Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Aesmith - Thank you for your recent interest in my issues.  Input on people's topics can be most useful from specialised experts or those that have similar experiences.  Some people really struggle with knowing what to do (I certainly do) - so it is most useful and helpful and reassuring when solid sensible advice is offered.  I have found there to be some very kind, helpful, supportive and legally knowledgeable people here on cag over the years - who give sound legal advice for people to roll up their sleeves and follow up on.   Of course, sometimes it can be quite challenging sifting the wheat from the chaff.  I don't have lawyer or barrister.  I sometimes attend pro-bono legal clinics for help.  And sometimes have access to barristers via a pro-bono service called Advocate.  Both ad-hoc. Pro-bono means 'free'
    • The Judge was wrong. The keeper is only INVITED to say who was driving, there is no obligation for them to say.
    • Member of the Question Time audience asks Richard Tice about Donald Trump.    
    • I hope Lord Frost is OK. Islamists and the woke Left are uniting to topple the West ARCHIVE.PH archived 18 Apr 2024 19:12:37 UTC  
    • Ok you are in the clear. The PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 for two reasons. The first is that in Section 9 [2][e]  says the PCN must "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges ". It does not say that even though it continues correctly with blurb about the driver. The other fault is that there is no parking period mentioned. Their ANPR cameras do show your arrival and departure times but as that at the very least includes driving from the entrance to the parking space then later leaving the parking space and driving to the exit. It also doesn't allow for finding a parking spot: manoeuvering into it avoiding parking on the lines: possibly having to stop to allow pedestrians/other cars to pass in front of you; returning the trolley after finishing shopping; loading children disabled people in and out of the car, etc etc.  All of that could easily add five, ten or even 15 minutes to your time which the ANPR cameras cannot take into account. So even if it was only two hours free time you could  still have been within the  time since there is a MINIMUM of 15 minutes Grace period when you leave the car park. However as they cannot even manage to get their PCN to comply with the Act you as keeper cannot be pursued. Only the driver is now liable and they do not know who was driving as you have not appealed and perhaps unwittingly given away who was driving. So you do not owe them a penny. No need to appeal. Let them waste their money pursuing you . 
  • 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

tv licence agents.


xxorlsxx
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5690 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 i had a visit from a tv licensing agent and i refused to co-operate as there is'nt a tv in the flat, i got fed up with their threatening letters and their attitude, to these people we are put into two catagories, "licence payers or licence dodgers", has anyone had similar dealings with these people, if so what happened?

Cheers..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

This is probably know help to you but I experienced the TV licensing agent, many years ago now.

I said I have NO TV, (which I didn't) I lived in a flat then. In those days people used to say they couldn't prove you had a TV on in your particular flat because the block used a communal aerial. I think because of those assumptions they used to pick on flats to investigate quite alot.

Anyway I then got a letter from them saying i needed to get a license.

I promptly replied saying why do they assume every one has a TV, etc......

The letter was not particularly polite, I was a bit of a wild child then.

I never heard another thing.

As you don't have a TV, i would just ignore them, they can't do any thing if you don't own a TV.

Like you, I feel extremely irritated where they assume every dwelling in the country has a TV in it!

I do own a TV now & the appropriate license but its for the family, I still hardly ever watch it.

Edited by questioning
Link to post
Share on other sites

You do not have to offer any cooperation whatsoever especially as you have no tv.

You could always just ignore them in the hope they get a warrant of entry from the court to enter your home. When they do this you can watch them like a hawk and when they move something, make sure they put it back in the exact same position.

 

You do know that you can legally have a television in your house, the license is for using it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You do know that you can legally have a television in your house, the license is for using it.

 

I thought under these circumstances you must have a licence?

 

The important factor is in ownership of equipment capable of receiving signals-thus a licence would be required.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Al. No, the licence is for using (any) equipment to receive a 'live' broadcast.

You can watch streeming on your PC of programmes that have already been broadcast, but you can't use your PC (with a tv card) to watch programmes as they are broadcast, without a license.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So does that mean that if I were to Sky+ everything and watch it 5 minutes 'behind schedule' so to speak, that I wouldn't need a license?

