Slyck.com
 
Slyck Chatbox - And More

Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

For discussion of the threatened legal action surrounding the alleged filesharing of pornography, computer games and music. (Golden Eye Int LTD / GEIL / MIRCOM / TCYK)
Forum rules
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Slyck Forum Rules

Welcome to this forum, should you have received a letter do not panic, read the threads and make a (hopefully more informed) decision on how you want to proceed.

To avoid repeating previous posts, please familiarise yourself with the following information before posting.

Summary site (BeingThreatened.com) and Chat (IRC) or Chat (WebClient)

Speculative invoicing and “pay up or else” schemes for copyright infringement - Citizen's Advice Bureau

Speculative Invoicing Handbook

I've received a letter, what should I do? and Davenport Lyons - What can we do as a group?

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Mullard47 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:19 am

Countalucard wrote:
steveh wrote:Crossley suspended for 2 years from today and to pay costs of 76,326.55



Is this a proper fine that he has to pay or does his bankruptcy prevent him sticking his hands in his pocket?


It is a "new" debt incurred after the date of the bankruptcy order and so it matters not whether it is a fine - it is a not "covered" by the existing bankruptcy.

Two issues come to mind:-

1 Was any fine imposed at all?

and

2 Does anyone know what happened to the proposals to bring harassment proceedings against him?


I would add that there is no point in anyone griping about the ICO penalty situation. That is not a fine - it is a debt - and any debt incurred prior to the bankruptcy order would be provable in that bankruptcy. The only purpose that a larger penalty would have served would have been to increase the percentage of any available assets that went to the government and reduce what was left for any other creditors. it would have made no difference at all to him.
Having said that, is anyone aware that there were any assets at all?
Mullard47
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 1:59 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Dustin_D_Lense » Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:38 am

steveh wrote:Crossley suspended for 2 years from today and to pay costs of 76,326.55


He got off lightly.
By rights, with his disciplinary record and the scale of this operation and the numbers of people adversly affected, he should have been struck off.
Dustin_D_Lense
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 12:14 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby bpaw » Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:40 am

It was tweeted a couple of times that he mentioned splitting up from his long term partner. With a £750,000.00 house and a £150,000.00 Bentley, and not being able to find work, was it a ploy or did TL see sense and dump him? With his track record, I suspect the former.
bpaw
 
Posts: 1156
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 6:09 pm
Location: ACS:Law leaked spreadsheet

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Billpayerr » Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:46 am

steveh wrote:Crossley suspended for 2 years from today


Hmm got off lightly then. That's frankly disgusting. You'd think that after breaching all those rules you would ban him for life!
Just goes to show...the SRA don't give a dam. He'll be back and could be just as bad in a couple of years time. There is nothing to stop him.

SRA are a pointless waste of time.
Billpayerr
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:20 am

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby concerned100 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:47 am

So far as I'm aware, nobody has taken forward harassment proceedings although Ralli may not have dropped the idea.

I think Crossley admitted the charges as a strategy to avoid getting struck off, slap on the wrist fine and short suspension like the DL two. Who knows if the strategy avoided 'strike off' but at least the two year suspension should pretty much end his legal career for practical purposes. Job prospects as a practicing solicitor minimal if not non=existent after a 2 year suspension and a profitable new startup practice? In what field? IP? IT?
Last edited by concerned100 on Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
concerned100
 
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 9:06 am

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby steveh » Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:57 am

Countalucard wrote:Is this a proper fine that he has to pay or does his bankruptcy prevent him sticking his hands in his pocket?

There was no fine - these are purely costs which were known about in advance and he was expecting to pay. However he did state that these are covered under the bankruptcy, whereas a fine would not be. I can only assume that the costs were a contingent liability known about when he became bankrupt - and as he admitted most of the charges he knew that he was going to incur them - he certainly didn't contest them - in fact he found them to be reasonable (in the light of the Davenport Lyons costs being £450,000)!
steveh
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby CharonsBoat » Mon Jan 16, 2012 12:25 pm

I think him being struck off would be a purely symbolic gesture, because I seriously doubt he'll ever work again (as a solicitor anyway).

