Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?

Factory Direct Scotland
328 Clepington Road
Dundee, DD3 8RZ
01382 826781

"Rocket Ron"  wrote in message
news:g40o24$b4h$1@registered.motzarella.org...

> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>
> Factory Direct Scotland
> 328 Clepington Road
> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
> 01382 826781


14258

My treatment to the c****s at http://www.cooperativebank.co.uk

"Zorst"  wrote in message
news:bZydnQOFNNdrn_nV4p2dnAA@posted.plusnet...
> "Rocket Ron"  wrote in message
> news:g40o24$b4h$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> > Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
> >
> > Factory Direct Scotland
> > 328 Clepington Road
> > Dundee, DD3 8RZ
> > 01382 826781
>
>
> 14258
>
> My treatment to the c****s at http://www.cooperativebank.co.uk

Bad form to reply to ones own message I know but for the record the CLI
showed up as: 08001-698914.

Zorst wrote:

>"Rocket Ron"  wrote in message
>news:g40o24$b4h$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?

>14258

£3.75 pm seems a bit excessive...

Rocket Ron wrote:
> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
> 
> Factory Direct Scotland
> 328 Clepington Road
> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
> 01382 826781

TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO, 
silentcallguard, ofcom

http://www.silentguard.co.uk/
http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/
http://www.ico.gov.uk/
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/mofaq/telecoms/silentfaqs/

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:18:54 +0100, Allan Gould
<invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Rocket Ron wrote:
>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>> 
>> Factory Direct Scotland
>> 328 Clepington Road
>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>> 01382 826781
>
>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO, 
>silentcallguard, ofcom
>
>http://www.silentguard.co.uk/
>http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/
>http://www.ico.gov.uk/
>http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/mofaq/telecoms/silentfaqs/

The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your complaint
completely.

-- 
(\__/)  M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

The message 
from Mark  contains these words:


> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your complaint
> completely.


Or if you are very lucky they will tell them they have been naughty and
ask them not to do it again.

MB

In article ,
	Mark  writes:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:18:54 +0100, Allan Gould
> <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>Rocket Ron wrote:
>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>>> 
>>> Factory Direct Scotland
>>> 328 Clepington Road
>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>>> 01382 826781
>>
>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO, 
>>silentcallguard, ofcom
> 
> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your complaint
> completely.

Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that will get
publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct action is the only
way to get the culprit to stop.

Here's a method that has been successful for me:

Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service at
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the registered address
of the company from there. Any business operating within the law will
have the info on their web site any way, but of course businesses which
indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard for the law.

Write to the company at their registered address along the following
lines, substituting your own number, of course:

	The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use of
	telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of
	duration or content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not
	call that number. Further calls made by you to that number
	after receipt of this notice will indicate your acceptance of
	these terms.

Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service, so that
you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and often do
so less plainly than is set out in that notice.

Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.

If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
(England and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total costs
involved. I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if they
didn't stop, which Rocket Ron wanted.

-- 
Tim Clark

>>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>>>>
>>>> Factory Direct Scotland
>>>> 328 Clepington Road
>>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>>>> 01382 826781
>>>
>>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO,
>>>silentcallguard, ofcom
>>
>> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your complaint
>> completely.
>
> Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that will get
> publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct action is the only
> way to get the culprit to stop.
>
> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
>
> Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service at
> http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the registered address
> of the company from there. Any business operating within the law will
> have the info on their web site any way, but of course businesses which
> indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard for the law.
>
> Write to the company at their registered address along the following
> lines, substituting your own number, of course:
>
> The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use of
> telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of
> duration or content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not
> call that number. Further calls made by you to that number
> after receipt of this notice will indicate your acceptance of
> these terms.
>
> Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service, so that
> you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
> solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and often do
> so less plainly than is set out in that notice.
>
> Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
>
> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
> not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
> (England and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total costs
> involved. I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if they
> didn't stop, which Rocket Ron wanted.


Complete rubbish. Such a ltter places no obligation on them to pay and if 
you did sue you would lose.

Peter Crosland

In article <m8GdneWrH4LboPfVnZ2dnUVZ8uqdnZ2d@posted.plusnet>,
	"Peter Crosland"  writes:
>>>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>>>>>
>>>>> Factory Direct Scotland
>>>>> 328 Clepington Road
>>>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>>>>> 01382 826781
>>>>
>>>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO,
>>>>silentcallguard, ofcom
>>>
>>> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your complaint
>>> completely.
>>
>> Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that will get
>> publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct action is the only
>> way to get the culprit to stop.
>>
>> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
>>
>> Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service at
>> http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the registered address
>> of the company from there. Any business operating within the law will
>> have the info on their web site any way, but of course businesses which
>> indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard for the law.
>>
>> Write to the company at their registered address along the following
>> lines, substituting your own number, of course:
>>
>> The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use of
>> telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of
>> duration or content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not
>> call that number. Further calls made by you to that number
>> after receipt of this notice will indicate your acceptance of
>> these terms.
>>
>> Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service, so that
>> you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
>> solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and often do
>> so less plainly than is set out in that notice.
>>
>> Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
>> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
>>
>> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
>> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
>> not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
>> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
>> (England and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total costs
>> involved. I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if they
>> didn't stop, which Rocket Ron wanted.
> 
> 
> Complete rubbish. Such a ltter places no obligation on them to pay and if 
> you did sue you would lose.
> 

Only a court can determine that. Many contracts are set up in a very
similar manner. The terms of the contract have been proposed, the other
party have taken the necessary action to accept them. Whether it is
valid would need to be tested in court for a specific instance. As I
point out, it's only worth doing by those prepared to gamble the total
costs involved. Given that a claim against a company by an individual is
heard in the County Court local to the individual, they may well not
contest it for a small amount, or not turn up and would lose the action
by default.

