Archive
A Limited Ploy? – ACS:LAW and Media C.A.T close together
To those who have endured the letters of ACS:LAW from May 2009, the news is simply stunning, albeit there is an air of cynicism to be had. It is true that ACS:LAW and their symbiotic monster Media C.A.T have ceased trading. It was announced in yet another leaked email, an email sent by Andrew Crossley confirming that not only had he closed his business but to prove the point of connection with his long time friend Lee Bowden, he also announced that Bowden’s company Media C.A.T was also closing up shop.
The SRA as has been reported has already referred Crossley to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal for a THIRD time. The decision to fold BOTH companies just days before a Judge was due to hold a hearing regarding costs and damages, must be to all but the most positive thinking airhead to be in the least suspicious. Can a limited company be held for costs and damages IF it no longer exists?
What is disturbing, it that on the date of the second hearing, Bowden not being present, it has transpired that he was busy setting up another Limited Company…now I know this sounds to unbelievable but it is sadly true. The Company “100 Mile Media” was registered as a domain, as can be seen here.
Lee Bowden is the Managing Director of “Piri Ltd” and the “The Textworks”, as well as Media C.A.T, there will be others I am sure. What is so galling is that it seems that Bowden will be able to walk away from all this “Scot free”, his company being a Limited Company will protect him against costs that would have been surely awarded against him. Bowden was described by ACS:LAW as a “Copyright Expert”, well, in addition to that he has also been a “Public Relations Agency” and also “Building Development”.
We will have to see what happens at 14:00 on Tuesday 8th February at the Patents Court. What will become of the data that ACS:LAW still hold on people? Will it be destroyed or sold off to someone else?
Andrew Crossley acquired a Limited Company called “Larper Ltd” back in April 2010. What is worrying is that come the hearing on the 8th February, unless Judge Birss finishes the practice of “Speculative Invoicing” it can be picked back up by changing limited companies, folding and starting anew, I realise of course there are more parameters involved, ie the NPO granting, which I doubt will be allowed to be given out as freely as in the past.
Also of note is the number of EX ACS:LAW employees busy scratching the name of the Company from their CVs (Leyla Mehru, hello). I believe we need to keep an eye out for the main players activities in all this, Adam Glen, Jonathan Miller, Terence Tsang seem to be the main ones in addition to Crossley and Bowden. We have already seen that Miller plus one other “Ex ACS:LAW employee” were behind GCB Ltd.
These are the details of the companies setup by Bowden and Crossley (I have included Media C.A.T as it seems interesting that it shares the same “Virtual space” as his new Company.
100milemedia.co.uk
Name & Registered Office:
100 MILE MEDIA LIMITED
2 ND FLOOR
43 WHITFIELD STREET
LONDON
UNITED KINGDOM
W1T 4HD
Date of Incorporation: 24/01/2011
Company No. 07503354
http://www.whois-search.com/whois/100milemedia.co.uk
Name & Registered Office:
MEDIA C.A.T. LTD
c/o GATEWAY PARTNERS
43 WHITFIELD STREET
LONDON
ENGLAND
W1T 4HD
Date of Incorporation: 29/04/2002
Company No. 04426555
http://web.archive.org/web/20060402205823/http://media-cat.co.uk/
Name & Registered Office:
LARPER LIMITED
c/o ACS LAW SOLICITORS
20 HANOVER SQUARE
LONDON
W1S 1JY
Date of Incorporation: 06/04/2010
Company No. 07213422
ACS:BORE-2010 in review
The stats helper monkeys at WordPress.com mulled over how this blog did in 2010, and here’s a high level summary of its overall blog health:
The Blog-Health-o-Meter™ reads Wow.
Crunchy numbers
The Louvre Museum has 8.5 million visitors per year. This blog was viewed about 130,000 times in 2010. If it were an exhibit at The Louvre Museum, it would take 6 days for that many people to see it.
In 2010, there were 57 new posts, not bad for the first year! There were 147 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 24mb. That’s about 3 pictures per week.
The busiest day of the year was May 27th with 6,649 views. The most popular post that day was ACS LAW send out Phishing Questionnaires UPDATED.
Where did they come from?
The top referring sites in 2010 were torrentfreak.com, slyck.com, consumeractiongroup.co.uk, ispreview.co.uk, and twitter.com.
