Consider this before responding to Dave's Letter

[condmca]

The failure to respond to one of dave's letters WILL NOT lead to default judgements against anyone, despite the fact his letters are sent certified 1st class mail and sound real scary.

Dave cannot win a default judgement against anyone for one's mere failure to respond to Dave's "threat" of suing, which is all dave is really doing when he sends a letter, he's threatening to sue you if you don't give him money and confess your guilt.

Dave has to actually sue someone before he can win a default judgement. Keep this in mind as you decide how to respond or whether to respond to dave's extortion letter. ;)





Original response was posted at the following thread:
http://www.dsschat.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=1967903287#post1967903287

[BubbaHill]

Dave has only sued about 5 to 6% of the people who has
received a letter. So, that leave's you with a 95% chance
you will not be sued. It all depend's on what area, or State
you live in. Dave will sue just enough people, to make the
rest scared enough to settle. Also see statute of limitations.

[thepoet]

Yep, and DirecTV's lawyers are only too happy to sue in civil court if the demand letter's ignored. They only need to document that a reasonable attempt was made to deliver a demand letter in order to bring suit which then results in a summons being served. For a good time, try failing to respond to a summons and see what happens. ;)

[SpinyNorman]

Poet,

The original post refers to not responding or paying at the mere threat of being sued. Why would you immediately go to assuming someone would ignore a summons and that the sky will fall?

I have spoke to a few lawyers and all have said to sit tight.

Do you dig underground?

[Lager]

Originally posted by thepoet
Yep, and DirecTV's lawyers are only too happy to sue in civil court if the demand letter's ignored. They only need to document that a reasonable attempt was made to deliver a demand letter in order to bring suit which then results in a summons being served. For a good time, try failing to respond to a summons and see what happens. ;)

A reasonable attemtp to deliver a demand letter has nothing to do with anything. You do not need a demand letter to sue someone. That is one thing that should tell folks that Dave is full of hot air. They are trying to scare people into settling. If people would just deny everything Dave would have nothing to work with even if they did sue you.

Lager

[mrself_destruct]

True, but it's standard practice to send some type of demand letter or notification of intent to sue before you do actually sue someone. Most people and companies won't sue until after they notfiy someone about their greivance and attempt to settle it.

That being said...there's alotta unknowns determining whether you get sued or not...if you look at the poll in the forum here, and narrow it down to those who have not been sued you have:

15% who have ignored 1st letter...nothing has happened
15% who have ignored second letter...nothing has happened
41% who have responded to the letters with an attorney...nothing has happened.

What this tells me is that it best to either A) ignore the letter and tkae your chances (which seem to be decent) or B) get a good attorney and have them deal with.

Option B seems to be the most effective. Like I've been saying all along...Dave wants the easy pickings...if you have a good attorney respond and you play hardball he's gonna leave you alone...not worth the trouble.

I'm also betting that half of those 30% who have ignored have just bought time as Dave gets enough people to sue together in their respective federal circuit. He's been filing lawsuits with 10-15 defendants named in each one (a very cost effective method). He migth just be waiting to get enough people in a particular circuit to make it worth his while.



Originally posted by Lager
A reasonable attemtp to deliver a demand letter has nothing to do with anything. You do not need a demand letter to sue someone. That is one thing that should tell folks that Dave is full of hot air. They are trying to scare people into settling. If people would just deny everything Dave would have nothing to work with even if they did sue you.

Lager

[RxMan1]

You might want to look at the poll again.

Ignore 1st letter and nothing happened = 15%

Ignore 2nd letter and nothing happened = 25%

Combine those 2 and you get 40%, the same as if you used a lawyer.

[mrself_destruct]

That's right....my bad

Originally posted by RxMan1
You might want to look at the poll again.

Ignore 1st letter and nothing happened = 15%

Ignore 2nd letter and nothing happened = 25%

Combine those 2 and you get 40%, the same as if you used a lawyer.

[JD490]

If you plan on fighting them if they do sue you then I would just ignore the letter. Anyone that receives the letter can decide if he or she wants to fight or settle its that simple. Nothing complicated about it. If you don't have enough information to make that discion then contact one of the attorneys on www.legal-rights.org. I can tell you one thing if you plan on fighting, and using an attorney it will cost more then $3500.00. This is what DirecTV will want to settle. If you think your savy enough to fight them your self then you could save money. Of course you are taking more risk. If you wait till they sue that is if they do it then you want to settle they will want an extra $1000.

[BubbaHill]

How do you know it will cost more to fight? This is all
hear say. If you wait until they sue, it will cost you
more to settle? Where are you getting this information
from?

[m_jonis]

From DTV's lawyers.

To settle BEFORE lawsuit: $3500

To "fight" it, lawyer will charge retainer of $5000 (varies by lawyer)

DTV's lawyers have said if it goes to court (meaning I'm served with a summons) and THEN I settle, the settlement amount magically becomes $4500

[condmca]

Originally posted by m_jonis
From DTV's lawyers.