-- 
Tim Clark

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:54:15 +0100, Tim Clark wrote:

> In article <m8GdneWrH4LboPfVnZ2dnUVZ8uqdnZ2d@posted.plusnet>,
> 	"Peter Crosland"  writes:
>>>>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Factory Direct Scotland
>>>>>> 328 Clepington Road
>>>>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>>>>>> 01382 826781
>>>>>
>>>>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO,
>>>>>silentcallguard, ofcom
>>>>
>>>> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your
>>>> complaint completely.
>>>
>>> Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that will get
>>> publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct action is the
>>> only way to get the culprit to stop.
>>>
>>> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
>>>
>>> Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service at
>>> http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the registered
>>> address of the company from there. Any business operating within the
>>> law will have the info on their web site any way, but of course
>>> businesses which indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard
>>> for the law.
>>>
>>> Write to the company at their registered address along the following
>>> lines, substituting your own number, of course:
>>>
>>> The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use of
>>> telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of duration or
>>> content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not call that number.
>>> Further calls made by you to that number after receipt of this notice
>>> will indicate your acceptance of these terms.
>>>
>>> Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service, so that
>>> you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
>>> solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and often do
>>> so less plainly than is set out in that notice.
>>>
>>> Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
>>> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
>>>
>>> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
>>> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
>>> not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
>>> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm (England
>>> and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total costs involved.
>>> I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if they didn't stop,
>>> which Rocket Ron wanted.
>> 
>> 
>> Complete rubbish. Such a ltter places no obligation on them to pay and
>> if you did sue you would lose.
>> 
>> 
> Only a court can determine that. Many contracts are set up in a very
> similar manner. The terms of the contract have been proposed, the other
> party have taken the necessary action to accept them. Whether it is
> valid would need to be tested in court for a specific instance. As I
> point out, it's only worth doing by those prepared to gamble the total
> costs involved. Given that a claim against a company by an individual is
> heard in the County Court local to the individual, they may well not
> contest it for a small amount, or not turn up and would lose the action
> by default.

Don't pay any attention to Peter Pervert. He knows f**k all squared. Just 
add him to your killfile.

>>>>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Factory Direct Scotland
>>>>>> 328 Clepington Road
>>>>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>>>>>> 01382 826781
>>>>>
>>>>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO,
>>>>>silentcallguard, ofcom
>>>>
>>>> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your complaint
>>>> completely.
>>>
>>> Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that will get
>>> publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct action is the only
>>> way to get the culprit to stop.
>>>
>>> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
>>>
>>> Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service at
>>> http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the registered address
>>> of the company from there. Any business operating within the law will
>>> have the info on their web site any way, but of course businesses which
>>> indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard for the law.
>>>
>>> Write to the company at their registered address along the following
>>> lines, substituting your own number, of course:
>>>
>>> The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use of
>>> telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of
>>> duration or content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not
>>> call that number. Further calls made by you to that number
>>> after receipt of this notice will indicate your acceptance of
>>> these terms.
>>>
>>> Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service, so that
>>> you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
>>> solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and often do
>>> so less plainly than is set out in that notice.
>>>
>>> Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
>>> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
>>>
>>> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
>>> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
>>> not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
>>> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
>>> (England and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total costs
>>> involved. I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if they
>>> didn't stop, which Rocket Ron wanted.
>>
>>
>> Complete rubbish. Such a ltter places no obligation on them to pay and if
>> you did sue you would lose.
>>
>
> Only a court can determine that. Many contracts are set up in a very
> similar manner. The terms of the contract have been proposed, the other
> party have taken the necessary action to accept them. Whether it is
> valid would need to be tested in court for a specific instance. As I
> point out, it's only worth doing by those prepared to gamble the total
> costs involved. Given that a claim against a company by an individual is
> heard in the County Court local to the individual, they may well not
> contest it for a small amount, or not turn up and would lose the action
> by default.


Quite wrong. In order for there to a valid contract there has to be, amongst 
other things, offer and acceptance. Simple inaction in such case does not 
create a binding contract.

Peter Crosland

On 2008-07-01, Arse Cork OK <Thunderbird@Hardy.invalid> wrote:
>
> Don't pay any attention to Peter Pervert. He knows f**k all squared. Just 
> add him to your killfile.

Your cork seems to have fallen out.

