Davenport Lyons going against file sharers

[Bookworm]

Dangerous game in my opinion. How are you going to make the court only allow £1 a month payments? Are you planning on lying in court (contempt of court)?

No need to lie, if OP is on low income with lots of outgoings, something like this is going to be way way WAY down on the list of priority payments, and therefore if there is little or no disposable income, then a judge is likely not to allow much more than that. That is assuming OP lost, of course. ;-)

 

Even if they did get an order against you and you managed to convince a court you could only afford to pay £1 a month, what would happen if you owned a house?

Not a lot, it is highly unlikely a civil debt such as this would be able to obtain a charging order and/or to force the sale of the house for something as trivial as this.

You may end up with a charge registered against your property. Should they find out you are working, you could end up with an attachments of earning order against you.

As I said before, highly unlikely, and a AoE is usually when other methods of enforcement have failed or reserved for govt agencies.

 

Fastrack claims can end up in large fees if you lose.

And why should a £500 claim end up in fast track? The limit for SCC is £5000, and there is nothing exceptional about this type of case which would justify fasttracking it. :-?

 

Why are you trying to alarm OP?

[Bookworm]

Thanks people for your replies and help, I will first send them a letter making them provide concrete evidence (looking back I'm not sure I did download the film, I may but I'm definately not sure) if they come back with this then I guess I'm gonna have to get some legal advice.

 

I would be able to provide proof to pay minimum a month because I really am on a low wage and my expenditure leaves very little for living, I am also in rented accommodation so there's no chance these robbers can take my flat off me

 

Once again thanks for your help, if any new readers are reading this and have had a run in, especially if you have got as far as court, let me/us know how you got on.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark

I'd strongly advise you not to say anything to the effect that you "may" have done, as they'll use that to coerce you into paying. Say nothing beyond: "prove it, and by prove it I mean proof that will convince a judge that on the balance of probabilities I did this, because from where I am standing, you have no proof whatsoever".

[Bookworm]

According to Watchdog's report, the letter ran to 30 pages, so posting it could be time-consuming.

[Bookworm]

The letter is 21 pages long (longer if the ISP's letter is more than a page). Importantly the letter clearly states that it is not permitted to post the letter on any "Fora" and anyone found doing so will be prosecuted.

 

Hence me not posting mine on here

Which just shows more bully-tactics by people who seem to think they own the Internet...

[Bookworm]

i have also reminded them (davenports) that i am in receipt of there unsolicited letter and is impossible to be the subject of copyrite when it was not requested nor was it without predudice so can i post this letter on here...come on bookworm let me post it...if you wish i am willing to have both laptops subjected to deep packet inspection to prove i have not been downloading the offensive material

Sorry, have only just seen it!

 

Not up to me, hun, I haven't been a mod for months now! Best I can advice is report your own post asking for the site team if it's ok or not. ;-)

[Bookworm]

Just imagine! At last a way to silence all those morons who insist on playing their mobile phones music on public transport as loud as they can. My gods, it might be worth it just for that!