In a startling email between Andrew Crossley and Andrew Hopper QC (concerning collaborating with Tilly Bailey and Irvine), Andrew Crossley dismisses Davenport Lyons efforts (Which he based his whole practice on) as “.. a little bit rubbish at doing this work” and adds “….to arrogant”
What is really interesting is that it appears that Andrew Hopper QC is actually working with ACS:LAW and also Tilly Bailey and Irvine by advising them how best to deal with the SRA.
In the email Crossley continues regarding Davenport Lyons arrogance by stating “…not like me, TBI or the latest brigand Gallant Macmillan”
The link with Gallant Macmillan is unfortunate timing for them in light of the email leak. Gallant Macmillan are back in Court on 4th October to contest the release of an NPO which will give them permission to get lots of further names from the IP addresses they already hold (for the Ministry of Sound).
The original hearing was on the 20th September 2010 but was adjourned as Chief Master Winegarten the presiding Judge had reservations about granting the NPO. This was covered in an article by Torrentfreak
It will be a VERY interesting October 4th when Simon Gallant walks through the door and has to put his case before the Judge, in light of ACS:LAW releasing their emails to the public
To write to Chief Master Winegarten CHANCERY DIVISION, ROOM TM 7.08, THE ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE, STRAND, LONDON, WC2A 2LL
The full email is here
Many people have received a letter from either ACS:LAW or Gallant Macmillan. These letters seem to act like a dragnet in that they may well identify the occasional person who is accused of file sharing who actually did it, but far to many times the dragnet has included many who are wholly innocent of what they have been accused of.
The wording of the letters of ACS:LAW and Gallant Macmillan are VERY similar and they have also used the same “Monitoring” Software.
With the recent news that ACS:LAWs Andrew Crossley is following Davenport Lyons in being referred to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, a lot of people receiving a letter from Gallant Macmillan have started coming forward, claiming innocence.
With all this in mind ACS BORE has obtained a Proforma from the Solicitors Regulation Authority for people to fill out details of the letters they have received, as the SRA are looking to end this practice. This practise after all is very corrosive to the trust that people have in the Legal profession.
Here is a link to help you complete the form that the SRA require. It is a simple form that will not take long at all to fill out. PLEASE DO IT
Solicitors Regulation Authority
Tel: 0870 606 2555
Fax: 0207 320 5964
Here is a link to the previous appearances by Andrew Crossley at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal
This letter sending dragnet of “Speculative Invoicing will ONLY stop when the SRA has a loud and booming voice saying “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, THIS IS NOT JUSTICE” and one of the best ways we can provide that voice is by filling out the form and sending it to them. If YOU do nothing then dont expect ANYTHING to change
It is the news that thousands of people have been waiting to hear. It has been a long time coming but finally the authority that regulates Solicitors in the UK the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has finally referred Andrew Crossley head of ACS:LAW to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT).
Crossley is no stranger to the Tribunal he has already appeared TWICE before (http://www.sra.org.uk/documents/consumers/SDT/Crossley%209346.05_0206.pdf)
From this Transcript of his SECOND appearance on 2nd February 2006 it can be seen in the summary
“At a hearing on 31st October 2002 the allegation that the Respondent had been guilty of conduct unbefitting a solicitor because he failed to file with the Law Society his Accountant’s Reports for the periods ending 31st December 1999 and 31st December 2000 was substantiated.”
One has to wonder if a Solicitor who has appeared what will be THREE times can possibly continue in his position. This all follows on from the Davenport Lyons people being referred to the same Tribunal for the same “Speculative Invoicing” plan.
Tilly Bailey Irvine are no longer under investigation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority(SRA), after they quit the “Speculative Invoicing” that their were doing.
A new business called Gallant Macmillan has recently started the same kind of plan, representing the Ministry of Sound”. It would seem on the balance of probability Gallant Macmillan, will face the same fate that has befallen the previous companies that they sought to emulate in the near future. Unless of course Gallant Macmillan take the course of Tilly Baily and Irvine and quit to salvage some vestige of their reputation.
Andrew Crossley has been bragging recently that he has reclaimed a “million pounds for my clients”, a Lawyer with Zuxxez has told ACS BORE “If Andrew Crossley has recouped a million pounds it certainly wasn’t with us”.
It seems the Brains of the operation Terence Tsang has escaped any recriminations maybe as he was just the Para-Legal, but it is strange that he left ACS:LAW to go to Cramer Pelmont shortly after acquiring a “new Monitoring Software” the software that ACS:LAW claims uncovers file sharers and is NOT compromised by anything such as spoofing or cloning. (If it was so perfect as Crossley claims why then the new software acquired by Tsang).
Which? Consumer group have been a major force in this coming to a conclusion and their excellent posts and appearances in the media have been invaluable in keeping this in the spotlight. Indeed such has been their high profile that Andrew Crossley himself wrote a Press Release called “Which? Hunt” which bemoaned what he saw as Which? attempting to hassle the SRA into action. Nothing of the sort of course it was not just Which? but just typing ACS LAW into google will uncover 100′s of links to forums that contain thousands of posts.
Only FIVE Months ago I posted a piece on here regarding the “Davenport TWO” and speculated that it would not be long before Crossley followed in their footsteps, I wonder now how long for the others operating this ghastly method of protecting “rights”
Of course the time taken to deal with this is a joke, as it was with Davenport Lyons, all I can say though is IF the time taken has been because it is a THOROUGH investigation that will result in the STRONGEST possible punishment for these people, then all I can say is it is time well spent.
