For Information.

See. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11418962

If you have received letters from ACS:Law, if you are with ISP's other than Talk Talk or Virgin Media, it is possible that some of your data (Name, address, bank details) could be on the internet.

Apparently according to reports, ACS have not pursued either TT or VM customers, as it would be too much hassle for them.

National firm Ralli is seeking to pursue a group action for harassment against London firm ACS Law in relation to the handling of file-sharing cases.

Ralli has called for individuals to contact the firm if they have received what it claims are ‘bullying’ letters from ACS Law.

The legal action concerns letters sent by intellectual property lawyer Andrew Crossley, principal at ACS Law, in relation to alleged illegal sharing of films, games and songs over the internet.

Michael Forrester, a solicitor in Ralli’s intellectual property and harassment team, said: ‘The legal basis for the claims being made against these alleged file sharers involves complex legal and technical principles. These are extremely difficult for a lay person to understand and can often mean an innocent person is being pursued.

‘It can be incredibly upsetting for people to receive such letters and they may well have a claim of harassment against ACS Law, so I am urging them to come forward.’

The Solicitors Regulation Authority has referred Crossley to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, following an investigation which was triggered by complaints made to the SRA by consumer group Which? and others.

nogol - Absolutely useful and a warm welcome to the forum, your post is sound and further reinforces what myself and huckster have been explaining all the way through this apology of a topic.

PS - No disrespect intended whatsoever to Skywalker the OP.. for introducing it, just for the persistant, "bleater" earlier on.

Hi, i'm new to this forum and any forum reraly but i am i law student so know a bit about such things. i recieved a letter this morning demanding payment so have spent the last few hours searching the internet for information and resollutions that people have found. On their own website it is made clear that ACS:LAW has not brought any cases to court despite the 15000 letters sent out before the new year, the reason they haven't is due to the evidensial burden is high and it simply cannot be met with the technologies that they employ to track ip adresses. ip adresses can be fakes, hijacked, shared, changed or subject to inacurate record keeping so the only way that they could win a case is for the person to admit that they did it. which is obviously not an option if you didn't.

Further information involves the fact that although at the end of the letter (at least my letter) the firm mentions that they are registered and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Autority, they fail to mention however that they are currently alleged to be under investigation by this authority for sending out these letters. i've tried to reach the RSA but can not get through at the moment if i am able to i'll post agian with what i learn and any advice they give. i shall also lodge a complaint with the Office of fair trading shortly i would earge everybody else on this forum to do the same, all u need to do is send in a brief description of what has happened and they will have to make enquiries ( http://www.oft.gov.uk/ ).

Based on what i have read they will not take any one to court unless they stumble on to someone who has infringed copyright ALOT and they can stick them with a huge fine, but for people accuses of one or two acts it is simply impossible to prove. my advice is to ignore them, but if they do try to take things further get intouch with your local citizens advice and they will be able to advise and guide you better then i can on a forum.

sorry it's a bit long but hope it's also useful

emmajj

Nothing at all. They have to prove your liability in court.

Please read the thread. There is plenty of information to put your mind at rest and even a letter that could be used.

If you are connected to ACS:Law in any way, please stop bumping this thread !!!

Well in that case pedross you have had all your options reasonably explained to you, there are no more possibilities you either :

1) If guilty pay up, or seek independent legal advice as we have already suggested.

or :

2) If not guilty, then pay nothing and waste possibly more money by seeking legal advice.

The final decision is yours alone, but please stop bumping this thread and whining on about ..........but what if.?

You know something huckster - I feel the same way as you.!

The way that pedross has been hoo-haahing back and forth whining on and worrying about something he knows he didn't download and carping on about actually paying, definitely leads me to believe he is either a very stupid gullible person....... or more sinister, he has links with this company and is trying to worry others into making payments by bumping this thread.!

I make no apology either way -

pedross - For the record and to avoid any confusion, or your repetitive moaning(s).

1) If you're guilty then pay it.

2) If you're not guilty, then don't part with a penny..

Pedross

Sorry if I am wrong.