No reputable firm would take him on; a middle-aged solicitor with a rap sheet as long as your arm and a record of breathtaking incompetence, in the middle of a global depression and thousands of new law graduates being pumped out of the university system every year? Ha!

His only chance would be to set up as a lone practitioner again and with bankruptcy behind him, he'll probably find it hard to get the money together to restart a business and I wonder what his liability insurance costs would be?

While I have no doubt he's squirreled some assets away and his sob story was no doubt exaggerated, I suspect the immediate and medium-term prospects for Mr Crossley are rather grim. Even best-case scenario, unless he has the assistance of loyal friends and family, I doubt that he'll ever again enjoy the standard of living he became accustomed to.
CharonsBoat
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:54 am

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby bpaw » Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:19 pm

Mullard47 wrote: 6) Used his position as a Solicitor to take or attempt to take unfair advantage of other persons being recipients of letters of claim either for his own benefit or for the benefit of his clients.

Whatever happens, Andrew Jonathan Crossley admitted to 6 of 7 charges (Including the above). This all goes against everything he said from the start of his harassment campaign right up to this day. It surely cannot be possible for him to keep up a denial of wrong doing after this.

Doesn't the admission of number 6 above and the subsequent judgement give more credence to pursue an harassment case against him?

As for his future, if soon to be Solicitor Terence ‘Jintin’ Tsang sets up practice, he could employ Crossley as a paralegal.
bpaw
 
Posts: 1156
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 6:09 pm
Location: ACS:Law leaked spreadsheet

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby steveh » Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:29 pm

Terence ‘Jintin’ Tsang is now a trainee at PSB Law and assists Eddie Parladorio. Edward Parladorio was named by Crossley in one of the testimonials presented to the tribunal - they were at law school together! Edward came to fame when he went out with Ulrika not long after Sven had finished with her!

As well as Edward, other testimonials presented from Crossley include:
Andrew Hopper QC
Alistair Logan OBE – whom he stated was his son’s grandfather (i.e. Tamsin’s father).
Raymond Murphy – senior solicitor at Merriman White where he first worked 22 years ago. (Not the ideal person to have a testimonial from at the SDT: http://www.mamanpoulet.com/michael-lynn-and-ray-st-john-murphy/)
Mark West – a barrister and recorder
David Fisher – Birchwood – (part of the GCB fiasco!)
Ray Santilli – Orbital Media
Clive Windsor – Lewis Prison – (perhaps he was expecting to be a lodger!)

And Lee Boyden !!!

The testimonials were part of the documentation presented to the tribunal, copies not available.
Last edited by steveh on Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
steveh
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Mullard47 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:36 pm

steveh wrote:
Countalucard wrote:Is this a proper fine that he has to pay or does his bankruptcy prevent him sticking his hands in his pocket?

There was no fine - these are purely costs which were known about in advance and he was expecting to pay. However he did state that these are covered under the bankruptcy, whereas a fine would not be. I can only assume that the costs were a contingent liability known about when he became bankrupt - and as he admitted most of the charges he knew that he was going to incur them - he certainly didn't contest them - in fact he found them to be reasonable (in the light of the Davenport Lyons costs being £450,000)!


My understanding is that costs are always at the discretion of the court and are therefore not a liability at all until the order making them is made. That would lead to the proposition that although at the time of the bankruptcy order, there were pending proceedings with a risk that a costs order might be made, that it is a risk of a liability rather than a contingent liability.

A case that looks at this type of thing and refers to a number of other cases can be seen HERE. On the face of it, the question (in this type of action) is whether the costs order is before or after the bankruptcy order and not when the proceedings (giving rise to the costs order) were commenced.

If some other principle is at play, it would be interesting to see what it is.

I believe that even where SDT costs are provable in bankruptcy, there can be issues with practising if they remain unpaid (notwithstanding that they might have been discharged).
Last edited by Mullard47 on Mon Jan 16, 2012 2:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Mullard47
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 1:59 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby bpaw » Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:41 pm

steveh wrote:Terence ‘Jintin’ Tsang is now a trainee at PSB Law and assists Eddie Parladorio. Edward Parladorio was named by Crossley in one of the testimonials presented to the tribunal! Edward came to fame when he went out with Ulrika not long after Sven had finished with her!

