It looks as if the egregious Andrew Crossley is to get his just desserts. Having tried to extort money from innocent people that he accused of filesharing – irrespective of whether they actually did engage in such activity, it’s all gone belly up now that some of them forced him to go to court.
Judge Birss is considering whether ACS Law should pay the defendants’ costs.
Now that’s what I call poetic justice. ACS law set about blackmailing people on a speculative basis, hoping to scare them into paying up. It is fortunate that some of them were insufficiently cowed and stood their ground, which is precisely what you should do when faced with bullying of this nature. It has become apparent that the whole scam was rooted in people not challenging the claims and therefore there being no examination of the flimsy cases being pursued. Crossley now faces costs and possible fines, which, frankly, is the best outcome. Let this nasty, greedy little man taste the medicine he was so willing to dish out.
I would have responded to his blackmail letters with a fairly simple and robust response. It would have gone something like this:
Dear Mr Crossley,
In response to your claim for monies apparently owed; I have never engaged in filesharing. Therefore, you do not have evidence that I have. Consequently, I refer to you to Arkell v Pressdram (1971).
Yours sincerely
LR
👿
I love the comment from his defence solictor who stated taht because ACS:Law didn’t make any money, they actually lost money, from the scam they shouldn’t be fined. He also said that Andrew Crossley has also suffered enough from being hounded on the internet due to his actions, therefore he should not be penalised at all.
Well boo-hoo, if you do something bad you get punished – tough shit. He should take responsibility for his actions and acknoweldge that he is a scammer.
One thing I learned a long time ago – at a cost – was that solicitors letters are often hot air and bluster. It cost me several hundred pound of legal fees to realise it, but it was money well spent. These days, I tend towards the Arkell v Pressdram defence. When they are trying it on as they usually are, it works a dream. Looks like I am not the only one as Crossley has discovered to his cost. 😀