But I am beggining to suspect that you connected to ACS:Law in some way. Either that or you are genuinely worried.

In your first post you provided the same information about the download of Addicted to Base.

I can only repeat that if you do your research, you will find loads of information on this, which will hopefully put your mind at rest.Google for Speculative invoicing handbook. You will find a manual which I think you will find revealing.

Whatever you do, do not pay anything or admit any liability. You may come to regret it.

I have found this posting on torrent freak. It says that a judge thinks that all is not well!

you seem to be very knowlegeable. Do you practice in law?

Note: This post has been moderated. Please ensure you read the moneysupermarket.com Content & Community Standards before posting. Thanks.

Letter found online which you could send to ACS:Law

Re: Letter of claim dated xxx concerning
XXXXX (“The work”)
Dear Sir/Madam
I am writing in reply to your letter of claim dated xxx stating that my connection was used in an infringement of copyright, using peer to peer networks which allegedly occurred on the date xxxx and concerns the work “XXXXX” (“the work”).

You assert in your letter that the infringement was apparently traced to my internet connection. I note that I am not personally being accused of the infringement, as you have no evidence to this effect. Nevertheless, I categorically deny any offence under sections 16(1) (d) and 20 of the CDPA 1988. I have never possessed a copy of the work in any form, nor have I distributed it, nor have I authorised anyone else to distribute it using my internet connection. I note that section 16(2) of the act requires a person to either directly infringe copyright, or authorise someone else to do so. I have done neither, and you have not provided any evidence of my doing so. As such I cannot and will not sign the undertakings as provided by you.

As you seem to be perfectly aware, it is impossible to link an IP address to a particular person or computer without further detailed analysis, which requires a level of expertise I do not possess. Furthermore the delay in your sending of a letter of claim precludes any such analysis. You have stated that “it will be necessary for me to set out [the] reasons [for my denial]” and that “a bare denial (without further detailed explanation) will not be sufficient to change [your] view of the circumstances”.

Unfortunately your failure to supply any evidence in support of a valid claim under the CDPA 1988 means that there is little to answer. Simply, you have asserted that an infringement took place which I did not carry out or authorise, and you have provided no evidence to support any assertion to the contrary. I do not have the expertise to provide a detailed explanation. As such I can only conclude that I have been a victim of foul play.

As far as I am aware, there is no law in the UK under which you could properly hold me responsible for an infringement occurring via my internet connection, without either my knowledge or permission. I would be interested to hear your legal basis for attempting to do so.

Please inform your clients that if they wish to pursue this matter, I will seek to recover all my costs to the maximum permitted by the Civil Procedure Rules.

The signature of the undersigned confirms the statement provided to be accurate and legally binding under the terms required by pre-action protocol in civil law.

Yours Faithfully
[name]

I doubt there is any intention of ACS Law taking anyone to court if they did not pay, following a threat letter.

Do your research. Which the consumer organisation has recently filed a complaint against ACS for allegedly falsely accusing 150 people of downloading, which has been proven to be a totally false accusation.

Also according to reports ACS: Law are allegedly currently also under investigation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

In November when ACS were given approval for obtaining data on the identities of the downloaders, the judge made some of the following comments.

Lord Lucas went on to explain that ACS:Law had “been kind enough” to write to him in person, but went on to criticize the evidence their allegations are based on.

Noting that the evidence is provided by foreign companies that do not disclose the methodology used to obtain it, Lord Lucas observed: “It may well have been obtained against data protection rules – that is certainly the conclusion that the Swiss and French authorities seem to have reached.”

Describing the allegations as “totally impenetrable,” Lord Lucas said that upon receiving these letters telling account holders that they have to pay money, people have no way of disproving what they are accused of.

“I think most of their [ACS:Law's] income comes from people who just pay,” he said. “I am not aware that there have been many court cases at the end of this because of the element of bluff.”

To be more precise, ACS:Law have never taken anyone to court on file-sharing allegations, even though they threaten to.

I have also found a letter online which you could send to ACS Law, which I will add to another post.

Has anyone actually paid out or ignored the letter and recieved a writ?