Some visitors came searching, mostly for gallant macmillan, andrew crossley, wordpress blog acs law, acs bore, and acs law wordpress.
Attractions in 2010
These are the posts and pages that got the most views in 2010.
ACS LAW send out Phishing Questionnaires UPDATED February 2010
14 comments
Gallant MacMillan “Latest entrants into the hall of Infamy” demand Money for “Ministry of Sound” July 2010
61 comments
“Tilly Bailey and Irvine” Stop sending “Speculative Invoices” to save their Reputation April 2010
10 comments
Davenport Lyons, ACS:LAW, Tilly Bailey and Irvine, SHAME ON YOU March 2010
1 comment
Received a letter from ACS LAW? Dont panic January 2010
3 comments
I would like to thanks Slyck, Enigmax of Torrentfreak and ACS:FLAW, or just Flaw who is a legend! Thanks guys and gals onto 2011……
Musically – Speculate to accumulate: Mass lawsuits and p2p
This is an article from MusicAlly, an industry site.
This article includes contributions from the excellent Beingthreatened.com and your favourite “amateurish shouty, unprofessional” Blog ACS:BORE
Please download the musically Article
Musically is a subscription based website aimed at the industry, but they have kindly released this part of the article.
Thanks also to Enigmax at Torrentfreak
EDIT: Link is now fixed
ACS:LAW still sending out letters AFTER the Leak.
Andrew Crossley - ACS LAW
Lee Bowden - Media C.A.T
After one of the BIGGEST data leaks in UK history adding misery to thousands of people many of them innocent, ACS:LAW seem to be deaf to the cries of reason.
Unbelievably they have continued to send out letters of claim to people they suspect of illegal file-sharing. What it means to be suspected by ACS:LAW is unknown as their monitoring apparatus is NOT available for public scrutiny and indeed in some of the leaked emails even ACS:LAW staff were not convinced by the “Expert Witnesses” that are supposed to have see the software used to identify IP addresses.
Below is part of a scan of a letter sent THIS month (October) on behalf of Media Cat, whose Boss Lee Bowden goes back a long way with ACS:LAW Boss Andrew Crossley.
Lee Bowden “represents” RELISH Adult films that is owned by Jasper Faversham, AKA Jasper Orlando Slingsby Duncombe AKA 7th Baron Feversham. Faversham was disinherited by his Father (Got the title but nothing else), but of course this has NOTHING to do with money does it?
Media Cat are seen as small time chancers in the emails leaked, indeed Lee Bowden seems quite upset that he is not getting his cut, “Everyone is getting eir(sic) bit and I am owed £17k ffs.” Faversham himself does not come across much better “Much looking forward to sending letters to these f$$$ers,”, and that from a LORD no less!
ACS:LAW “Davenport Lyons were rubbish and arrogant”
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
For continuing coverage of the email leak please see TorrentFreak and Slyck
The full email is here
EXCLUSIVE: ACS:LAWs Andrew Crossley and the FIRST Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal
The Notorious ACS:LAW Solicitor Andrew Crossley who has been referred to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal is no stranger AT all. Many Blogs and news articles have stated that this will be Crossleys Second time before the Tribunal however here at ACSBORE we can confirm it will in fact be his THIRD time in front of the Tribunal.
Although the report of the maverick lawyers Second appearance has been available on the SRA Website, the FIRST appearance has been harder to track down, but WE HAVE GOT IT and it makes for some interesting reading.
I have posted the Document for your own perusal and I will not go into to much detail. One of the most striking things is the way that Andrew Crossely uses his health and an unfortunate string of events outside his control as an excuse for not filing his financial report to the Solicitors Regulation Authority that is required to show that a clients finances are not being mishandled.
In the Finding that found Crossley of committing “Conduct unbefitting a Solicitor” which Crossley did NOT accept, is a section where he claims to have been struck Blind with a Stroke at 36, and also troubles with a rogue accountant who “Blackmailed” Crossley by demanding money before the release of paperwork.
The Blackmail charge is a charge that has been used AGAINST Crossley by the House of Lords and many letter recipients who have received his “Pay up or else face Court” Letters, letters that Crossley laughingly calls “an invitation to enter into a compromise”. Maybe his ex Accountants should have used that excuse!
