ACS to leave pirates alone - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

ACS to leave pirates alone

sancho1983 Avatar
5y, 11m agoPosted 5 years, 11 months ago
"A lawyer has dramatically withdrawn from pursuing alleged illegal file-sharers in the middle of a court case he brought.......He cited criminal attacks and bomb threats as reasons"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12253746

About time, I dread to think how many people have just paid the £500 or whatever he was demanding.
sancho1983 Avatar
5y, 11m agoPosted 5 years, 11 months ago
Options

All Comments

(14) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
#2
i had dealings with these and Davenport Lyons. Lots and lots of people paid and thats why they kept sending out letters. I passed all the info i had to trading standards when Davenport were sending them. They then passed all the cases onto ACS. I wonder if anyone who paid would be able to get their money back?
#3
but in a statement read to the court, solicitor Andrew Crossley, said he had now ceased all such work.

He cited criminal attacks and bomb threats as reasons.


Right. Here's me thinking he'd stopped work because he'd been barred from the profession by the Solicitors Regulation Authority for persistently breaking the law in his company's attempts to bully money from people, too.
banned#4
dxx
but in a statement read to the court, solicitor Andrew Crossley, said he had now ceased all such work.

He cited criminal attacks and bomb threats as reasons.


Right. Here's me thinking he'd stopped work because he'd been barred from the profession by the Solicitors Regulation Authority for persistently breaking the law in his company's attempts to bully money from people, too.


Got a link to that decision please? I knew he was being investigated but wasn't aware it was over, couldn't see anything on the sra site about it, thanks
#5
colinsunderland
dxx
but in a statement read to the court, solicitor Andrew Crossley, said he had now ceased all such work.

He cited criminal attacks and bomb threats as reasons.


Right. Here's me thinking he'd stopped work because he'd been barred from the profession by the Solicitors Regulation Authority for persistently breaking the law in his company's attempts to bully money from people, too.


Got a link to that decision please? I knew he was being investigated but wasn't aware it was over, couldn't see anything on the sra site about it, thanks


I don't, sorry. I just read about it on Encyclopaedia Dramatica, in a page that seems to have now been deleted.
#6
dxx
colinsunderland
dxx
but in a statement read to the court, solicitor Andrew Crossley, said he had now ceased all such work.He cited criminal attacks and bomb threats as reasons.
Right. Here's me thinking he'd stopped work because he'd been barred from the profession by the Solicitors Regulation Authority for persistently breaking the law in his company's attempts to bully money from people, too.
Got a link to that decision please? I knew he was being investigated but wasn't aware it was over, couldn't see anything on the sra site about it, thanks
I don't, sorry. I just read about it on Encyclopaedia Dramatica, in a page that seems to have now been deleted.

Still under investigation I believe but he has allegedly set up a new company to collect out of court settlements from file sharers GCB Limited
banned#7
He cited criminal attacks and bomb threats as reasons

LOL - more likely they knew they would lose and gave up throwing more good money after bad

GREAT RESULT!
banned#8
I doubt there is an ounce of truth in the threats claimed, but I would truly lmfao if they got a damned good kicking.

There is something severely wrong with the laws of this country when this blackmailing activity is allowed to continue. Shameful.
banned#9
oh dear, poor mr crossley, now he's closed acs and media cat

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2011/feb/04/acs-law-mediacat-close-filesharing
#10
I dread to think how many people have just paid the £500 or whatever he was demanding.


be interesting to know what happens to those that have paid up the £500, would they be entitled to their money back ?
#11
What they seemed to do was, (complete law noob so forgive me if this makes no sense lol) get the details from the ISP using a court order for a case they never followed up. After having the details of the person, they then used those details in a separate case that allowed them to demand money to drop the case.

In the original case that they used to get the details, they couldn't demand money and in the second case where they could, they couldn't demand the details from an ISP about a specific IP address. This is why it was deemed a little dodgy and why they got attacked the way they did.

Unfortunately, if you paid the amount in the letter they sent you, you basically admitted your guilt to case #1 and #2, so the chance of any sort of refund is about a bazillion to one.
#13
Ha ha ha, excellent!
#14
Garrrrrr I be over the moon. Now if only I could remember where Polly put me treasure map, garrr.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!