-- 
David Taylor

In article <nqydnZfpBPUd6vfVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet>,
	"Peter Crosland"  writes:
> 
> 
>>>>>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Factory Direct Scotland
>>>>>>> 328 Clepington Road
>>>>>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>>>>>>> 01382 826781
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO,
>>>>>>silentcallguard, ofcom
>>>>>
>>>>> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your complaint
>>>>> completely.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that will get
>>>> publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct action is the only
>>>> way to get the culprit to stop.
>>>>
>>>> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
>>>>
>>>> Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service at
>>>> http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the registered address
>>>> of the company from there. Any business operating within the law will
>>>> have the info on their web site any way, but of course businesses which
>>>> indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard for the law.
>>>>
>>>> Write to the company at their registered address along the following
>>>> lines, substituting your own number, of course:
>>>>
>>>> The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use of
>>>> telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of
>>>> duration or content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not
>>>> call that number. Further calls made by you to that number
>>>> after receipt of this notice will indicate your acceptance of
>>>> these terms.
>>>>
>>>> Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service, so that
>>>> you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
>>>> solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and often do
>>>> so less plainly than is set out in that notice.
>>>>
>>>> Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
>>>> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
>>>>
>>>> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
>>>> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
>>>> not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
>>>> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
>>>> (England and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total costs
>>>> involved. I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if they
>>>> didn't stop, which Rocket Ron wanted.
>>>
>>>
>>> Complete rubbish. Such a ltter places no obligation on them to pay and if
>>> you did sue you would lose.
>>>
>>
>> Only a court can determine that. Many contracts are set up in a very
>> similar manner. The terms of the contract have been proposed, the other
>> party have taken the necessary action to accept them. Whether it is
>> valid would need to be tested in court for a specific instance. As I
>> point out, it's only worth doing by those prepared to gamble the total
>> costs involved. Given that a claim against a company by an individual is
>> heard in the County Court local to the individual, they may well not
>> contest it for a small amount, or not turn up and would lose the action
>> by default.
> 
> 
> Quite wrong. In order for there to a valid contract there has to be, amongst 
> other things, offer and acceptance. Simple inaction in such case does not 
> create a binding contract.

I was not suggesting that inaction would create a binding contract.  It
is acceptance by positive action that creates it. As I have pointed out
it would be up to a court to decide whether it is valid in the specific
case judged.  Assertions that it is "quite wrong" add little to the
discussion, and is anyway somewhat irrelevant.

-- 
Tim Clark

>>>>>>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Factory Direct Scotland
>>>>>>>> 328 Clepington Road
>>>>>>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>>>>>>>> 01382 826781
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO,
>>>>>>>silentcallguard, ofcom
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your 
>>>>>> complaint
>>>>>> completely.
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that will get
>>>>> publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct action is the 
>>>>> only
>>>>> way to get the culprit to stop.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
>>>>>
>>>>> Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service at
>>>>> http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the registered 
>>>>> address
>>>>> of the company from there. Any business operating within the law will
>>>>> have the info on their web site any way, but of course businesses 
>>>>> which
>>>>> indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard for the law.
>>>>>
>>>>> Write to the company at their registered address along the following
>>>>> lines, substituting your own number, of course:
>>>>>
>>>>> The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use of
>>>>> telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of
>>>>> duration or content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not
>>>>> call that number. Further calls made by you to that number
>>>>> after receipt of this notice will indicate your acceptance of
>>>>> these terms.
>>>>>
>>>>> Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service, so that
>>>>> you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
>>>>> solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and often do
>>>>> so less plainly than is set out in that notice.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
>>>>> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
>>>>> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
>>>>> not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
>>>>> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
>>>>> (England and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total costs
>>>>> involved. I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if they
>>>>> didn't stop, which Rocket Ron wanted.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Complete rubbish. Such a ltter places no obligation on them to pay and 
>>>> if
>>>> you did sue you would lose.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Only a court can determine that. Many contracts are set up in a very
>>> similar manner. The terms of the contract have been proposed, the other
>>> party have taken the necessary action to accept them. Whether it is
>>> valid would need to be tested in court for a specific instance. As I
>>> point out, it's only worth doing by those prepared to gamble the total
>>> costs involved. Given that a claim against a company by an individual is
>>> heard in the County Court local to the individual, they may well not
>>> contest it for a small amount, or not turn up and would lose the action
>>> by default.
>>
>>
>> Quite wrong. In order for there to a valid contract there has to be, 
>> amongst
>> other things, offer and acceptance. Simple inaction in such case does not
>> create a binding contract.
>
> I was not suggesting that inaction would create a binding contract.  It
> is acceptance by positive action that creates it. As I have pointed out
> it would be up to a court to decide whether it is valid in the specific
> case judged.  Assertions that it is "quite wrong" add little to the
> discussion, and is anyway somewhat irrelevant.


On the contrary it was quite accurate. Perhaps you would like to cite a UK 
case where the sort of notice you suggested has been held to be a valid 
contract?