After employing a new accountant Crossley claims that that one also did him wrong bemoaning the “High Cost” of £500 for “Writing one letter and talking to the respondent(Crossley) Twice”
Those innocent people who have received letters of claim for a similar amount might think Crossley got a better deal for his £500 than what they got!
One further point is that Crossley has no problems using his illness as mitigating factors where he has never to my knowledge shown that to any of the people he has sent his “Speculative Invoices” to.
With news breaking the Logistep one of Crossley favoured data managers being BANNED from their country of origin and a group of Solicitors persuing ACS:LAW through the Courts for harrassment, this whole nasty mess might be starting to fade. Let us hope this is true
Andrew Crossleys FIRST appearance (31_10_2002) at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (Please Click for the PDF of the findings)
Andrew Crossleys SECOND appearance (02_02_2006) before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (Please Click here for a PDF of the findings)
How to complain to the SRA about ACS:LAW and Gallant Macmillan
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
Contact Centre Proforma – External Use Doc File
Contact Centre
Solicitors Regulation Authority
Tel: 0870 606 2555
Fax: 0207 320 5964
Email: contactcentre@sra.org.uk
Here is a link to the previous appearances by Andrew Crossley at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal
crossley,andrew_20100826085003
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
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 (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/
The Players Part One: ACS:LAW and friends
This is a post from an earlier Blog but is worth reposting as the Information is VERY Valid and shows those people accusing others in a truer light. It is basically scaps of info and news on the people at ACS:LAW and those who worked with and for them. For later information please see the rest of my Blog especially
http://acsbore.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/lee-bowden-and-media-cat-comming-soon/
and
http://acsbore.wordpress.com/2010/04/05/terence-tsang-undercutting-his-friends/
The Players
each of the following respects, namely:-
(a) He failed to deliver to the Law Society his Accountant’s Report for the 12 month
period ended 31st December 2002 (due by 30th June 2003);
(b) He failed to deliver to the Law Society his Accountant’s Report for the six month
period ended 3rd June 2003 (due by 31st December 2003);
(c) He failed to deliver to the Law Society his Accountant’s Report for the six month
period ended 31st December 2003 (due by 29th February 2004);
Radio interview with Andrew Crossley on the BBC Radio 4 in relation to the mass mailing of claims for money from alleged Copyright Infringement.
Anon: Why arent you commenting Terence? you seem VERY quiet all of a sudden! Questions need answers my friend, what have you to hide?
TezimondoYou are my favourite infringer. It’s a
shame the other infringers dislike you – I find you quite amusing.
AnonNot sure what you mean by that Terence, buy please tell me WHY wonf you answer any questions? oh and by the way, I am NOT an infringer!
TezimondoBecause I don’t need to?
AnonYou are arrogant enough to think you dont need to answer questions? You accuse me of being an infringer? what a nerve, you dont even know me
TezimondoExactly. I don’t know you – why should I answer your questions?
AnonThen why should you call me an infringer? I have shown evidence that YOU are, yet the case against my friend is laughable, and no evidence
AnonSerious, why wont you and your Law firm RELEASE the evidence you have, it looks real bad on your part, why not? you more than an IP surely?
AnonYou are pushing my friend to a breakdown, you and your Law Firm, I find it a disgrace, I realy hope s(he has the strengh to fight your claim
TezimondoI would personally love a court battle. It will look great on my CV. Bring it on I say… if you have the resources.
AnonNo My friend does NOT have the money to fight it, and that is what is so wrong, he is innocent yet a victim of your Money grabbing Firm
AnonThat tells me everything I need to know though I am worrying about my friends healthm you respond about your CV, I mean heartless or what
TezimondoIf it’s affecting your friend’s health then write in and explain the circumstances.
AnonDont think that your firm would care and you know it, you are heartless, worried about your CV and your career, I hope it works out for you
TezimondoI suggest you take down your ‘blog’ before we issue proceedings against you personally.
TezimondoWe do actually, and all circumstances are taken into account when backed up by medical evidence.
AnonI think not, your comment about your CV was it for me, but please tell me WHY you wont release the evidence you have, it is very unusual
AnonYou must realise that if you go to Court without releasing the Evidence you have it will go against you? my friends letter shows an IP addy!
TezimondoAccuracy of the Logistep system is backed up by a court certified experts report. Evidence from isp backed up by a witness statement.
