2013-07-30

Trying to wrap this one up...

I would like to finally bring this matter to a conclusion.

Taking stock here - your only apparent defence to my claim was your
assertion that I was shareholder and director of the company that owns
titanic.co.uk and that somehow this meant I was not an individual
subscriber.

You now know: (a) that your assertion is factually untrue as I am not
shareholder, director, or even employee of the owner of titanic.co.uk,
and never have been, and (b) that the registrant and registrar of a
domain is unrelated to whether the recipient of an email is an
individual subscriber. The regulations define both subscriber and
individual, and this relates to the contract for the relevant
communications services and nothing to do with who owns a domain.

This leaves your only defence defeated.

The facts of the case are that you sent an unsolicited direct marketing
email to an individual subscriber that had not given any prior consent
to the sending of such email and as such you have acted in breach of
section 22 of The Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive)
Regulations 2003. Under section 30 I am entitled to claim damages for
such a breach.

I trust that you now agree these facts. They are supported by evidence.

You currently have no defence to this claim. You have, however, stated
that you will not be settling my claim, confirming that discussion and
negotiation has now broken down.

Without prejudice, I am prepared to settle the matter in full if you
make a payment of £10 today.

If you are not prepared to settle the matter today, then I am
considering taking legal advice on the value of my claim. In particular,
the consequences of your breach have now led to some 28 emails being
exchanged. Each email uses resources on my Internet connection and
computer systems, wastes my time, causes distraction and annoyance and
distress, and delays reading of other emails. Significant stress has been
caused by you repeated accusations of fraud and scamming. It also breaks
my concentration, which is important for my day to day work designing
and developing software. As you rightly point out, I own and run a
company so disruption to my day to day work has an impact on my final
income. I see from other successful claims by other people under these
regulations that claimants have won amounts ranging from as little as
£270 to well over £1000. It seems to me that with appropriate legal
advice I may find I have severely underestimated the damages I have
suffered and may be in a position to revise my claim.

It is, of course, entirely up to you whether you want to risk not only a
court case (having now exhausted discussions and negotiations) but to
also risk a much higher claim for damages.

If I do revise my claim, I will, of course, give you time to respond to
the revised claim and an opportunity to resolve the matter without going
to court as per the pre-action directions.

I look forward to your prompt reply, and payment.

-- Adrian Kennard

2 comments:

  1. Just a note to say "Please continue - it may feel to you that you're being slightly hilarious - but you're doing what we would want to do, if we had a really understanding boss..."

    ReplyDelete
  2. I assume that he didn't cough up and therefore that he considers your threats as empty as his turned out to be. Ho hum.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are moderated purely to filter out obvious spam, but it means they may not show immediately.

Deliveries from China

I have PCBs made in China (well Hong Kong). This is all my many small PCB projects (not FireBrick). I would rather use UK suppliers but I am...