*** WON WON WON *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July *****

[Scammed]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

Will take Monday off and work on it then. Which step shall I take? Look at the ones used by the guys who won their cases or use some of the content of the email I sent to them at the time telling them why I don't think I should pay and how their site was misleading

[Amethyst]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

A mix of both would be best - your witness statement is personal to you - the other guys statements should just be used as a bit of a guide to see how they go together/layout/kind of wording etc. The legal bittys are in your defence, and would go in your skeleton arguments if we get to that, so keep the witness statement mainly to , basically, a chronological liist of On 1/2/2015 I did this, On 2/2/2015 they did that etc.... Have a draft and post it up and we'll give you a hand.

[Scammed]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

Thank you will do

[Scammed]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

Received his witness statement already....

[Amethyst]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

Nice bit of fiction for bedtime reading then xx

Can you send me the call/contact logs and para 6/7 - ( the bit about your case ) and anything else that you think is important in there pls xx Ta xx

[Scammed]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

I will scan the pages at work and email it to you if that's ok?

[Amethyst]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

Of course xxx Thank you

[Amethyst]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

Got them, thank you.

Can you just do para 6 or 7 of the written statement too - should be response to defence or something like that?

[Scammed]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

Sent it for you

[Scammed]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

Apart from my name not one part of that statement is personalised to my case I don't know if it's good or bad

[EXC]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

Apart from my name not one part of that statement is personalised to my case I don't know if it's good or bad

It's good - for you.

[Amethyst]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

You'd think after losing with that exact statement on numerous occasions now he'd have changed it.... but nope, same old crap.

He has put

]''Please view EXHIBIT C to see how much personal data we have on the Defendant. The accusation that they Defendant did not complete our online contract is quite absurd. We do not just have the Defendants email address, phone numbers and postal address we have other data that could have only be provided by the Defendant including the country of birth, town of birth, reason for needing a new passport, time and date of travel. Information that could not have been obtained any other way then the Defendant providing this information on our online form.

We would also like to remind the court that email and text messages have been sent to the Defendants personal account and number and there is no indication that our contact was a surprise or they were unwanted communications. It would appear that the accusation that "it wasn't me" has only arisen when we have made efforts to collect on the money we were promised."

I don't recall you putting anything of the sort in your defence.

Actually looking back you have put this

5. She was misled into believing the Claimant’s telephone helpline and website was the official HM Passport Office website and completed a form online to book an appointment on 4th or 5th August. The Defendant was led to believe any fee stated was the payment to HM Passport Office to obtain her baby boy's passport. Booking an appointment with the HM Passport Office is a free of charge service.

so his Witness Statement is just a pile of poop

[Amethyst]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

And this is just ballhooks I'm afraid. Thousands of customers details are STILL publicly accessible online. I won't go into details of course and the ICO are looking at it ( fricking slowly) but just another example of how full of poop Mr Howard is.

We fully comply with all Data Protection Legislation and are registered with the Information

Commissioners Office (ZA032800). Customer data is never put at risk. The website link for where the Defendants receipt and contract can only be found on a web link that has 25+ random characters to ensure that the URL cannot be guessed indexed by a search engine or is accessible to hackers. An example of a web link that would host a customer's contract would be something like this... htt : www.contract.co.uk d 27476 A reement-29417a154ab8899b78873869 e e5. d

Customers can also access their contract on the SignedContract.org.uk website. In order to access their online account they would need to first enter the correct user name in the URL this makes up the first part of the web address and for a customer called Sarah Peters the URL would either be http://SarahPeters.signedcontract.... Or it could be http://SPeters.signedcontract.... Or it may be http://SarPet.signedcontract..... Our system randomly creates the first part of the web address based on the customer's full name as a security feature.

In addition to this the URL must also contain their unique 5 digit Applicant ID otherwise they will not be presented with the login page. This is similar to a pin number and is unique for each customer. If this example customer was allocated with a 5 digit pin 56310 then they would need to visit the URL. http://Sarahpeters.signedcontract.org.uk/u56310 if the 5 digit pin was incorrect or the first part of the URL which includes the customer name is entered incorrectly 3 times in a row it blocks the user from making further attempts. This prevents unauthorized access of any kind.

Once the consumer arrives on their unique web address (which only they are given) they are required to enter their unique 8 digit password which is only sent to the consumer via to the mobile phone or email address that they provided us when they signed up for our service. If this password is entered 3 times in a row incorrectly it blocks the user from making another attempt.

In regards to processing payments via credit or debit cards we use a merchant who is fully PCI compliant and uses the secure https:// web address. This ensures that customers payment details are safe at all times. We can confirm that our merchant deletes all card details once the payment has been successful and does not retain any sensitive details.

To summarize we are compliant with all Data Protection legislation and never put customers personal data at risk. It has been noted that the Defendant has not provided any evidence of their details being at risk this is clearly because this was not the case.

[Amethyst]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may



Durable medium is NOT a link in an email xx

42. The claimant claims in his witness statement that he sent the Defendant a "copy of the signed contract sent via durable media which is e-mail.''. The Defendant did not receive the contract in a durable form. The exhibit clearly shows that no copy of the signed contract was contained in the email. Rather, there is a link to it on a webpage, which is not a durable medium.

43. The Department for Business Innovation and Skills Implementing Guidance for the Consumer Contracts (Information Cancellation and Additional Charges Regulations) provides that: ''An email is a durable medium. However, information contained via link to a website which may change, and which is embedded in an email is not.''

44. I also rely on Admissibility – Directive 2002/92/EC on insurance
mediation – Concept of a “durable medium” in Inconsult Anstalt v the Financial
Market Authority (Finanzmarktaufsicht) 2010 (Skeleton Exhibit 3) which held that:
''The Court therefore limits itself to concluding that in order to qualify as a
“durable medium”, an Internet site must allow for the unchanged reproduction of the information stored, that is, the information must be stored in a way that makes it impossible for the insurance intermediary to change it unilaterally.''

45. The link to the alleged contract is hosted on the documentsarchive.org.uk website which research by the Defendant has established is owned and operated by the Claimant. It is owned by RAPTOR SMS – the company has changed its name to ‘Five star Doggie Day Care’ and the Director of the company is Mr Richard Howard.

[Scammed]

Re: *** Scammed v BPS - court date 7th July - WS in by 12th June - fee by 22nd may

When do you think I should ring the court to see if we are still ahead on the 7th... Seeing that lost column brings fear in me I might be the first to loose...