Peter Crosland

In article <OsudneH09NUnC_fVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@plusnet>,
	"Peter Crosland"  writes:
>>>>>>>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Factory Direct Scotland
>>>>>>>>> 328 Clepington Road
>>>>>>>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>>>>>>>>> 01382 826781
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO,
>>>>>>>>silentcallguard, ofcom
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your 
>>>>>>> complaint
>>>>>>> completely.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that will get
>>>>>> publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct action is the 
>>>>>> only
>>>>>> way to get the culprit to stop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service at
>>>>>> http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the registered 
>>>>>> address
>>>>>> of the company from there. Any business operating within the law will
>>>>>> have the info on their web site any way, but of course businesses 
>>>>>> which
>>>>>> indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard for the law.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Write to the company at their registered address along the following
>>>>>> lines, substituting your own number, of course:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use of
>>>>>> telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of
>>>>>> duration or content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not
>>>>>> call that number. Further calls made by you to that number
>>>>>> after receipt of this notice will indicate your acceptance of
>>>>>> these terms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service, so that
>>>>>> you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
>>>>>> solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and often do
>>>>>> so less plainly than is set out in that notice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
>>>>>> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
>>>>>> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
>>>>>> not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
>>>>>> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
>>>>>> (England and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total costs
>>>>>> involved. I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if they
>>>>>> didn't stop, which Rocket Ron wanted.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Complete rubbish. Such a ltter places no obligation on them to pay and 
>>>>> if
>>>>> you did sue you would lose.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Only a court can determine that. Many contracts are set up in a very
>>>> similar manner. The terms of the contract have been proposed, the other
>>>> party have taken the necessary action to accept them. Whether it is
>>>> valid would need to be tested in court for a specific instance. As I
>>>> point out, it's only worth doing by those prepared to gamble the total
>>>> costs involved. Given that a claim against a company by an individual is
>>>> heard in the County Court local to the individual, they may well not
>>>> contest it for a small amount, or not turn up and would lose the action
>>>> by default.
>>>
>>>
>>> Quite wrong. In order for there to a valid contract there has to be, 
>>> amongst
>>> other things, offer and acceptance. Simple inaction in such case does not
>>> create a binding contract.
>>
>> I was not suggesting that inaction would create a binding contract.  It
>> is acceptance by positive action that creates it. As I have pointed out
>> it would be up to a court to decide whether it is valid in the specific
>> case judged.  Assertions that it is "quite wrong" add little to the
>> discussion, and is anyway somewhat irrelevant.
> 
> 
> On the contrary it was quite accurate. Perhaps you would like to cite a UK 
> case where the sort of notice you suggested has been held to be a valid 
> contract?

I was not suggesting the notice itself forms the contract hence there
will obviously be no case to cite where it does. I don't think further
discussion of this will assist anyone in deciding what course to follow.
I believe that anyone contemplating the course I suggest will be able to
make up their own mind from the suggestion I have put forward and
decide for themselves whether the subsequent exchanges above change that
in any way.

-- 
Tim Clark

>>>>>>>>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Factory Direct Scotland
>>>>>>>>>> 328 Clepington Road
>>>>>>>>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>>>>>>>>>> 01382 826781
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO,
>>>>>>>>>silentcallguard, ofcom
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your
>>>>>>>> complaint
>>>>>>>> completely.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that will get
>>>>>>> publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct action is the
>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>> way to get the culprit to stop.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service at
>>>>>>> http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the registered
>>>>>>> address
>>>>>>> of the company from there. Any business operating within the law 
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>> have the info on their web site any way, but of course businesses
>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>> indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard for the law.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Write to the company at their registered address along the following
>>>>>>> lines, substituting your own number, of course:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use of
>>>>>>> telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of
>>>>>>> duration or content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not
>>>>>>> call that number. Further calls made by you to that number
>>>>>>> after receipt of this notice will indicate your acceptance of
>>>>>>> these terms.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service, so 
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
>>>>>>> solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and often 
>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>> so less plainly than is set out in that notice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
>>>>>>> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, 
>>>>>>> write
>>>>>>> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
>>>>>>> not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
>>>>>>> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
>>>>>>> (England and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total 
>>>>>>> costs
>>>>>>> involved. I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if they
>>>>>>> didn't stop, which Rocket Ron wanted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Complete rubbish. Such a ltter places no obligation on them to pay 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> you did sue you would lose.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Only a court can determine that. Many contracts are set up in a very
>>>>> similar manner. The terms of the contract have been proposed, the 
>>>>> other
>>>>> party have taken the necessary action to accept them. Whether it is
>>>>> valid would need to be tested in court for a specific instance. As I
>>>>> point out, it's only worth doing by those prepared to gamble the total
>>>>> costs involved. Given that a claim against a company by an individual 
>>>>> is
>>>>> heard in the County Court local to the individual, they may well not
>>>>> contest it for a small amount, or not turn up and would lose the 
>>>>> action
>>>>> by default.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Quite wrong. In order for there to a valid contract there has to be,
>>>> amongst
>>>> other things, offer and acceptance. Simple inaction in such case does 
>>>> not
>>>> create a binding contract.
>>>
>>> I was not suggesting that inaction would create a binding contract.  It
>>> is acceptance by positive action that creates it. As I have pointed out
>>> it would be up to a court to decide whether it is valid in the specific
>>> case judged.  Assertions that it is "quite wrong" add little to the
>>> discussion, and is anyway somewhat irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> On the contrary it was quite accurate. Perhaps you would like to cite a 
>> UK
>> case where the sort of notice you suggested has been held to be a valid
>> contract?
>
> I was not suggesting the notice itself forms the contract hence there
> will obviously be no case to cite where it does. I don't think further
> discussion of this will assist anyone in deciding what course to follow.
> I believe that anyone contemplating the course I suggest will be able to
> make up their own mind from the suggestion I have put forward and
> decide for themselves whether the subsequent exchanges above change that
> in any way.


