After a very long wait - nearly 1.5 years - the public's complaint against Andrew Crossley and ACS:Law is finally being elevated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Andrew Crossley and ACS:Law will have to confront their past with the SDT, or the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT).

Anyone spending time online will probably be familiar with ACS:Law - especially those living in the UK. ACS:Law has been intimately involved with sending out hundreds, if not thousands of monetary demands to UK residents, alleging distribution of copyrighted works. The nature of these demands has caused many of the accused to vigorously defend their innocence, as often shocked ISP customers who contend they've never shared a file find themselves receiving these monetary demands.

The consumer advocacy group Which? (similar to the EFF) has also gotten involved on the side of the accused. In May of 2009, Which? filed a complaint with the Solicitors Regulation Authority. After moving at a glacial pace (yet collecting over 258 other ACS:Law complaints as of March 2010), the SRA has agreed to refer Andrew Crossley of ACS:Law to the SDT. Which? accuses ACS:Law of "excessive" and "bullying" conduct.

"We welcome this decision because we’ve received so many complaints from consumers who believe they been treated appallingly by this law firm.

"We also believe that it’s time for the profession to take action against law firms, and those responsible for them, which behave in a way we believe most right-thinking people would view as both aggressive and bullying."

In March of 2010, Andrew Crossley attempted to silence Slyck.com's forum thread dedicated to UK residents accused of illegal file-sharing. The forum has hundreds of pages and is frequently visited by those looking to discuss the latest legal issues. This is only one example of the extreme measures used by ACS:Law documented by users, who often find themselves frustrated at their bullying tactics.

Share




This story is filed in these Slyck News categories

You can discuss this article here - 2 replies