02078314545

To the board, with regard to Mr Crouchers comments. (His needless unending pursuit of the Streisand effect)

As one can clearly see, Mr Croucher is NOT interested in the evidence, in fact he quite clearly is interested in the opposite, destroying the evidence, in his own words it is plain to see.  The link that has been deleted can still be seen, here https://www.scribd.com/doc/307379486/HatonBer ... LAR-Please-Read

If Mr Croucher has reported anyone to the Police, then I would imagine there are many many candidates for whom he and quite possibly certain members of his staff, have upset and annoyed in the past, I however am not one who would make such threats, IF those threats actually happened, (which I doubt with no actual evidence being produced, Crime number etc)

Mr Crouchers Websites, (there are a few)  have meaningless legalise written all over them, my assertions are far from mere speculation, and have always been backed up by evidence that anyone can see.  It is truly bizarre to suggest that one holds the copyright for a company name that is in government papers quite clearly owned by someone else (Paul Carter) https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08221539/officers.

The legal wrangling between these two is of no concern to me or anyone else beyond the point of proving the lack of veracity in Mr Crouchers assertions, indeed it points to extreme naievity to allow someone else to actually register the name of your business, before one does it ones self

Splitting hairs over whether there is a huge difference between a foreign company having to hire a barrister or a solicitor obfuscates the issue, they have to hire A LEGAL person which is what I said.  Mr Croucher informs the board that “..people are actually being taken to court”, well again, assertion without evidence, indeed he goes on to ask me to confirm with Lawdit, (the company that his client leaked part of an email exchange with to the Pornographer Terry Stephens(One Eyed Jack), in an attempt to smear Lawdits reputation*) Lawdit has said this about TCYK LLC actions; “Where proceedings are issued, they are not pursued if a default judgment cannot be obtained.”
*http://www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=57634&start=2100#p617151

@Ian; (Ian, just Ian is fine, don't be bullied!) Mr Croucher cannot see evidence in front of him, what does that tell you?
Mr Croucher says, that on closer inspection that I was accused of downloading Pornography; well this is rather frighting, and dare I say threatening, (using Mr Croucher delicate feelings), I was accused of UPLOADING a game, not Pornography, although of course his client WAS involved in providing Mr Crossley with what he is now providing Mr Croucher.  You would have thought that Mr Croucher would know that this “Speculative invoicing” scheme does not target downloaders, only UPLOADERS.

Mr Croucher is right (for once), I never was taken to Court, why? BECAUSE NOONE GOES TO COURT, unless someone actually admitted then retracted the admission, there is simply no way that Mr Croucher and all the other similar actions would continue, it would be LAUGHED out of court, as it was when Mr Crossley, of ACS:LAW, attempted to got to court, and then tried to drop the cases when the accused turned up.

I am not on the electoral roll, that is true.

We know what this board is for, that is why we are discussing Mr Croucher and his companies on here.  Slyck is a wonderful forum that is run by a Solicitor, called Thomas Mennecke, I would urge Mr Croucher to get in touch with Mr Mennecke if he feel that anything on the Slyck forums is libellous, or defamatory, I find it quite incredible that a self confessed professional businessman, well Graphic Designer in reality, can act in such a bizarre way to threaten me with legal action, cast aspersions on me, and provide no evidence, I hope it can be seen by the board, that I am at least attempting to back up what I say with evidence.

The truth is not defamatory or libelous.

If you receive one of these letters from Mr Crouchers firm, reply, and if you feel it is right, deny, but demand that he takes your case to court, where ALL the evidence that he and Mr Achache are accusing you of, can be heard in that Court, and not in some shady, backstreet deal, where your voice will not be heard in Court.  If you are really worried, contact a reputable Lawyer.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/307379486/HatonBer ... LAR-Please-Read (The link that Mr Croucher deleted)

Type TCYK LLC into google and see all the scam type activity associated with it worldwide, then ask yourself, why would a “respected” company touch it.  One other thing, if you ran a “Copyright Protection company”, why would you need more than one? Patrick Achache has Excipio, Guardaley, Maverickeye and a whole host of others.