Thanks for confirming that you have no evidence whatsover to support your 
advice.

Peter Crosland

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 21:35:06 UTC, "Peter Crosland"  
wrote:

> >>>>>>>>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Factory Direct Scotland
> >>>>>>>>>> 328 Clepington Road
> >>>>>>>>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
> >>>>>>>>>> 01382 826781
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO,
> >>>>>>>>>silentcallguard, ofcom
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your
> >>>>>>>> complaint
> >>>>>>>> completely.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that will get
> >>>>>>> publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct action is the
> >>>>>>> only
> >>>>>>> way to get the culprit to stop.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service at
> >>>>>>> http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the registered
> >>>>>>> address
> >>>>>>> of the company from there. Any business operating within the law 
> >>>>>>> will
> >>>>>>> have the info on their web site any way, but of course businesses
> >>>>>>> which
> >>>>>>> indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard for the law.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Write to the company at their registered address along the following
> >>>>>>> lines, substituting your own number, of course:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use of
> >>>>>>> telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of
> >>>>>>> duration or content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not
> >>>>>>> call that number. Further calls made by you to that number
> >>>>>>> after receipt of this notice will indicate your acceptance of
> >>>>>>> these terms.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service, so 
> >>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>> you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
> >>>>>>> solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and often 
> >>>>>>> do
> >>>>>>> so less plainly than is set out in that notice.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
> >>>>>>> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, 
> >>>>>>> write
> >>>>>>> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
> >>>>>>> not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
> >>>>>>> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
> >>>>>>> (England and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total 
> >>>>>>> costs
> >>>>>>> involved. I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if they
> >>>>>>> didn't stop, which Rocket Ron wanted.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Complete rubbish. Such a ltter places no obligation on them to pay 
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> if
> >>>>>> you did sue you would lose.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Only a court can determine that. Many contracts are set up in a very
> >>>>> similar manner. The terms of the contract have been proposed, the 
> >>>>> other
> >>>>> party have taken the necessary action to accept them. Whether it is
> >>>>> valid would need to be tested in court for a specific instance. As I
> >>>>> point out, it's only worth doing by those prepared to gamble the total
> >>>>> costs involved. Given that a claim against a company by an individual 
> >>>>> is
> >>>>> heard in the County Court local to the individual, they may well not
> >>>>> contest it for a small amount, or not turn up and would lose the 
> >>>>> action
> >>>>> by default.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Quite wrong. In order for there to a valid contract there has to be,
> >>>> amongst
> >>>> other things, offer and acceptance. Simple inaction in such case does 
> >>>> not
> >>>> create a binding contract.
> >>>
> >>> I was not suggesting that inaction would create a binding contract.  It
> >>> is acceptance by positive action that creates it. As I have pointed out
> >>> it would be up to a court to decide whether it is valid in the specific
> >>> case judged.  Assertions that it is "quite wrong" add little to the
> >>> discussion, and is anyway somewhat irrelevant.
> >>
> >>
> >> On the contrary it was quite accurate. Perhaps you would like to cite a 
> >> UK
> >> case where the sort of notice you suggested has been held to be a valid
> >> contract?
> >
> > I was not suggesting the notice itself forms the contract hence there
> > will obviously be no case to cite where it does. I don't think further
> > discussion of this will assist anyone in deciding what course to follow.
> > I believe that anyone contemplating the course I suggest will be able to
> > make up their own mind from the suggestion I have put forward and
> > decide for themselves whether the subsequent exchanges above change that
> > in any way.
> 
> 
> Thanks for confirming that you have no evidence whatsover to support your 
> advice.

Her never asserted that there was evidence in his original post, other 
than saying it had always worked for him. That is in itself evidence, 
unless you are calling him a liar and demanding proof of his own 
experience.

-- 
Bob Eager
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

The message <OsudneH09NUnC_fVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@plusnet>
from "Peter Crosland"  contains these words:


> On the contrary it was quite accurate. Perhaps you would like to cite a UK 
> case where the sort of notice you suggested has been held to be a valid 
> contract?


Surely the whole point is to scare off the junk callers, if it does that
then it has succeeded.

What else can he do, registering with the TPS has little effect on many
callers.  The TPS, OFCOM and OIC are not interested in seriously taking
on the junk callers.