Will Gilmour tweeted early on "Tsang chose webhost, "soon to be" qualified solicitor. God forbid!".

My appreciation for the updates BTW :D
bpaw
 
Posts: 1156
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 6:09 pm
Location: ACS:Law leaked spreadsheet

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Mullard47 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 2:35 pm

A post elsewhere asserts that Adam Glen is the "A Glen" referred to as the joint author of a publication, which is referred to HERE (third down in the list of "publications") which is entitled :
‘Regulation of Online P2P Infringement of Copyright - No Risk of Penalty for Infringers, No Avenue for Protection for Copyright Owners’.

I wonder if it is? It certainly is an "Adam Glen" as is evident HERE.

That abstract of the paper makes very interesting reading.
Last edited by Mullard47 on Mon Jan 16, 2012 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mullard47
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 1:59 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby steveh » Mon Jan 16, 2012 2:41 pm

[irony]My comments made earlier during the adjournments at the SDT were made courtesy of the WiFi connection kindly provided by the SDT. Whilst it was password protected, they were happy to give the password to observers and other attendees at their offices without any checks as to the identity of the users. [/irony]
steveh
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Mullard47 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 3:02 pm

steveh wrote:[irony]My comments made earlier during the adjournments at the SDT were made courtesy of the WiFi connection kindly provided by the SDT. Whilst it was password protected, they were happy to give the password to observers and other attendees at their offices without any checks as to the identity of the users. [/irony]


A wag that knew that in advance would have gone there and been seeding one of the torrents that were the subject of that recent case of Amp v Persons Unknown.
Mullard47
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 1:59 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Hickster » Mon Jan 16, 2012 6:00 pm

Hi Guys, just update Blog, not much new really just for continuity.... Thanks Steveh!

So are we happy? or are we p$$£$d off.. I have mixed feelings, I am pleased he got the suspension, would have been nice if he was struck off, however, this has put him and any other crook on notice (And those who worked for him knowing, he was a crook) for the future.

This has been an interesting experience but now after nearly 3 years for myself, and longer for many others, we can at long last raise that glass.. :toast:
Please feel free to email me at:
acs.bore@gmail.com

Read the BLOG Here
http://acsbore.wordpress.com

Faceless Keyboard Warrior
User avatar
Hickster
Faceless Keyboard Warrior
 
Posts: 1477
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 2:25 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Hickster » Mon Jan 16, 2012 6:11 pm

Mullard47 wrote:A post elsewhere asserts that Adam Glen is the "A Glen" referred to as the joint author of a publication, which is referred to HERE (third down in the list of "publications") which is entitled :
‘Regulation of Online P2P Infringement of Copyright - No Risk of Penalty for Infringers, No Avenue for Protection for Copyright Owners’.

I wonder if it is? It certainly is an "Adam Glen" as is evident HERE.

That abstract of the paper makes very interesting reading.


Hi mate, I am not sure, there is a Glenn Allan who works there to, coincidence maybe, as the name IS different, although as Andrea Cerevkovac is also at edgehill, I think maybe it is NOT, could be wrong but it is you Mullard, can recall when you were wrong :)
Please feel free to email me at:
acs.bore@gmail.com

Read the BLOG Here
http://acsbore.wordpress.com

Faceless Keyboard Warrior
User avatar
Hickster
Faceless Keyboard Warrior
 
Posts: 1477
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 2:25 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby concerned100 » Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:58 am

Just noticed this comment on acs bore. Does anybody know anything about DL appealing?

'The latest news on this scam is that Trevor Sears,the bossman and the main beneficiary from the scam at Davenport Lyons is “very confident” of winning the appeal through his corrupt practises filed by Gore and Miller who were found guilty by the SDT last year.
We need to blow the whistle on this Sears scheme and alert All concerned and ensure Law and Justice prevails on this a very rare ocassion over Sears.'
concerned100
 
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 9:06 am

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Mullard47 » Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:39 pm

concerned100 wrote:Just noticed this comment on acs bore. Does anybody know anything about DL appealing?