AnonBTW out of all the stuff I have posted here, is any of it Untrue? I would hate to misrepresent the facts!
AnonI gotta get to bed, its late here in France! 3:15 keep in touch Terence!
TezimondoAll will be revealed at trial… if someone actually challenges us. All cases so far we have won or infringers have defaulted on.
AnonWhy do they default? to far to travel? very clever system you have, but not really justice is it? Why revealed at trial? why not now?
TezimondoAccuracy of the Logistep system is backed up by a court certified experts report. Evidence from isp backed up by a witness statement.
Anoncourt certified experts? so tell me who? The Logistep is flawed you must know that, even here in france it was thrown out.
TezimondoI’m not at liberty to disclose their names. They exist and will be produced if necessary in court.
AnonSo what really is the thinking here I mean this is not about infringers is it? it is a money making scheme right?
TezimondoWe have issued a decent number of cases. Not all cases are reported you know. Many reasons why they would default.
TezimondoDo you really think we have issued on only 4 cases? Sometimes they contest it and back out at the last minute. I enjoy being in court.
AnonI didnt realise you had issued on ANY cases as ACS LAW, are you ex Davenport then Terence, I know a few went to ACS are you one of them?
AnonBy the way, what is the reason Nicola Beale left? I know she is at Newmans and she has been contacted, as she will have to appear at court
TezimondoClient’s want to protect their rights. Simple as that. We act on their instructions and get paid for it. We’re called a law firm.
Tezimondobut seriously our logo’s are copyrighted, your website is defamatory. We could easily get them shut down and you would have to pay costs.
AnonNow now Terence easy tiger, it is NOT my logo, I just thought it summed up your actions, I rather like it. You gonna track me down for it!
AnonI am not the only one to use it, and you really need to build up the reputation of your Law firm by honest means, do a google search of ACS
AnonTwitter is hardly a website BTW it is a social messenging place.about 8 hours ago
TezimondoI’m ex DL – fantastic top UK firm for media work. No idea about Nicola, left shortly after I joined. People move around, it’s normal.
AnonInteresting that you are DL, why go to a 2 bit firm like ACS? were you sacked? or just went to save the name of DL?
TezimondoThink of your comments as you wish. I have other work to be getting on with but if instructed to, I will have to issue a claim against you.
AnonFor a twitter background? come off it, you are joking right? I have to go anyway! thx for the chat
Anonahh I remember you did that to a guy who hosted beingscammed! but not beingthreatened, interesting, makes me wonder of acs involvement
TezimondoI like a challenge…. you’re on!
Anon err what challenge? You are threatening me over a Twitter background?
TezimondoYes but I decided to not pursue him for costs and damages. Was feeling nice.
Anonoh your all heart Terence, how on earth do you sleep at night, like a baby I bet, no conscience, I pity you I really do
TezimondoDefamatory use of someone’s logo. Defamatory comments in general.
AnonDefamatory? nonsense, I have only posted the truth, are you denying you cybersquatted? come off it,
AnonWhat content on here do you find defamatory? I asked you this a while ago, what is untrue?
TezimondoI’m not going to run into a legal argument here with you on the definition of Defamation. You should seek legal advice if unclear.
TezimondoI’m just asking you to remove your defamatory content. Would you prefer it if I didn’t and just issued proceedings?
AnonThere Terence is that better? Some of us cant afford legal advice which is why I know this is all wrong
AnonI am no lawyer but I am pretty sure accusing me of being an infringer is defamation. and you have done that a number of times now
TezimondoTell your friend to write to me personally. I will look into her case. Make sure she details the effect on her health.
AnonShe’s not capable of that not at the moment, but thankyou for your concern, Passions run high, it is not personal, hate to see her like it
TezimondoI’m going to sleep. I’m not as bad as you make out. Tell your friend to write in to me.
Anonnight night!
TezimondoAlso, I would appreciate the things you write about me taken off your blogs.
TezimondoGet someone to write in on her behalf. Address it to me.
