Plusnet will give your personal details to ACS Law with not informing you!!

[#1]

I understand that and do not have any problem with my ticket responses being made public.
My point was really the value of having two simultaneous discussions going with the same person (in this case me) in two different places.

[#2]

To lighten the spirits - http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/men-admit%2c-once-and-for-all%2c-that-every-single-one-of...
WARNING - CONTAINS 2 SWEARY WORDS! 

[#3]

@foxtrck just because his name was attached to the email sent to ACS:Law does not mean he's the culpable person, any more than your name being attached to an ACS:Law letter means you broke the law.
Sure someone at BT did a stupid thing, but please stop bashing a guy who maybe innocent, and whose career this could do irreparable harm to for no other reason than people presume he's guilty.
@mrmarkus1981, perhaps I'm sad, but this is my favorite YouTube vid ever

[#4]

Any chance of some kind soul with good typing skills and plenty of time (don't look at me) doing a summary of the position so far in this thread?
It could be put as a separate thread and referred to when someone brings up a point already discussed/answered in the 93 pages of this thread. Edits could be made as further developments arise.

[#5]

Quote from: fourfourdevon

Sure someone at BT did a stupid thing,

Innocent until proved guilty applies to all.  

[#6]

Quote from: HPsauce

Innocent until proved guilty applies to all.

Unless you're a victim of ACS:Law, of course.

[#7]

There's a basic summary of our statements here.
I'm unlikely to have time to do anything any more comprehensive today TBH.

[#8]

There NEEDS to be something more comprehensive on the position re. Monday.
To prepare for this on Friday - the last working day before it's back in court - is TOO LATE.
adie:quote

[#9]

@Mand
DL to ACS:Law connection as described by people on Slynck, the guy who claims to be an ex-employee seems credible, his past posts have either proved true or at least ring true.

Quote from: watching

There NEEDS to be something more comprehensive on the position re. Monday. To prepare for this on Friday - the last working day before it's back in court - is TOO LATE.

Indeed, but I pretty much expecting another adjournment CMW has had a lot of post this last few days, and Im sure he reads newspapers.

[#10]

I'm very interested to hear what CMW will have to say on the 4th, especially after the events of the last couple of days. I'd be ashamed to even show my face at a hearing if I were representing ACS:Law.

[#11]

It's not ACS:Law's application it "someone insert correct law firm name for me", but they are using essentially the same court rules, court orders, letters, detection methods etc etc  I'd be stunned if that hadn't at least partially made it into CMW conciseness.

[#12]

Monday 4th is NOT ACS:Law it's an adjourned hearing with a different solicitor.
That's why it's important for PN to be there.
(I doubt any ACS hearing would proceed at present)
EDit: Looks like Davenport-Lyons Gallant Macmillan acting for Ministry of Sound

[#13]

Just in case anyone has written to Alex at Privacy International and is waiting a reply, he has just posted a comment regarding the delay

Quote

Just wanted to ask people to be patient with regards to replies to their emails - I have a LOT coming in and currently my attention is required elsewhere due to a major new breakthrough on the issue which I cannot disclose at this time but hope to make public in the next 36 hours. I will continue to reply to all emails throughout the day but some responses may continue to be delayed as a result of the ongoing work on this "other" matter. Thanks, Alex

[#14]

Quote from: Tidgy

Quote a major new breakthrough on the issue which I cannot disclose at this time but hope to make public in the next 36 hours.

Do I hear a chorus of angels singing?


Not quite what I wanted, but best I could find.

[#15]

Tidgy, what is the source of that PI quote?