'The latest news on this scam is that Trevor Sears,the bossman and the main beneficiary from the scam at Davenport Lyons is “very confident” of winning the appeal through his corrupt practises filed by Gore and Miller who were found guilty by the SDT last year.
We need to blow the whistle on this Sears scheme and alert All concerned and ensure Law and Justice prevails on this a very rare ocassion over Sears.'


That post appears to be unsupported by any information that can be found on the Internet. JH has queried it in the thread. It is possible that it is an inaccurate re-hash of what what said at the time relating to an appeal.
Mullard47
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 1:59 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby concerned100 » Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:39 am

Mullard47 wrote:
concerned100 wrote:Just noticed this comment on acs bore. Does anybody know anything about DL appealing?

'The latest news on this scam is that Trevor Sears,the bossman and the main beneficiary from the scam at Davenport Lyons is “very confident” of winning the appeal through his corrupt practises filed by Gore and Miller who were found guilty by the SDT last year.
We need to blow the whistle on this Sears scheme and alert All concerned and ensure Law and Justice prevails on this a very rare ocassion over Sears.'


That post appears to be unsupported by any information that can be found on the Internet. JH has queried it in the thread. It is possible that it is an inaccurate re-hash of what what said at the time relating to an appeal.


Good. I had a trawl thru internet too and couldn't find anything. Re Crossley, I see that both The Lawyer and the Law Society Gazette have now printed articles about his SDT hearing. Of course those may be the ones that solicitors normally read and 'believe' and this time, so far, there have been no indignant comments by readers (i.e. other solicitors) defending Crossley's position. The SDT has spoken so that probably finishes Crossley's reputation in the eyes of his peers, except for 'friends'.

Although it was surprising to see that he' d had 5 jobs in view that only seemed to fall thru because of insurance considerations and of course prior to the SDT verdict. I wonder what his insurance position will be after the suspension. Assigned risks pool? He'd better look for something that doesn't require a practicing certificate!
concerned100
 
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 9:06 am

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Mullard47 » Wed Jan 18, 2012 4:46 am

I believe that you can only be in the ARP for a limited time, and that this is leading to solicitors who cannot get commercial insurance ending up having to close down. There is actually also an issue of solicitors who are practising without insurance.

There is an article about that sort of matter HERE.
Mullard47
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 1:59 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby steveh » Wed Jan 18, 2012 7:52 am

concerned100 wrote:Although it was surprising to see that he' d had 5 jobs in view that only seemed to fall thru because of insurance considerations and of course prior to the SDT verdict. I wonder what his insurance position will be after the suspension. Assigned risks pool? He'd better look for something that doesn't require a practicing certificate!

It was very surprising to hear him say it as well. This was part of his mitigation, and I think came from the part of his brain that gets concerned about trains running 10 minutes late, or accidents happening to family members preventing him attending court hearings.

He was building up a case for why he should be allowed to continue practicing, as with so many people wanting to employ him, that he could quickly come out of bankruptcy with an IVA and at some time be able to pay the costs that were going to be awarded against him.
steveh
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby factual » Wed Jan 18, 2012 11:52 am

The SDT result has recently been reported on the BBC website:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16616803

...and the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/20 ... sfeed=true
factual
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 12:13 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby CharonsBoat » Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:58 pm

It was revealed during the hearing that the SRA had asked Mr Crossley to stop the scheme within days of him setting it up, but he had refused.


From the BBC article. And yet it still took THREE YEARS, hundreds of complaints, questions asked in parliament and all the ****ing trauma so many of us went through before they took action? Staggering.
CharonsBoat
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:54 am

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby Hickster » Wed Jan 18, 2012 2:30 pm

CharonsBoat wrote:
It was revealed during the hearing that the SRA had asked Mr Crossley to stop the scheme within days of him setting it up, but he had refused.