Terence Tsang gets caught trying to hijack Morgan Stanleys name
http://www.adrforum.com/domains/decisions/896636.htm
Terence Tsang gets caught trying to hijack Old National Bancorps Name
http://domains.adrforum.com/domains/decisions/869455.htm
A few more scraps of info on Terence Tsang
If u’r after Jap cars visit my site
I’ll beat any offer that you get by a big margin…
Contact me also on terence@autoadvan.co.uk for tuning products like…
autoadvan.co.ukRegistrant:
Auto Advan
Registrant type:
Unknown
Registrant’s address:
11 rupert law close
quorn
UK
LE12 8PE
United Kingdom
Registrar:
Key-Systems GmbH [Tag = KEY-SYSTEMS-DE]
URL: http://www.Key-Systems.net
& ;nbs p; Relevant dates:
Registered on: 17-Jun-2003
Renewal date: 17-Jun-2011
Last updated: 21-Jul-2009
haha sick film!!
i cudn’t get an errection for 2 months after watching it
dl’ed it and not played! (NAME REMOVED) @Tezimondo Sage isn’t suitable for law firms. There are better options for law firms. Tried Law Soc’s Software Solutions Guide?
2:52 PM Apr 3rd from web
(Tezimondo) @(NAME REMOVED) have you tried http://www.guru.com? I use it frequently to find freelance writers. Some very talented people on there at good prices.
3:26 AM Apr 15th from web
*There is NO suggestion here that(NAME REMOVED) are anything but an innocent party in this, and were merely advising Tsang without knowing his background.
http://devis-trade.com/ (Site has been taken down but please look here for registation details http://whois.domaintools.com/devis-trade.com)
The previous and/or current name is also Motto AG but I can’t find much on them. I only post this out of curiosity as they appear to be selling an e-cigarette!!“We distribute Cigartec® products different from many others on the market. These products give an extremely high satisfaction rate to reseller and consumer.”
Members of the Board:
Leszek Oginski
Richard M. Schneider
ACS:LAW a “No Show” on the “One Show”
Well ACS:LAWs Andrew Crossley had his chance to defend his “Foolproof” method of identifying people file sharing and he blew it. Not only did he blow it but he has now taken his reputation even lower than anyone previously thought possible.
The One show had been putting together a segment relating to a number of complaints from innocent people who have been accused by Crossley and his cohorts (Logistep/Digirights/Digiprotect/NG3Systems)
ACS:LAW has been investigated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority(SRA) as have the previous Solicitors who attempted to execute this so called “Foolproof” method which amounts to nothing more than “Speculative Invoicing”.
It is a way for Solicitors to recoup money for rights owners whose products are usually so bad that no one has bought them, in the words of one of these “People” to “Generate alternative revenue streams”
On the “One Show” Program, it clearly showed there were problems with the way ACS:LAW go about their business. It highlighted Three innocent people, Lawdits Michael Coyle was damning in his assessment. Which? Legal Expert Deborah Prince also appeared
Andrew Crossley is standing now on the precipice, the Solicitors Regulation Authority(SRA) are due to conclude their investigation against him at the end of this month, the previous Solicitors who attempted this “Scheme” Davenport Lyons, have already been referred to the disciplinary tribunal at a date still to be set.
What was Andrew Crossleys reason for NOT appearing on the show? Believe it or not, it was some hogwash about “Not prejudicing the SRA investigation into my business”. Well I say that is a very cowardly reason. Of course one has to wonder wether he considers he HAS a reputation to save anymore.
This “Scheme” of course is NOT Andrew Crossleys. The “Speculative Invoicing Scheme” is merely a conduit that IF ACS:LAW are forced to stop will be picked up by some other chancers. Already Davenport Lyons have attempted and then ceased, as mentioned they are awaiting disciplinary measures. Tilly Bailey Irvine attempted it and then withdrew, and now of course we have another firm called Gallant Macmillan
Here are some GOOD reasons for anyone who has received a letter from these “People” to consider
The practice has been openly and repeatedly condemned in the House of Lords
The practice has been openly and repeatedly condemned by Which? 2
The practice has been exposed on BBC’s Watchdog
The practice has been exposed on BBC’s The One Show
The practice has been exposed in the red-top and broadsheet press
Online coverage of the issue in all kinds of digital media has been huge
There is a thriving online support community 2
Davenport Lyons were forced to withdraw from the scheme
ACS:Law is under investigation by the SRA with this due to conclude by the end of the month
We await The SRAs conclusion and we also await a response from Andrew Crossley, although don’t hold your breath….