They should be proactive, get the law changed so that registering with
the TPS (or making known in some other way that you do not wish to
received junk calls) will result in immediate prosecution with serious
penalties.  Then operate a call centre financed from the fines.  Plenty
of lines registered with the TPS, then if a junk callers calls more than
one of the numbers it proves that it was not a mistake.  They should
have forensic access to tracing numbers whether withheld or faked CLID.

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:40:00 +0000, Bob Eager passed an empty day by
writing:

> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 21:35:06 UTC, "Peter Crosland" 
> wrote:
> 
>> >>>>>>>>>> Any idea how to get them to stop or how to piss them off?
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Factory Direct Scotland
>> >>>>>>>>>> 328 Clepington Road
>> >>>>>>>>>> Dundee, DD3 8RZ
>> >>>>>>>>>> 01382 826781
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>TPS, write to them with notice to cease under the DP Act, ICO,
>> >>>>>>>>>silentcallguard, ofcom
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> The TPS will refer you to the ICO.  The ICO will ignore your
>> >>>>>>>> complaint
>> >>>>>>>> completely.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Indeed, they're only interested in high profile issues that
>> >>>>>>> will get publicity.  Individuals don't matter to them. Direct
>> >>>>>>> action is the only
>> >>>>>>> way to get the culprit to stop.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Check the culprits are a limited company. The Webcheck service
>> >>>>>>> at http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/ is useful. Find the
>> >>>>>>> registered address
>> >>>>>>> of the company from there. Any business operating within the
>> >>>>>>> law will
>> >>>>>>> have the info on their web site any way, but of course
>> >>>>>>> businesses which
>> >>>>>>> indulge in dubious practices often have scant regard for the
>> >>>>>>> law.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Write to the company at their registered address along the
>> >>>>>>> following lines, substituting your own number, of course:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> The charge I make for calling my advice line on the ethical use
>> >>>>>>> of telephones at 01632 960476 is £20 per call, regardless of
>> >>>>>>> duration or content. If you do not wish to be charged, do not
>> >>>>>>> call that number. Further calls made by you to that number
>> >>>>>>> after receipt of this notice will indicate your acceptance of
>> >>>>>>> these terms.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Send the letter by Royal Mail's recorded, signed for, service,
>> >>>>>>> so that
>> >>>>>>> you know when it has been received. Remember that accountants,
>> >>>>>>> solicitors etc. often charge for their time on the phone, and
>> >>>>>>> often do
>> >>>>>>> so less plainly than is set out in that notice.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further
>> >>>>>>> calls arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would
>> >>>>>>> work.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't
>> >>>>>>> pay, write
>> >>>>>>> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if
>> >>>>>>> they do not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line
>> >>>>>>> process at
>> >>>>>>> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
>> >>>>>>> (England and Wales only) if you're prepared to gamble the total
>> >>>>>>> costs
>> >>>>>>> involved. I think that might qualify as pissing them off, if
>> >>>>>>> they didn't stop, which Rocket Ron wanted.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Complete rubbish. Such a ltter places no obligation on them to
>> >>>>>> pay and
>> >>>>>> if
>> >>>>>> you did sue you would lose.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> Only a court can determine that. Many contracts are set up in a
>> >>>>> very similar manner. The terms of the contract have been
>> >>>>> proposed, the other
>> >>>>> party have taken the necessary action to accept them. Whether it
>> >>>>> is valid would need to be tested in court for a specific
>> >>>>> instance. As I point out, it's only worth doing by those prepared
>> >>>>> to gamble the total costs involved. Given that a claim against a
>> >>>>> company by an individual is
>> >>>>> heard in the County Court local to the individual, they may well
>> >>>>> not contest it for a small amount, or not turn up and would lose
>> >>>>> the action
>> >>>>> by default.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Quite wrong. In order for there to a valid contract there has to
>> >>>> be, amongst
>> >>>> other things, offer and acceptance. Simple inaction in such case
>> >>>> does not
>> >>>> create a binding contract.
>> >>>
>> >>> I was not suggesting that inaction would create a binding contract.
>> >>>  It is acceptance by positive action that creates it. As I have
>> >>> pointed out it would be up to a court to decide whether it is valid
>> >>> in the specific case judged.  Assertions that it is "quite wrong"
>> >>> add little to the discussion, and is anyway somewhat irrelevant.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On the contrary it was quite accurate. Perhaps you would like to
>> >> cite a UK
>> >> case where the sort of notice you suggested has been held to be a
>> >> valid contract?
>> >
>> > I was not suggesting the notice itself forms the contract hence there
>> > will obviously be no case to cite where it does. I don't think
>> > further discussion of this will assist anyone in deciding what course
>> > to follow. I believe that anyone contemplating the course I suggest
>> > will be able to make up their own mind from the suggestion I have put
>> > forward and decide for themselves whether the subsequent exchanges
>> > above change that in any way.
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks for confirming that you have no evidence whatsover to support
>> your advice.
> 
> Her never asserted that there was evidence in his original post, other
> than saying it had always worked for him. That is in itself evidence,
> unless you are calling him a liar and demanding proof of his own
> experience.