From the BBC article. And yet it still took THREE YEARS, hundreds of complaints, questions asked in parliament and all the ****ing trauma so many of us went through before they took action? Staggering.


I agree, this is an outrage, so many of us wrote to the SRA back in June 2009 or thereabouts and got nothing but BS from them.

I just want to say for the record, that one of the shining lights for me in this, and I am talking of Journos only on this point, is the excellent Dinah Greek, The News Ed of Computeractive, she has been available since first taking an interest and has been there ever since, whereas (in my own experience) many from the BBC and others, took info and run, she was always there and always appreciative of any input from the community. I just wanted to state that here!

So Crossley is down, now for the rest...

Lee Bowden
Adam Glen
Jonathan Miller
Terence Tsang (Jintin)

Any others, that have escaped the scrutiny of the authorities, please add to this list.

My demand, has always been low, I merely want an apology! Until that happens, I am in persuit!

Yes guys, I am back!
Please feel free to email me at:
acs.bore@gmail.com

Read the BLOG Here
http://acsbore.wordpress.com

Faceless Keyboard Warrior
User avatar
Hickster
Faceless Keyboard Warrior
 
Posts: 1477
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 2:25 pm

Re: Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

Postby jsx » Thu Jan 19, 2012 1:08 pm

OK, some possible info on Adam Glen .... there is an address in Crosby, Liverpool involved but I think it's out of date because the property is listed as having been sold in April 2011 even though he uses it in his domain registration info which was updated in November 2011.

Adam Glen used another email address at ACS:Law i.e.
adamzglen@hotmail.com

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Terence Tsang <terencetsang1982@googlemail.com>
Date: Tue, May 26, 2009 at 10:32 AM
Subject: Fwd: Digiprotect accounts and usernames
To: acslawac@googlemail.com, acslawag@googlemail.com, acslawcm@googlemail.com, acslawdkb@googlemail.com, acslawrh@googlemail.com, acslawtt@googlemail.com, katharina.khor@gmail.com, Adam <adamzglen@hotmail.com>, leyla mehru <acslawlm@googlemail.com>

I've Googled this email before and nothing came up until recently, but now it seems he used it to register a domain.
http://www.domaincrawler.com/mikamada.com#whois
registrant-firstname: Adam
registrant-lastname: Glen
registrant-street1: 13 York Avenue
registrant-pcode: L23 5RN
registrant-state: MSY
registrant-city: Crosby Liverpool
registrant-ccode: GB
registrant-phone: +44.1519320767
registrant-email: adamzglen@hotmail.com

admin-c-firstname: Adam
admin-c-lastname: Glen
admin-c-street1: 13 York Avenue
admin-c-pcode: L23 5RN
admin-c-state: MSY
admin-c-city: Crosby Liverpool
admin-c-ccode: GB
admin-c-phone: +44.1519320767
admin-c-email: adamzglen@hotmail.com

tech-c-firstname: Hostmaster
tech-c-lastname: ONEANDONE
tech-c-organization: 1&1 Internet Ltd.
tech-c-street1: 10-14 Bath Road
tech-c-street2: Aquasulis House
tech-c-pcode: SL1 3SA
tech-c-state: BRK
tech-c-city: Slough
tech-c-ccode: GB
tech-c-phone: +44.8716412121
tech-c-fax: +49.72191374215
tech-c-email: hostmaster@1and1.co.uk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registration last Updated Date: 19-nov-2011

I'll have to rely on people here with greater knowledge than my own about registrations being incorrect or out of date, but the address given is listed as being sold in April 2011.
http://www.zoopla.co.uk/property/13-yor ... n/12372984

I have also seen references to a dissolved company called Adam Glen Ltd which also lists the address in Crosby and this underlines that the address is probably out of date.
http://ukdata.com/company/05428239/ADAM-GLEN-LIMITED

Adam Glen is on LinkedIn and listed as being in Liverpool providing IT Services.
A search of company directors at the L23 post code reveals his birthday in January 1952.
jsx
jsx
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 8:44 am

PreviousNext

Return to Torrent Download Court Action Threat/Settlement Letter Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron
© 2001-2008 Slyck.com