 

Unfortunately not! It is an offence to watch or record live or near live broadcasts without a license. However, it is NOT an offence if you use BBC iPlayer, or C4 and ITVs versions to download and watch programmes. So if you are happy to wait for your programmes and miss some (not all are shown online), then you can do without a license.

 

I believe SKY are now offering a similar service too, so its becoming more and more possible to do without a license. Of course, the government is no doubt plotting ways to close this loophole.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was having similar problems, with me newly moving in to my own house. Not being one to really watch tv, if its on i will watch it but as i am often out in an evening with my hobbies, i watched it 4 on demand to catch up on the few programmes i did watch. I paid the tv licence as i thought that because i had the tv i needed to get one, but as the bills started rolling in i had to work out what i needed and what i didnt. A tv licence i could do with out. So i called them up, and asked them to cancel my tv licence. The lady on the other end tried so many ways for me to keep it, but i said that i didnt want to use my tv anymore. She asked a few questions, testing if i would be using it for anything she could charge me for. I said i play dvds, i play on the games console and i download programmes to view in my own time. She said that i had to make sure the ariel was out of the tv and that if someone came round they would want to check it. So much so i took the metal bit off the end of the wire so theres no chance they can say i just took it out.

 

Since then i know i can watch my tv online as and when i want and its free. I've also had several people i know saying i still need a licence, but as i explained to them they have said its a usefull bit of info especially with the ever growing credit crunch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also de-tune your channels as an extra precaution as they might try and say you use an indoor aerial. Of course, you do not have to allow an enquiry officer into your house unless he has a warrant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

I live with my girlfreind so i've not been at my flat for a while now, i've been in touch with tv licensing to let 'em know that fact, ( i dont have a tv) they are still bombarding me with letters about 'interview under caution' etc, i've written to them and removed their 'implied rights' to my property and if they carry on with their threatening letters i would view it as harassment.

Needless to say, these people still want to send an 'officer' round, im not going to spend weeks at my flat to 'prove my innocence', im just worried that they will get a warrant to search the flat and im going to find my front door kicked in when i go to check the place.

Does anyone have any views on the likelyhood of this happening?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are a bunch of idiots who could not arrange a "small drinks party" on "licensed premises".

 

We get these letters regularly addressed to individual caravans on our caravan park, despite us having a "mobile units" licence.

 

Every time we buy a TV we get letters, equally threatening, saying we have no licence.

 

This has happened for years - and nobody has ever visited.

 

Likelihood of your door being kicked in = likelihood of me winning "The Apprentice", "Big Brother" and the National Lottery on the same week.

Edited by Meldrew2
substitute "small drinks party" for "p*** up"

British Shoe Corporation - won :) BT - won :) West Lancs Council - lost :-x 02 - won :) British Airways - still fighting :o STOP PRESS - RSPCA - daughter won with letters I wrote :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are no more 'officers' than traffic wardens or bin men, that is the title given to them to make it sound official, the same as a housewife/husband being called a 'domestic engineer'.

 

The television licence comes under the heading of 'Tax' and is a statute laid down by parliament so evasion is a criminal offence.

 

They always tend to make their letters sound as if the property has to be licenced tv or no tv, but you can have as many tv receivers as you want.

What you can't do is to watch 'live' tv without a licence, but they have to prove that you 'are' watching live tv before issuing a summons.

They can't figure out how anyone could survive without television so assume everyone does.

 

As you don't have a television, there is no need whatsoever to respond to any of their correspondence, so you should cease now and forget them.

You do not have to notify them that you do not, (or no longer), have a tv.

 

They have no right to demand that you talk to them (under caution or not). Their only legal course is to get a warrant to enter your house but even then, they have to convince a judge that they have grounds to suspect you are watching live tv or have caught you in the act.

 

Don't bother talking to them at all and just ignore any further letters.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

We used to get them in our previous 1 bed flat, because they seemed to have our address registered twice. "6 XXXXXX Close" had the licence, but "Flat 6 XXXXXX Close" continued to get threatening and rude letters, despite it being the same flat!

 

They're just a bunch of retards!

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few months ago I bought a lcd for the bedroom from Currys in the City...2 weeks ago I got a letter from the TV licensing agency saying...

