It's the Andrew Crossley Show. . .

Whoa, whoa, whoa . . . Do get this into perspective, people. Puh-leeeze.

Repeatedly talking about "ACS:Law" and "them" and "they" makes this outfit appear to be a multi-national multi-partnered law firm whose size alone makes it a legal Leviathan against whom no defence by a poor ignorant punter is remotely possible.

But it ain't.

Rather, as ACS: Law readily acknowledges, it's Andrew J. Crossley. Sole Principal.

Now. . . who can this Andrew J. Crossley possibly be?

Well, surely not the Andrew Jonathan Crossley born in 1963, admitted as a solicitor in 1991, and of whom it was said "at a hearing on 31st October, 2002, the allegation that the respondent (Andrew Jonathan Crossley) had been guilty of conduct unbefitting a solicitor. . . was substantiated" (Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.)

Not, then, that Andrew Jonathan Crossley fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £3,348.75p by way of costs to The Law Society.

(* Solicitors Regulation Authority, Tribunal Findings, Case Record 9346, February 2006. I located the file online within five minutes of reading The Register's report today. Anyone else can do the same.)

The Tribunal verdict on that Andrew Jonathan Crossley must be doubly embarrassing for the Andrew J. Crossley, sole principal, ACS:Law, seeing as how he is in zealous pursuit of people who fail to meet their obligations, whist the Andrew Jonathan Crossley who landed in serious professional trouble did so because he, er, failed to honour his obligations, to whit: he did not deliver his accounts in 2002; he did not deliver his accounts in 2003.

Good God. What kind of a solicitor would do something like that? As was pointed out in the tribunal's findings:

"The statutory requirement to file Accountant's Reports is important. The filing of such Report enables the Law Society to confirm to prospective clients that by placing their money with the solicitor concerned, they are not thereby placing their often very large sums of money in jeopardy. In essence, the failure of a solicitor to file Accountant's Reports prevents The Law Society from fulfilling its important regulatory function."

Blimey. A solicitor whose conduct is so bad, it actually lands The Law Society itself in trouble?

Well, that can't be Andrew J. Crossley, sole principal, ACS:Law.

And it surely can't be Andrew Crossley, aged 45 as at December 2008, either, who in an interview with The Law Society Gazette at that time provided a quoted response so revealing of a commitment to Law and the pursuit of truth and Justice that it may possibly rank as one of the most inspirational ever to appear:

Question: "Why become a solicitor?"

Answer: "I love music -- I was a disk jockey for 25 years -- and thought a legal background would be one way to start a career in music."

(For further enlightenment, Google for Law Society Gazette, Andrew Crossley, sex on the beach. . .)

Oh. Hang on. Sorry. That last Andrew Crossley, who became a solicitor apparently because of some bizarre misapprehension that Mick Jagger made it big in The Rolling Silks, is indeed the same Andrew Crossley who is a, er, one-man band at ACS:Law.

So there is a musical connection.

All of which is to say:

Posters on here, and El Reg itself, really ought to do some checking first before lamenting the conduct of giant international unstoppable unbeatable legal outfits like ACS:Law.

And if Mr Crossley, Sole Principal, is reading this, I hope he'll accept my sympathy at seemingly being in possession of the same name as a solicitor who was nearly struck off for serious misconduct.

As to Mr Crossley's sought-for musician's career, I sincerely hope it will be possible for him to embrace it sooner rather than later.

And that everyone here on El Reg and elsewhere will now do their best to assist him in that regard.