Game, set and match to Bob Eager! ROFL......

-- 
begin  oefixed_in_2005.exe

>> Thanks for confirming that you have no evidence whatsover to support your
>> advice.
>
> Her never asserted that there was evidence in his original post, other
> than saying it had always worked for him. That is in itself evidence,
> unless you are calling him a liar and demanding proof of his own
> experience.

He stated and I quote verbatim.

"Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.

If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
(England and Wales only)"

My point is, and has been throughout the thread, that sending a letter such 
as he recomended did not legally bind the recipient in any way, and thus was 
not a basis on which they could be successfully sued. In fact the suggestion 
is a well known urban myth that has often been repeated even though it is 
quite wrong. Sending such a letter might put the recipient off but there is 
no guarantee that it would. I have no idea if he was telling the truth, but 
I do know that his knowledge of law in the this respect is minimal.

Peter Crosland

On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 08:23:31 +0100, Peter Crosland wrote:

>>> Thanks for confirming that you have no evidence whatsover to support
>>> your advice.
>>
>> Her never asserted that there was evidence in his original post, other
>> than saying it had always worked for him. That is in itself evidence,
>> unless you are calling him a liar and demanding proof of his own
>> experience.
> 
> He stated and I quote verbatim.
> 
> "Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
> 
> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do not
> pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm (England
> and Wales only)"
> 
> My point is, and has been throughout the thread, that sending a letter
> such as he recomended did not legally bind the recipient in any way, and
> thus was not a basis on which they could be successfully sued. In fact
> the suggestion is a well known urban myth that has often been repeated
> even though it is quite wrong. Sending such a letter might put the
> recipient off but there is no guarantee that it would. I have no idea if
> he was telling the truth, but I do know that his knowledge of law in the
> this respect is minimal.
> 
> Peter Crosland

I think it is fair to say that if you write and state your terms - and no 
objection is received - you have the basis of a contract. You don't need 
to sign anything for an implied contract to be perfectly valid AFAIR. You 
may have some redress under the unfair terms and conditions framework, 
but other than that it would seem perfectly valid and safe to test at a 
County Court level if needed.

Furthermore, unwanted and unwelcome calls could fall foul of harassment 
law under the offences against the person framework, leaving the victim 
to sue the caller.

Perhaps you need to check your legal understanding. It takes more to be a 
man of the law than sitting in uk.legal all day long.

I have trimmed the below heavily in a manner I believe to be fair and
accurate. The original posts should all be available further up the
thread for readers to make their own judgement.

In article <486b1e0b$0$2915$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>,
	Klunk  writes:
> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:40:00 +0000, Bob Eager passed an empty day by
> writing:
> 
>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 21:35:06 UTC, "Peter Crosland" 
>> wrote:
>> 
..
Tim Clark> Here's a method that has been successful for me:
...
Peter Crosland> Complete rubbish.
...
Peter Crosland> Perhaps you would like to cite a UK case where the
Peter Crosland> sort of notice you suggested has been held to be a
Peter Crosland> valid contract?
..
Tim Clark> I was not suggesting the notice itself forms the contract
Tim Clark> hence there will obviously be no case to cite where it does.

Peter Crosland> Thanks for confirming that you have no evidence
Peter Crosland> whatsover to support your advice.

>> He never asserted that there was evidence in his original post, other
>> than saying it had always worked for him. That is in itself evidence,
>> unless you are calling him a liar and demanding proof of his own
>> experience.
> 
> Game, set and match to Bob Eager! ROFL......

Yes, I liked Bob's response. Peter Crosland's contributions follow the
typical pattern often seen in usenet news discussions, best illustrated
by this more extreme example:

Poster 1 provides a detailed and serious account of the composition of
the lunar surface.

Poster 2 interjects, "Complete rubbish!" adding, "Perhaps you would
like to provide evidence that the Moon is made from green cheese."

Poster 1 sensibly replies, "Of course I can't, since I am not suggesting
that it is."

Poster 2 responds, "Ah ha, thanks for confirming you have no evidence
to support what you say."

Continued reasoned discussion is rarely possible beyond that point.
The typical usenet path is for it then to degenerate into silly name
calling. This is not necessary; the appropriate response is to suggest
that readers consider the interaction and come to their own conclusion.
This I did, earlier in the thread. I will not fall into the trap of
thinking the whole purpose is to think about and duel with the other
poster. Instead, I remember that usenet consists of a wide readership,
most of whom will have made up their own minds on an exchange before it
degenerates.

Not that I'm criticising Bob Eager's response in any way. As ever, he
gets to the nub of the matter in far less words than I have used.