 

"We notice that you recently purchased a TV from (store name) and that you are not registered to have a TV license, contact us immeadiately to rectify this...blah...blah...blah"

 

I live with my girlfriend and we pay the license by DD...they sent it to the address so why wouldn't they that address has a license???

 

Needless to say, I threw the letter away, I'm not chasing them and making phone calls when they should be using the system properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

When we bought our current home two and a half years ago, the house was just a shell albeit with glass in the windows and a front door. Lo and behold inside the front door was 32 (Correct) letters/threatograms from TV Licensing! Is this a record?

 

P.s. When I rang the idiots to change our address on our EXISTING licence, the muppets denied that they had sent them!

 

Sounds like money well spent!

 

H

Link to post
Share on other sites

considering the cr*p the show on tv these days, and the amount of propaganda/brainwashing they broadcast , tv licensing should be paying you to watch it.... what our world is coming to?!! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

considering the cr*p the show on tv these days, and the amount of propaganda/brainwashing they broadcast , tv licensing should be paying you to watch it.... what our world is coming to?!! :lol:

 

I think they were saying that in the nineties...the eighties...the seventies...the sixties...the fifties...usually just before "I remember when this was all trees" or just after "The youth of today don't know they're born/have got no respect" and in the same conversation as "policeman are getting younger" and "my old gran used to say..."

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had grief with them in my old house... it was a former hall of residence but my landlady had bought it and rented the rooms out.There was 2 of living there, niether of us had TV's in our rooms, the only one was in the communal living area and my housemate paid the licence by DD. I lost count of the amount of letters we recieved, from the student licensing team, with all sorts of threats. I got so sick in the end that I rang them and gave them the full hairdryer treatment saying we both worked full-time, paid council tax, neither of us had a TV in our rooms, they needed to stop wasting their time by sending threat-o-grams to empty rooms, and if they bothered doing their job properly they would see the only TV in the house was actually properly licensed. Cue profuse apologies... and the next week... more threat-o-grams!!!Sheesh.

THE PRETENDER AGENDA - August 30,2008 - 2ND ROW!!! WOO-HOO!! :-)

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR A FAB NITE LEE! xx

Sunderland 011008 - THE BEST BIRTHDAY PRESSIE EVER! 'Aww, it's your birthday! Happy birthday darlin!'

 

02 Apr 2008, 23:55

OfficialLeeRyan wrote:

i like that!! its simple and good and gets the fans involved aswell x x x

 

MY SUCCESSES -

 

1st Credit (Lloyds TSB) admitted no CCA, reply from OFT 130608, reply from FOS 040608, adjudication stage rejected but still no contact....

 

My mate (Littlewoods/Moorcroft)

300608 -Long running battle,threatening court, CCA letter NO 2 and harrassment letter sent - passed back to Littlewoods early July.

070808 - Passed to Debt Managers, Acct in dispute/BOG OFF letter sent 080808...

140808 - Letter from Debt Managers passing debt back to Littlewoods - RESULT! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few months ago I bought a lcd for the bedroom from Currys in the City...2 weeks ago I got a letter from the TV licensing agency saying...

 

"We notice that you recently purchased a TV from (store name) and that you are not registered to have a TV license, contact us immeadiately to rectify this...blah...blah...blah"

 

I live with my girlfriend and we pay the license by DD...they sent it to the address so why wouldn't they that address has a license???

 

Needless to say, I threw the letter away, I'm not chasing them and making phone calls when they should be using the system properly.

 

I had a similar thing happen to me. Bought a TV from Curry's, moved house, informed the TV licence idiots of my change of address. Now, recently received a letter from them having been redirected from my old address, that I have no licence registered on the (old) property. Well, duh! Their system really is bad if they can't allow for that scenario and I have no intention of chasing them up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm begining to believe that TVLO is staffed by people headhunted from debt collectors, they certainly have the same attitude.

 

It is not the property that is licensed, it is you, and I believe they word it in a manner intended to deceive.

 

You have no duty to them at all, so continue how you have already decided and let them do any chasing but just ignore any further mail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I would also de-tune your channels as an extra precaution as they might try and say you use an indoor aerial. Of course, you do not have to allow an enquiry officer into your house unless he has a warrant.

But you do have to show him the television if you have one and he asks to see it, which could be difficult to do without allowing access given the size of modern sets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...