ACS LAW Chief Andrew Crossley sent for discipline by the SRA

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.(
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 still under investigation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority(SRA), although they have 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 that both Tilly Bailey Irvine to a lesser degree and Gallant Macmillan, will both face the same fate that has befallen the previous companies that they sought to emulate in the near future.

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 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….

7 Responses to ACS LAW Chief Andrew Crossley sent for discipline by the SRA

  1. Pingback: The Grauniad Lacks Clue on The #DEAct? at View From Planet Jamie

  2. anonymous says:

    I wonder what would happen if it was discovered that the ‘pirated material’ monitored by these clever bits of software had its origins with the very people crying fowl? Eg a fishing exercise which necessarily provided its own bait, then blamed the fish for biting.

    Of course this could only happen in the UK where our cable/satalite companies don’t go as far as similar companies on the continent, or in the states.

  3. Anonymous says:

    I believe it was a phising exercise, the material i was acused of was easily found in google and was byte for byte the same file in question. it leads me to speculate that they were the ones making these files available.. again no proof of this and you would likely need reliable tracking software to discover this 😉

  4. I hope law will take it’s own coarse and will fix the liability of crime over accused to make him pay for the bad deeds committed. Some exemplary punishment decision will be welcome step in this case.

  5. Do you know what is the current state of play in this case?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s