Take a look at Mr Achache and his leaked "business plan" http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com/2014/04/21/de ... s-presentation/
For a bigger picture of past practitioners of this practice see herehttp://www.wired.com/2010/10/the-legal-blackmail-business/

Apropos the Electoral Register------- My wife and I , for many years now, have opted out of the publicly published " voters roll" and ,while still being registered to vote with our local council, do not show up on any  public search of the register. So that route is no guarantee to finding if a person does or does not exist.

What a mess this is!!

I have some questions for Robert Croucher..

What is Nina Williams involvement and connection?

What is Caroline Croucher's involvement and connection?

Is Paul Carter operating from Office 3, 88-90 Hatton Garden? If so, what's his company name?

Why is your office in Mayfair up for rent?
http://berkeleysquareestate.com/props/43berkeleysquare.htm

Nina Williams is Paul Carters ex partner. No involvement.

Caroline Croucher is my Mother. No involvement.

My office is not 'up for rent' that is a different office suite that I do not use in the building.

Paul Carter does not operate from Unit 3, 88-90 Hatton Garden, he was evicted in early 2015 by Pearl & Coutts, managing agents.

Quite clearly not a mess. Pretty transparent. Any further questions you can email info@hattonandberkeley.com

And please, names and contact details in future.

@Questions

It IS a mess, WESTONE BUSINESS SERVICES LIMITED as you rightly point out, has Paul Carter, Nina Williams, and Caroline Croucher as "Directors" with Caroline Croucher as the last appointed Director after the others resigned.  Their is an outstanding rent bill on this lease, as can be seen at Companies Information.  You are also correct to state that all three were Directors CONCURRENTLY.

Mr Crouchers admission that the lady is his own Mother is rather startling, I will leave it to others to make a judgement on involving your own parents in such companies, it is not for me to make an opinion on.

I have not been able to speak to Mr Carter, so we only have Mr Crouchers word, and as we have seen, that is not exactly dripping in veracity is it?  The only Nina Williams I know is the purple fighter out of the Tekken series of Fighting games!

The reason that Mr Carter and Mr Croucher have similar sounding addresses, is becasue they would like to project the idea that they actually own theproperty they are in, that their actual offices, are in Mayfair, this projects a pretty impressive image, and of course that is the point, the reality of course is that these are two-bit wide boys, operating out of "rented, serviced offices".  A cheap suit and an expensive sounding address can take you far it seems.  This incidentally is exactly how Andrew Crossley of ACS:LAW carried out his legal action, only he did so from Hanover Sq, it gave the impression of success.

None of this of course means anything of course.  The answers most pressing are still the ones Mr Croucher cant or wont answer.

Patrick Achaches leaked business plan, and the fact that he hopes a Judge wont ask for an expert witness to review the evidence that is sent out to alleged infringers.

The fact that whilst Mr Croucher denies knowledge of Julian Becker or even the existence of the Goldeneye Internationals Pornography actions, that use a virtually identical format to his own TCYK LLC actions, he cant  or wont explain how one of the Goldeneye International Porn Producers, got hold of and published one of Mr Achaches emails in a VERY obvious smear attack on Lawdit Solicitors.

My Blog is here https://acsbore.wordpress.com/, for any  of you who may receive one of these "Speculative Invoices".  It is not an expensive or polished affair, but then I don't pretend to be something I am not.

@Rest of the Board
In light of Mr Carter and Hatton&Berkeley, does the following link tell you much about the veracity and trustworthiness of CMI Business and their Directors? Didnt think so.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/10145729

Don't you mean 36, 88-90 Hatton Garden as stated by the original poster?
Evicted was Robert Croucher's reply.

This whole denial joke is getting old.  36, 88-90 Hatton Garden has been known to me, for years, as a mail drop used by fraudsters. All one-man bands pretending to have had a "former association" when caught.

If anyone does have any actual enquiries they'd like to make in person they are more than welcome to visit the head office in Mayfair, Berkeley Square where a member of staff will be happy to advise further.

Should you wish to schedule an appointment, you can via the usual method of emailing info@hattonandberkeley.com and requesting a meeting with the relevant department head.

As for the conjectured posts above, I would refer readers to review my previous posts.