To settle BEFORE lawsuit: $3500

To "fight" it, lawyer will charge retainer of $5000 (varies by lawyer)

DTV's lawyers have said if it goes to court (meaning I'm served with a summons) and THEN I settle, the settlement amount magically becomes $4500

After reading some of these recent gloom-and-doom posts, I figured I'd bump one of my "don't sweat it" posts back to the forefront.

As for fighting this potential lawsuit, I seriously doubt it'll ever cost any simple end-user in here more than $600 to get one of these frivolous lawsuits dismissed, not the $4500-$10,000 to "fight it" as we read far too often. And this $600 approximation comes after one is actually served a summons (something we know doesn't happen too often, if ever, to the little guy).

If Dave's primary goal is to acquire mass-confessions, maybe he should agree to settle for pennies and not dollars just to increase his legal leverage with the recipients of his "threat to sue" letters...At least that's what I'd do if I was waging his war ;)

[einstein99]

If they have already agreed to settle for 3500.00 they can't arbitrarily bump it up to 4500.00. you can argue the point judicially and have the paperwork to back you up. What is the judge going to think when you point out the fact that they were willing to settle for 3500.00 and now they want more? it shows unreasonableness and a lack of cooperation on their part. If this crap does go to court what do you think the federal judges are going to do when their docket is crammed with piddling-a$$ lawsuits about joe schmoe stealing tv? especialy when there is no evidence other than some contrived intent and wishfull thinking on DTV's part? this is serious yes, but be smart, hire a good lawyer find one that only charges a couple of hundred bucks retainer to fire a letter back to them. DO NOT hire a lawyer that asks for more than 500 bucks for retainer! find one that is honest! I know because I have had both. DTV is a california company and In my opinion this whole suing the end user is horse$hit only a california company would even think about getting away with such a thing because most californians are a bunch of lying, crying, self-pitying sue-happy -----s and believe me I know because I work with a bunch of them.

...End of RANT...

[Arlodawg]

You can shop around for a lawyer if you want, but you better remeber, "you get what you pay for". I've forked over the bucks to fight them as holes. And it wasn't $600 bucks.
When you get your summons, you got 20 days to shop around and them as holes will use 5 or 6 of those 20 days to get the summons to you.
600 bucks for a good lawyer, good luck!!!:cool:

[einstein99]

Christ,
you don't need perry mason, any lawyer can fight this nonsense and win, especially if you have case law to support your defense!
what im talking about is anyone who bought a programmer... unlooper a little harder... but they have to prove you purchased it, received it, and used it for illegal purposes, hell those people who settled should have taken an old pc card, glued a video slot on it and surrendered it to DTV, what can they say? 5000.00 to fight what amounts to a glorified small claims lawsuit? give me a break!

[einstein99]

I still can't believe some of these posts, hasn't anyone used a lawyer before? this is exactly why lawyers are here to handle BS crap like this, this forum isn't going to solve anyones problems, you people need to hire a lawyer its as simple as that!


This message brought to you by the Association of professional lawyers.:cool:

[Fuzzball]

Originally posted by einstein99
Christ,
you don't need perry mason, any lawyer can fight this nonsense and win, especially if you have case law to support your defense!
what im talking about is anyone who bought a programmer... unlooper a little harder... but they have to prove you purchased it, received it, and used it for illegal purposes, hell those people who settled should have taken an old pc card, glued a video slot on it and surrendered it to DTV, what can they say? 5000.00 to fight what amounts to a glorified small claims lawsuit? give me a break!

The settlement aggrement starts out with a non admission of guilt so you have no illegal devices to give them, do you?

Also as the DTV laweyers appear to be on fixed rate schedule dont agree to the proposed settlement, make changes and send it back. If they want you to sub, delete that part. Change whatever you and your attorney come up with and send it back to them. All they can do is say NO. Make the settlement process cost them.

[bandit73]

Originally posted by einstein99
DTV is a california company and In my opinion this whole suing the end user is horse$hit only a california company would even think about getting away with such a thing because most californians are a bunch of lying, crying, self-pitying sue-happy -----s and believe me I know because I work with a bunch of them.

...End of RANT...


You got that absolutely correct !!!!

[Makaha]

Originally posted by thepoet
Yep, and DirecTV's lawyers are only too happy to sue in civil court if the demand letter's ignored. They only need to document that a reasonable attempt was made to deliver a demand letter in order to bring suit which then results in a summons being served. For a good time, try failing to respond to a summons and see what happens. ;)

Wrong poet! They need not send any type of "DEMAND" to bring civil suit. The objective here is to avoid court as that costs money. They would rather send a letter ('bout $1.00 total cost per mailing) and put the fear of a potential suit hoping for a settlement. However, this is not to say they won't sue IF they feel they could win without too much effort or get the defendant to blink first. Ignoring the letter may or may not have consequences. Ignoring a summons will have consequences.