Plusnet will give your personal details to ACS Law with not informing you!!

[#1]

Yeah but don't forget he'd only have come back from his holiday today, so he'll need time to catch up with what's happened, and time to figure out what it all means (and what we can be told).
dick:quote

[#2]

All;
Per Bob's post I am back from holiday - sorry for not being clear on this in my last update.  I'm going to post out an update tomorrow late afternoon / early evening on where are up to with ACS Law.
Thanks,
Fletch

[#3]

Thanks Fletch,
First day back ain't nice 🙂
Hope you had a lot of sun last week as we never did here in the UK.

[#4]

mmm.  reading through the thread here and also having done a search online for these lawyers - including their own website - I have to say they come across as playground bullies.  The best way to deal with people like that is, and always has been, to stand up to them.  Ask them for proof of whatever they are claiming.  Proof that will stand up in court.  The chances are they will not be able to provide it and will not want to waste their valuable time chasing people where they know the chances of success are slim.
Reading their website, where they boast of their prowess at extracting money from people, it struck me that there are parallels with the car clamping industry.  Love 'em or hate 'em, our new Government is keen to get rid of pariahs who prey on the vulnerable and generally make our lives difficult - things like rogue clampers who use the law to extort money from people - usually staying just inside the law themselves.  Clamping by private operators will be banned in November.
If enough net users make their feelings felt about the more shady "copywrite" lawyers  bullying internet users, they just might get the same treatment as the clampers and be legislated out of business.  There would be plenty of young votes in it.  Write to your MPs boys n girls.  For that matter, write to the Law Society if you feel any law firm is overstepping the mark.  The Law Society isn't the fastest moving beast on the planet but it does have teeth.

[#5]

It seems the Law Society are not accepting complaints after October - you have to see some Ombudsperson after that...

[#6]

All;
I want to outline the position I'm going to take with ACS:Law.  Currently, I'm not going to share any reports with the community, and this is unlikely to change in the short term - there are a number of factors in the reason I've taken this decision.  The main reason is because while a number of our customers are unhappy with the approach taken by ACS:Law I have to be confident that any disclosure would not damage any further action Plusnet may choose to take in future, at this point I'm not satisfied this is the case.  I would again ask that Plusnet customers who are concerned about this issue and that have received letter from ACS:Law the NPO of the 19th of November to contact the support team, as to date I've received a very limited response. 
However, this doesn't mean that we are not continuing to review and I remain passionate about raising our customers concerns to ACS:Law about the experience they have received.  Since this was brought to my attention we have had repeated correspondence with ACS:Law, and I assure you we will continue to do so over the coming weeks to seek clarity on a number of issues.  Explicitly, I have asked the legal team again today to respond to a number of points raised in our correspondence with ACS:Law.
 
I also wanted to explicitly answer a number of questions raised recently:
Has Plusnet ever challenged the evidence of the monitoring?
- To date we have not challenged any of the evidence.
Are Plusnet going to challenge the evidence presented in future court order applications made?
- At this point we will review our approach based on each individual application.
Are Plusnet going to start charging the solicitors a fee for processing this data?
- We will charge any solicitors a fee for the data moving forward.
What are PN going to do to help their subscribers who have received letters like this?
- We are going to produce an FAQ, including advice explicit content on seeking advice from Citizen's Advice Bureau, and explaining your rights to complain to the SRA etc and update our internal training processes within the CSC.
Any questions then please ask, or PM me.
Thanks,
Fletch

[#7]

In other words, Plusnet aren't going to do anything substantive - apart from joining with ACS to cash in on this scam.

[#8]

I am not really concerned at this stage whether or not Plusnet will or will not challenge ACS:Law in the future.
This Whole thread is about 3 questions only........
1. Did you receive a report.......yes or no
2. How many customers were sent letters of claim.
3. How many customers have had legal proceedings taken against them.
This is all I have been asking for since the begining.

[#9]

So the only change is that Plusnet are now going to start charging for giving out their customers information, which the customers eventually will have to pay for (if a case ever goes to court).
I am very, very dissappointed.
Corporate f/wits!

[#10]

Thanks for the update Fletch, although I'm pretty sure it's not what a lot of us hoped for.

Quote from: davethir

This Whole thread is about 3 questions only........ 1. Did you receive a report.......yes or no 2. How many customers were sent letters of claim. 3. How many customers have had legal proceedings taken against them.

Well the answer to the first question is obviously 'yes', but as for the second two:

Quote from: Fletch

...Currently, I'm not going to share any reports with the community, and this is unlikely to change in the short term...

So we won't be told by Plusnet how many letters of claim were sent out, or how many of those resulted in a court case.
Fletch, although you said you weren't going into details, can you tell us whether or not you received the information that the NPO says you should have recieved? I.e. do you know how many letters have been sent to PN customers, and how many of those resulted in a court case? I don't want to know details, just a yes or no. Thanks.

[#11]

Quote from: Fletch

Explicitly, I have asked the legal team again today to respond to a number of points raised in our correspondence with ACS:Law.

I too am quite disappointed, but not surprised by this current situation. Read into that what you will.
However, I am hopeful there is some good news possibly forthcoming hinted at by the sentance quoted above.

[#12]

As far as i can see (and i have read it again and again) NOTHING in Fletch's post is advantageous to its customers, it tells us absolutely nothing. It has taken months and yet we are still in the dark.

EDIT : Oh and it isnt about that you 'remain passionate about raising our customers concerns to ACS:Law about the experience they have received'. I dont want you talking to ACS:LAW about how we feel we are being treated, we want you to stop sending yor customers details so ACS can fleece the innocent out of hundreds of pounds!

[#13]

from one of Fletch's answers, PN dont seem to know who have had letters from ACS.  That is why he is asking for copies of letters

[#14]

Quote from: mrmarkus1981

EDIT : Oh and it isnt about that you 'remain passionate about raising our customers concerns to ACS:Law about the experience they have received'. I dont want you talking to ACS:LAW about how we feel we are being treated, we want you to stop sending yor customers details so ACS can fleece the innocent out of hundreds of pounds!

I agree with this. I think the whole point of this thread is to help PN realise that ACS:Law are basically conning innocent people out of money to turn a quick buck, and that PN have the power to stop it simply by refusing to comply with any court orders that ACS:Law tries to get issued. The slightest bit of resistance towards ACS:Law by PN would be enough to make them stop their harassment of PN customers.
I can understand that PN need to make sure they're acting lawfully, which is why people here wanted to get details of how many court cases have actually been realised. If the answer is none (which, of course, it is) then that shows that ACS:Law have absolutely no intention of prosecuting anyone, and so their motivations behind acquiring an NPO are NOT as they stated. If this can be shown to a judge, the court would not issue the NPO, and PN customers wouldn't be getting harassed.

[#15]

I am very disappointed that plusnet aren’t willing to do more to protect my personal details from scammers thats why i will not be renewing my contract in December