACS? - Page 23

Russ · 27-01-2009, 19:56

You may as well use the letter as toilet paper. Ignore it, davenport will leave you alone.

cook1984 · 27-01-2009, 22:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luquitas10

I just received a letter from Davenport asking me to pay over Ã‚Â£600. To be honest I don't remember if I ever downloaded a game called pinball, and if so, i've never used it. (It's not in my pc)

Don't worry, the onus is on them to prove that you downloaded it, not for you to prove you didn't. They don't have any real evidence, they are just hoping you pay up out of fear.

Quote:

Is it illegal here in Uk to download games with out sharing them?

No. It is often (but not always) copyright infringement, however that is a civil offence. What that means is that it isn't a crime as such, the police do not persecute people for it. However, the owners of the copyright (the game's publishers) may try to sue you for it, which is what Davenport Lyons are threatening to do. Even if you loose, you don't get a criminal record or anything like that.

Besides which, there is absolutely no chance of you loosing.

Quote:

If so, is it possible to waive this "fine"?
is there any link from where I can get more info?
The name Orange provided them (the same they used in the letter) is wrong, my surname is not right (i.e. Duncas instead of Duncan). Based on this, can I just forget about the letter as per british law?

Firstly, it's not a "fine", because Davenport Lyons have no mandate to issue one. They are simply trying to extort money out of you by threatening to take legal action.

What you need to do is write back to them with a short, direct letter. Simply state that you are not the person they claim is at fault (since you are not Mr. Duncas) and that as far as you are aware you did not download the file in question. Ask them for copies of their evidence, such as it is, and state that you have no intention of paying.

Here is a sample letter, feel free to use it:

Dear Sir or Madam,

In regards to your letter dated dd/mm/yy, you appear to be mistaken. There is no-one by the name of "Duncas" at this address. In case you meant "Duncan", I should like to inform you that as far as I am aware I did not download the file in question.

As I'm sure you are aware an IP address alone is not sufficient to identify an individual. Please forward copies of any credible and individually identifying evidence you may have if you wish to pursue the matter further.

I have no intention of paying you anything.

Yours,
<name>

After that you will not hear from them again.

28-01-2009, 06:22

I'd just go with:

Quote:

There is no-one by the name of "Duncas" at this address.

Why give them any other help!

Pog66 · 28-01-2009, 15:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by cook1984

What that means is that it isn't a crime as such, the police do not persecute people for it.

Prosecute surely!! - we are not quite in a police state yet

scantheman · 28-01-2009, 18:51

I received a letter from them yesterday wanting Ã‚Â£612.94 for downloading "two worlds" in july 2008.

It was not me who downloaded the game it was my 13 year old son....i don't ever even play games.

I was advised by my brother to email and tell them this,which sadly i did.

After reading all the posts on here i guess i should have just denied it as they could have been wrong.....so i will have to pay up

Al

28-01-2009, 19:04

But you are not sharing it are you? I think that's what they are keying on...

Tapps · 28-01-2009, 19:51

I am doing some research for a friend and came across this forum. One of my friends was taken to court a 3 weeks ago and lost. He hired a lawyer who were quite confident they were going to win and tried to get Davenport Lyons to drop the case by making offers outside of court. The offers were like you pay everything to date and drop the case and our client will be happy, but Davenport Lyons rejected all of this. At the hearing the judge ruled against my friend and his expected costs are expected to be in the region of Ã‚Â£8000. Now the solicitors say they can't do anything about it and say they can not help.

Has anyone else experienced this?

Wayfair · 28-01-2009, 20:02

Have you got any links to this Tapps? local rag? must of been a top local story, well it would be in my part of the country lol, beats stabbings and robbery.

scrotnig · 28-01-2009, 20:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tapps

I am doing some research for a friend and came across this forum. One of my friends was taken to court a 3 weeks ago and lost. He hired a lawyer who were quite confident they were going to win and tried to get Davenport Lyons to drop the case by making offers outside of court. The offers were like you pay everything to date and drop the case and our client will be happy, but Davenport Lyons rejected all of this. At the hearing the judge ruled against my friend and his expected costs are expected to be in the region of Ã‚Â£8000. Now the solicitors say they can't do anything about it and say they can not help.

Has anyone else experienced this?

Sorry, this has all the hallmarks of a "plant" to try and frighten more people into paying by convincing them they cannot win.

A case like this would have been reported quite widely in the media and on the web.

28-01-2009, 21:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrotnig

Sorry, this has all the hallmarks of a "plant" to try and frighten more people into paying by convincing them they cannot win.

A case like this would have been reported quite widely in the media and on the web.

That's first thing I thought when I just read that!

Fake! Plant! We've been invaded by DL!!

Tapps · 28-01-2009, 21:19

Why do you think I'm a plant? Just because it is my first post?

This is going to financially ruin a very good friend of mine. It isn't in the media yet because although the judge has ruled against him, there will be a damages hearing shortly. Does anyone want to offer any actual help?

Raistlin · 28-01-2009, 21:21

At this point your friend's best hope is their legal council, if they say they can't/won't help then he needs to get better council.

cookie_365 · 28-01-2009, 21:26

Well, that's what it seems like. But it could be true - it could be that the damages judgement was only a couple of hundred pounds so wasn't picked up by the media; the Ã‚Â£8k will include both his and DL's costs, which could well be Ã‚Â£7k or Ã‚Â£8k together in a contested case.

Course Tapps can clear any confusion up by just letting us know the court Case Number, a scan of the order, details of the solicitor/firm.

Since part of this thread covers the difference between criminal and civil law, I'd say that on the balance of probabilities Tapps is a plant, but it's not proven beyond reasonable doubt

---------- Post added at 21:26 ---------- Previous post was at 21:21 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob M

At this point your friend's best hope is their legal council, if they say they can't/won't help then he needs to get better council.

To give Tapps the benefit of the doubt; don't assume that a 'better' lawyer is someone that says 'yes, this is what we can do'. Part of a lawyers job is to tell people what they need to hear, not what they want to hear. Appealing might just be throwing good money after bad.

28-01-2009, 21:26

You friends lawyers must be rubbish if they can't convince the court that you can't ID somebody from an IP address!

That IP is not totaly unique to you if you go through a proxy server; it can be spoffed or whatever.

Luquitas10 · 28-01-2009, 21:28

Thanks all of you guys for your help.
One more question, has anyone of you sent the letter to DL? What did happen after that?

Cheers,

L10