-- 
Tim Clark

In article <hMednWQn5qxpsfbVnZ2dnUVZ8u2dnZ2d@posted.plusnet>,
	"Peter Crosland"  writes:
>>> Thanks for confirming that you have no evidence whatsover to support your
>>> advice.
>>
>> Her never asserted that there was evidence in his original post, other
>> than saying it had always worked for him. That is in itself evidence,
>> unless you are calling him a liar and demanding proof of his own
>> experience.
> 
> He stated and I quote verbatim.
> 
> "Sending the letter has always worked for me, with no further calls
> arriving, so I don't know how well the next steps would work.
> 
> If you do get more phone calls, invoice them. If they don't pay, write
> recorded delivery telling them you will take court action if they do
> not pay. Then you could sue them, mostly an on-line process at
> http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm
> (England and Wales only)"
> 
> My point is, and has been throughout the thread, that sending a letter such 
> as he recomended did not legally bind the recipient in any way, and thus was 
> not a basis on which they could be successfully sued. In fact the suggestion 
> is a well known urban myth that has often been repeated even though it is 
> quite wrong. Sending such a letter might put the recipient off but there is 
> no guarantee that it would. I have no idea if he was telling the truth, but 
> I do know that his knowledge of law in the this respect is minimal.

The urban myth, which Peter Crossland seems to be suggesting I support,
is that contracts can be set up by unilateral action. I have never
suggested that.  Contracts require bilateral agreement. A court can
decide if the necessary bilateral agreement has taken place, if the
contract is valid as a result, and if it has been broken.

The urban myth raised here plays the part of the "Moon is made of Green
Cheese" analogy I make in another post.

-- 
Tim Clark

On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 09:00:38 +0100, Tim Clark passed an empty day by
writing:

> I have trimmed the below heavily in a manner I believe to be fair and
> accurate. The original posts should all be available further up the
> thread for readers to make their own judgement.
> 
> In article <486b1e0b$0$2915$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>,
> 	Klunk  writes:
>> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:40:00 +0000, Bob Eager passed an empty day by
>> writing:
>> 
>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 21:35:06 UTC, "Peter Crosland" 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
> ..
> Tim Clark> Here's a method that has been successful for me: ...
> Peter Crosland> Complete rubbish.
> ...
> Peter Crosland> Perhaps you would like to cite a UK case where the Peter
> Crosland> sort of notice you suggested has been held to be a Peter
> Crosland> valid contract?
> ..
> Tim Clark> I was not suggesting the notice itself forms the contract Tim
> Clark> hence there will obviously be no case to cite where it does.
> 
> Peter Crosland> Thanks for confirming that you have no evidence Peter
> Crosland> whatsover to support your advice.
> 
>>> He never asserted that there was evidence in his original post, other
>>> than saying it had always worked for him. That is in itself evidence,
>>> unless you are calling him a liar and demanding proof of his own
>>> experience.
>> 
>> Game, set and match to Bob Eager! ROFL......
> 
> Yes, I liked Bob's response. Peter Crosland's contributions follow the
> typical pattern often seen in usenet news discussions, best illustrated
> by this more extreme example:
> 
> Poster 1 provides a detailed and serious account of the composition of
> the lunar surface.
> 
> Poster 2 interjects, "Complete rubbish!" adding, "Perhaps you would like
> to provide evidence that the Moon is made from green cheese."
> 
> Poster 1 sensibly replies, "Of course I can't, since I am not suggesting
> that it is."
> 
> Poster 2 responds, "Ah ha, thanks for confirming you have no evidence to
> support what you say."
> 
> Continued reasoned discussion is rarely possible beyond that point. The
> typical usenet path is for it then to degenerate into silly name
> calling. This is not necessary; the appropriate response is to suggest
> that readers consider the interaction and come to their own conclusion.
> This I did, earlier in the thread. I will not fall into the trap of
> thinking the whole purpose is to think about and duel with the other
> poster. Instead, I remember that usenet consists of a wide readership,
> most of whom will have made up their own minds on an exchange before it
> degenerates.
> 
> Not that I'm criticising Bob Eager's response in any way. As ever, he
> gets to the nub of the matter in far less words than I have used.

and without top and bottom posting in the same follow up too . . .
Can you prove the moon is *not* made of green cheese? Have you been there?

-- 
begin  oefixed_in_2005.exe

Tim Clark  wrote 

> > My point is, and has been throughout the thread, that sending a
letter such 
> > as he recomended did not legally bind the recipient in any way, and
thus was 
> > not a basis on which they could be successfully sued. In fact the
suggestion 
> > is a well known urban myth that has often been repeated even though
it is 
> > quite wrong. Sending such a letter might put the recipient off but
there is 
> > no guarantee that it would. I have no idea if he was telling the
truth, but 
> > I do know that his knowledge of law in the this respect is minimal.
> 
> The urban myth, which Peter Crossland seems to be suggesting I
support,
> is that contracts can be set up by unilateral action. I have never
> suggested that.  Contracts require bilateral agreement. A court can
> decide if the necessary bilateral agreement has taken place, if the
> contract is valid as a result, and if it has been broken.

Yes.

To set out the argument.

The letter is the offer.

Making one or more subsequent phone calls is evidence of acceptance.

Of course the phone spammer can send along someone negate that by
giving  evidence on how the calls came to be made, produce their
records and so forth but if they don't choose to be embarrassed (by,
eg, questions about their TPS checks), too bad for their case.

I recall discussion here on a company which sent out invoices for calls
to their (ordinary 020) number, calling back to get address details.

-- 
Mike D