Of course Andrew Crossley is one of those people who would not smell smoke if his hair was on fire. We await with anticipation what will happen now with the SDT. Exciting times….
For more on this story see the Excellent Torrentfreak Article http://torrentfreak.com/file-sharing-lawyers-to-face-disciplinary-tribunal-100823/
Remember when Lawdit had to “payup” for linking ACS:LAW with Davenport Lyons?
….Well it seems that Lawdit was RIGHT all along. Here is a “screenshot” from Lawdit concerning the issue. From 13th May 2009
And here almost a year later, the truth is exposed from ACS:LAWs own mouth!
Moral for you ACS is that when you LIE online, you will always be caught out!
The News that Lawdit had been censured by ACS:LAW was a blow to many of us who had only then just received these letters. Lawdit have proved to be an excellent Solicitors and very generous with their time and advice.
The Link in all this is again the Shadowy figure of Terence Tsang, who left Davenport Lyons just as the SRA were closing in on them to join ACS:LAW, and now true to previous form he has left ACS:LAW again just as the SRA are closing in on them to.
It remains to be seen if Tsangs new Firm Cramer-Pelmont will continue the sad and depressing episode of persuing innocent people with wild accusations. Of course we DO know that Terence has his OWN “Monitoring” Software now!
This piece is from the Legendary Beingscammed. who was threatened by ACS:LAW for trying to help the Victims of their letters. Originally posted on the 11th May 2009. In light of the TWO Directors of Davenport Lyons being sent by the SRA to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, I though it good that this be posted so all new recipients could see the truth. Thanks ACS:FLAW for pointing this out to me
Topware in Court
Well that was very interesting.I attended the court proceedings this morning between Topware and BE UN LTD, much to the angst of Andrew Crossley. Not sure if he even knew that courts are public and as such anyone may attend and observe (provided that you don’t interrupt / interfere, and you ask the judge nicely).Now the link between Davenport Lyons and ACS: Law became oh so more clear. The link is about as close as possible without them being the same company. Even in the minutes preceding the hearing, a representative of DL was giving prepatory documents to Andrew Crossley for him to use at the hearing…
During the hearing the Master even had to ask if this was the same case that he saw previously with DL, and wasn’t that them in the corridor?
Also in attendance was a Miss Camilla Balleny from Arnold & Porter LLP – Camilla Balleny As far as I could tell, she was representing A&P who represent Virgin Media and BE UN Ltd.
The end result of the hearing today was that this hearing and two others (similar but with other ISPs) until Monday 8th June 11am, same place.
What was so interesting were the claims that Andrew Crossley made to Master Winergarten during the proceedings. That 1500+ letters had been sent out, and that a significant proportion of people pay the demand (35-40%). This is SO much higher than what we (collectively on the forums) had thought. Not sure if it’s bull***t or bravado, but of course there wouldn’t be any docs available to back that up. It was more that he was convincing Master Winergarten that they were doing the right thing, and having success, and that if they weren’t guilty why would they pay etc.
That means that if some 500 people have paid up, each at around £600, that’s £300k going into someone’s pockets. Makes the whole thing worthwhile… almost… until you get stricken off as a lawyer for all this, and get made to pay the money back (perhaps).
I spoke to Camilla Balleny (think I freaked her out a little) after the hearing, and asked her if she knew how they got the IP addresses, and if she knew that the method that they got them was illegal or dubious at best, and had been thrown out of court in other European countries, and that a lawyer got struck off for 6 months for doing this…. Although I wasn’t expecting any answers, her surprise, discomfort and silence spoke volumes. I even offered her to see the letter that ACS Law had sent me, though by this stage I think she just wanted to get the hell out of there.
Camilla – if you’re reading this, the offer stays open, I’m sure plenty of us would be happy to send you format versions of our letters.
So, where from here? Well, I was going to go over to Hanover Square and visit Andrew Crossley, but after seeing him in the flesh, and having him validate in front of me all that we had previously suspected, I just didn’t see the need.
He is taking this seriously, making a lot of money from it, and although seemed a little disorganised he was doing a fair job of convincing everyone else – who either didn’t have the knowledge or information to know better.
The hearings were adjourned because the ISPs hadn’t had time to verify all the facts (times, IPs etc) of the NEW batch of IPs to be churned through this ever growing fiasco. So thank you at least for that much, that the ISPs are checking that they’re not giving out the wrong details this time.
I will continue with my stance of complete denial – although I’m not going to send any correspondence to ACS, as I would actually like for them to take me to court. I would LIKE to see all the EVIDENCE they have against me. I would LIKE to fight this, slam them down and stop all this bullying they are doing.
Stand strong people, and please use whatever means you have available to get the word out to the less informed people that they shouldn’t pay (unless they really want to), to deny deny deny and let’s see what happens when they try to take me to court.
Beingscammed, if you are still about, please email and say hi
Directors David Gore and Brian Miller will stand before a misconduct panel over the bullying letters sent out to people demanding payment and accusing them of illegally sharing copyright material. A scheme since taken on by ACS:LAW with the help of Ex Davenport Lyons Paralegal Terence Tsang
A leading law firm is being investigated over claims that it bullied and harassed hundreds of people wrongly accused of illegal filesharing. The Solicitors Regulation Authority, an industry watchdog, said it is investigating a complaint brought against Davenport Lyons, the London-based solicitors’ firm that has led a number of prosecutions against illegal filesharers. The consumer group Which? first made an official complaint in 2008, after a number of people contacted it to say that they had received letters from Davenport Lyons demanding payment for illegal downloads that were nothing to do with them.