Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Performing Rights Society-Listening to music at work-Help?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5711 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi there, im new-ish to this forum so please be patient with me!

Ok, my question is how much will this cost companies? I work in a relatively small company, we have about 130 workers and our boss took us into our canteen and explained the details about the PRS but seemed to think we would have to pay around £1000 per year??

Can anyone please shed some light on this? It seems rather steep compared to what iv heard??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, the only way round it is to remove the music altogether I'm afraid. Our company has just been stung for £2,500 !!! Even if you take the radios/piped music out they will still get you if you have holding music on your phone system or even training videos with music intros !! It's devastating for companies who are struggling to compete with foreign imports and are up against price wars every day. Some workers have such boring jobs that only the radio makes it bearable.

 

What I'd like to know is how they are going to pay Chopin, Beethoven, Brahmms etc who are dead (don't get me started).

 

Alternatively, you could ask your workers to use their own MP3 players with earphones, as that is classed as personal use and no-one else can hear it.

 

Even our local Chinese take-away has to pay as he has a TV in the shop.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'd like to know is how they are going to pay Chopin, Beethoven, Brahmms etc who are dead (don't get me started).

 

I'm not expert but I think royalties expire after a certain period of time, maybe 50 years or so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder who is actually doing the broadcasting, the radio station has already paid the fee to broadcast to the public, saying a garage has to pay again is getting the fees twice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just received a phone call out of the blue today from PRS and told that we would have to pay for radio in tea room (not provided by employer), and which can not be heard by public and is only on at lunch.

 

Public seems to constitute more than one person even if they are staff in a private area, remote from the public. If you have a radio, CD player or TV for staff use, then you have to pay.

 

Only option is to remove it or pay the fee. As Ell-enn said provided staff use their own headphones, that is OK.

 

I am not sure what the position is with use of PCs for radio, clips etc.

 

Kwik Fit are/ were involved in a court case. Don't know how this has gone. However, Kwik Fit say they banned the use of radios a long time ago, but never took enforcement action.

 

I was told by PRS that they have been working through all businesses in UK and there is a lot of debate on other sites about it.

 

BBC NEWS | Scotland | Edinburgh, East and Fife | Kwik-Fit sued over staff radios

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kenny you have to pay if staff play music through their PC, also if you have videos for training you have to pay for the intro music on them!! Basically you have to pay for any music sound anyone around you can hear :mad:

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically you have to pay for any music sound anyone around you can hear :mad:

 

What about talk radio stations? I listen to TalkSport only, through my pc (in a portacabin so not even a digital radio works)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they play any music on that station, and anyone else apart from you can hear it for even a nano second - they'll make you pay :mad:

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Kenny, it's maddening. What they don't realise it that the majority of manufacturing companies and indeed other employers rely on music to help ease the monotony workers can suffer from in repetitive jobs.

 

Unfortunately, there is usually no budget provision for this new "tax" and companies who are struggling to compete with foreign imports and cost down demands from customers, just can't afford to pay thousands for this licence. Eventually it will result in cuts in the workforce. I hope they're happy with their "windfall" at the expense of redundancies:mad:

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Quote from the PRS web site

 

"If you play music in your business or want to include it in your product you need clearance to do so from the owners of that music. PRS and MCPS represent the owners and can get you the clearances you need. We are a not-for-profit organisation, enabling you access to the world's music in the most efficient way"

 

NOW I AM NO LAWYER AND THIS IS A PERSONAL OPINION...OK?

 

But it appears from this statement that they act as agents for performers, copyright holders etc.

 

Perhaps they could be asked to provide details of how they distribute the money they raise.

 

Why not tell them that you will be using this music and to confirm that the performers / copyright owners will get their cash?

 

YouTube - Third Reich Military Music- Erika

 

YouTube - Badenweiler Marsch

 

Is there a smiley for "Tongue firmly in cheek?"

Edited by WAVE_131
Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears that the virtual monoply position of the PRS and similar societies is not approved of by the EU.

 

Check:-

EC wants to provide freedom for the authors from collecting societies | EDRI

 

Publications - Articles: CISAC squares up to commission's investigation of licensing agreements

 

The following may be useful:-

 

"If a music user is forced to pay a licence fee which they consider to be far in excess of the fee hitherto

negotiated or if onerous terms are imposed as a condition of granting the licence there is no other recourse

than applying to the Copyright Tribunal in order to try to lessen the financial obligation or ameliorate the

conditions of the licence" Source:-

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmdius/245/245.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...