Regarding on-going services for Rights Holders, action against Copyright Infringement and Litigation Activity in the UK, I would advise that readers refer to the website http://www.hb-administration.co.uk/ for further news and updates.

**News Alert** Robert Croucher, starts yet another new company dedicated to "Anti Piracy actions", or as most people would understand it as,

"Copyright Trolling".  Isn't it strange, that CMI Business Group T/A Hatton&Berkeley, has now become Hatton&Berkeley Global, and now we have "H&B Administration"
Not sure what he means by "conjecture", I don't believe that has been happening on here, at all, only the facts.
"H&B Administration"  is sure glossy, but devoid of substance, as these operations always are.

"IPEC Court Proceedings commence in the UK against illegal distributors" This statement, is nowehere to be found online, EXCEPT on this website.

"H&B Administration LLP provides a much needed solution to help rights holders combat the ever increasing problem of Digital Piracy in the modern age of the internet." — Robert Croucher, Executive Producer

Executive producer? of what? The statement? The Website? What does that mean.  I thought he was a graphic designer!

Still to avoid "conjecture" which I consider the call to be more chutzpah than anything else, here are a few links from a respected Lawfirm, with regard to these people

http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading-room/speculative-invoicing-porno

http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading-room/TCYK-trolls

They considered my evidence to be more than "conjecture"

I would refer readers to review my previous posts.

This is rather strange, so seeing what has been posted on here, and following up some leads, it seems, that Westone, was taken over by CMI43, and then what? CMI Business took over from them?  When you say, "taken over", is that a euphemism for "stolen"? I am only asking, as it wouldn't be the first time this type of thing has happened, and of course, the only way a Director can do so, is by I would imagine fraudulent purposes.

I am just pondering, as I know of a few people who have had bad dealings with these companies, and also the latest incarnation, CMI Business Group.  People trust these people with their business, sadly they realise to late, it is just a front for dodgy dealing.

The reason was summarised in my last sentence on 26 Apr 2016.
When backed into a corner these types spout a ton load of nonsensical BS or do a vanishing act.

Sorry didn't see that, so you know this Croucher guy?  Just seen this, possible reasons for all this, http://www.spearswms.com/profitable-independe ... s-them-us-film/
He is talking here, about how profitable independant film making can be, and yet, seeing this, it seems the company he was a Director of (THEM AND US UK LTD)  was already dormant. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/07822008/filing-history

How can he get away with so much of this dishonesty?  And yes it seems you are right about the address, thing that is strange though, is that he is listed as both Secretary and Director of the company, yet he is at two different places, one of which is the address you mentioned, the other it seems, is where he is running lots of different companies now. 43 Berkeley Sq.

I will tell my associates to avoid them like the plague.  Thankyou

You turned up a textbook snippet of no-substance BS injected onto an internet blog.
   There are plenty useful idiots who run internet blogs and forums and who don't apply due diligence. Then there is the facebook, youtube, twitter & online trade directories that upload any c.r.a.p. at a keystroke.
   After the first conviction, accounts and websites are shut down by the law just with cooperation of a bank or internet host.

Well I followed the link above, and even that is shocking.  http://www.hb-administration.co.uk/news-articles/

Under the heading

UK Intellectual Property Office Acknowledges TCYK Litigation

"Advice from the Government

Don’t ignore the letter, if it wasn’t you, supply the claimant with your defence and/or the information as to who it was that committed the offence, remembering that file sharing is illegal in the UK and has severe consequences for those offenders who baulk at the law.

Downloading and streaming are civil offences, and therefore carry lower claims for damages. File sharing via bit-torrent or what is known as P2P (peer-to-peer) file sharing involves distributing content, this is a criminal offence in the United Kingdom."

When you look at the original: Letters alleging online copyright infringement - GOV.UK

"Don’t ignore the letter. Even if you believe that you or anyone with access to your internet connection hasn’t shared the copyright protected material without the copyright owner’s permission. You should respond, even if you request more time to seek advice before you provide a more detailed response."

This website is a total lie.  How is it they are allowed to rewrite a Government Press release and only include the first 4 words, then add their own.

No, I meant office 3 (not 34) as that's what is being used by Paul Carter.

So does Robert Croucher lease office 34 and Paul Carter lease office 3 in the same building at 88-90 Hatton Garden?

