Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


panther12

Not long to wait now for Crossley’s comeuppance!

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2963 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal hearing is listed to take place from 16th-20th January 2012.

 

Let’s wish Crossley a prosperous new year but somehow I don’t think that’s going to be the case. What goes around comes around big boy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's his second time in front of such a hearing so no doubt he's concocted a tale or two to tell.

 

"The big boy made me do it & then ran away". ;)


Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Karma is going to bite his a*se big time lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well it's his second time in front of such a hearing so no doubt he's concocted a tale or two to tell.

 

"The big boy made me do it & then ran away". ;)

 

It's actually going to be his THIRD appearance before the disciplinary tribunal.


As of 03/03/12 please do not under any circumstances wait for my further input or guidance on any current thread or defence of a court claim I might have been involved in on or through Cag.

Jasper1965

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case the two previous appearances should NOT be taken lightly, this guy is a disgrace to his profession, and typical of the 'debt collecting industry' as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tribunal suspended Mr Crossley from the Roll of Solicitors for a period of two years and awarded costs against him in the sum of £76,326.55

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds good, what lead to this decision??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt the parasite will appear like the Phoenix and rise from the ashes like he did the last time. :(


Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he got off lightly with just a 2 year ban, should have been life as he's no stranger to the solicitors disciplinary tribunal.

 

Mr Crossley admitted 6 of the allegations against him before the Tribunal. A further allegation was withdrawn by the SRA, and the final allegation relating to the data leak from Mr Crossley's computer servers was unadmitted but found proved against him.

 

Mr Crossley admitted that he allowed his independence to be compromised; acted contrary to the best interests of his clients; acted in a way that was likely to diminish the trust the public places in him or in the legal profession; and entered into arrangements to receive contingency fees for work done in prosecuting or defending contentious proceedings before the courts of England and Wales except as permitted by the statute or law. He also admitted that he had acted where there was a conflict of interest in circumstances not permitted, in particular because there was a conflict with those of his clients; and used his position as a solicitor to take or attempt to take advantage of other persons being recipients of letters of claim either for his own benefit of benefit of his clients.

 

The Tribunal suspended Mr Crossley from the Roll of Solicitors for a period of two years and awarded costs against him in the sum of £76,326.55. This means that Mr Crossley is unable to practise as a solicitor until such time has elapsed, and that should he continue to do so he will be committing a criminal offence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully they will now review all his cases and recind the judgements by default - I think judgement by default should be scrapped as many claimants abuse the court by hoping people won't defend, lame excuse I've come across is 'you borrowed the money and didn't repay so therefore you have no defence'.

 

In Mr Crossley's case he did not own the copyright on the items he was defending and therefore was acting as a third party collecting doubtful debt that had arisen 'due to misuse of the orginal copyright'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good result especially coming after the two from Davenport Lyons were found to be in breach of various SRA rules too.

 

Surely though DL and the Crossle/ACS must of known that this was coming, whilst they may have got away with avoidong criminal law, the SRA does not take matters like this lightly, some of the major SRA accusations were blatantly obvious even before ACS's meltdown and data leak.

 

What does amaze me is the costs that SRA come up with £75K for Crosselys case and £150K for the DL one, both cases only lated a few days....unbelievable. !..but of course its good to see the guilty parties punished. :)

 

I bet Crossely was very pleased with himself when niave and frightened folk started sending him cheques as a result of his letters but regrets it all now.

 

Lets hope this is a final warning to others contemplating similar action..yes..there were/are one or two !

 

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit disappointed with just a 2 year ban but when this is up at least his reputation will remain evermore in tatters and can’t see any reputable firm of sols employing this bumbling buffoon. Wish I could have been there in person to see the smile wiped off his previously smug bloated face, but at least our statement was read out to the tribunal to help nail this disgraceful specimen of a human.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...