Also, the Mayfair address is up for rent - suite 4B at 43 Berkeley Square was always the address used by clients and now it's available to rent from the landlords - what is the suite number now then if you still occupy a suite in there Robert?

Also, what was that address you had in St Albans that's now disappeared from your website?

Furthermore, I spoke to Paul Carter on the phone who advised that Robert Croucher has no right to operate a mail service from either of those addresses as those properties are leased by Westone NOT Hatton & Berkeley.

What's actually happened? Who is telling the truth?

Did Robert buy the business from Paul?

Did Paul get in financial difficulty so Robert saw an opportunity to take over?

What was meant to be the deal/arrangement?

Needless to say, whatever it was, it hasn't gone smoothly!!

You spoke to Mr Carter? Interesting.  Should ask him what happened to the business relationship between him and Mr Croucher.  (Mr Croucher of course did not originally disclose that he was partners with Mr Carter, I am not sure if he is still denying it)

From what we have seen, Suite 4B was the upper floor office, (see here for more info: http://www.berkeleysquareestate.com/pdfs/BSE% ... %20download.pdf), he is now in one of those, as 4B was one of the smaller areas.  (we presume, on this point).

The website, http://www.hb-administration.co.uk is now being used for the "Copyright Trolling" side of the CMI Business Group T/A "Hatton&Berkeley".  The website it frankly an embarrassment, as it is full of inaccuracies, one aspect being, that could potentially lead a person reading it to think they are actually being condoned by the Government, when of course, they are not. That Mr Croucher and his partner Ms Kudor are using these tactics, are not exactly conducive to an open and honest dialogue for potential customers. (IMHO)

The real problem with all these "limited" companies, is that they just get shut down and a new one gets opened, as we have seen before, and the actual burden of debt expires with the company, and the individual it seems remains unscathed.

If anyone does have any actual enquiries they'd like to make in person they are more than welcome to visit the head office in Mayfair, Berkeley Square where a member of staff will be happy to advise further.

Should you wish to schedule an appointment, you can via the usual method of emailing info@hattonandberkeley.com and requesting a meeting with the relevant department head.

As for the conjectured posts above, I would refer readers to review my previous posts (once more).

Regarding on-going services for Rights Holders, action against Copyright Infringement and Litigation Activity in the UK, I would advise that readers refer to the website http://www.hb-administration.co.uk/ for further news and updates.

'Lawdit Solicitors', as I am aware are on the record as legal representative for a number of defendants at present in the UK, should you wish to validate that I'm sure Michael Coyle will be happy to speak to you.

Haha, well this is hilarious, what a clown. Looks like Mr Croucher has run out of lies so is back to spamming this forum with links to poorly thrown together websites in a vain attempt to justify dishonest operations. Just one question for Mr Croucher from me, what films were you the executive producer of? Because I can't find a single film credited to you, and the £40 million pounds you earned as stated on your website www.robertcroucher.com seems to be a very large figure considering your work is invisible?

This is really par for the course with the "Trolls".  Basically, he is labeling my posts, as "Conjecture", when anyone who looks up what I have said, and what my colleagues have said, can be verified as being truthful.  (If they are not, please let me know.

The Trolls, love to increment small changes, and not tell anyone.  So as I have pointed out already, they have used TWO WORDS from a Government press release, the added their own text to it, but lead you to believe that the GOvernment is backing their tawdry scheme.

One small example, literally.

"The website for "Cmi Business group t/a Hatton&Berkeley" has now changed from;

© Hatton & Berkeley Global Ltd. ‘Hatton & Berkeley’ is a trading name owned by Hatton & Berkeley Global Ltd, Registered in the United Kingdom, Companies House Registrar  number: 10145165

to this

2016 © Hatton & Berkeley Global Limited. 'Hatton & Berkeley' is a trading name of Hatton & Berkeley Global Limited, Registered in the United Kingdom, Companies House Registrar  number: 10145165

Notice the word "OWNED" is ommitted from the latest version of the page? Why? because again, it is NOT owned, by Mr Croucher or  "Cmi Business group t/a Hatton&Berkeley"

That is what I call EVIDENCE, it is what Mr Croucher calls conjecture.