Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
  • 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

Does a fine for no tv licence result in a criminal record


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5289 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've found no concrete answer for this question!

 

if you are stupid enough to get caught with no tv licence (and yes, i was, today) then does the resulting fine leave you with a criminal record?

 

i travel to the USA quite a lot and i read on the web that it means i can no longer travel on a visa waiver for example!

 

i'm kicking myself!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole thing is a black area, not helped by the US Embassy's interpretation of their own rules or rather, they are covering their backsides by taking the most extreme line rather than leave themselves open to questions. (It's also a good revenue stream). It's also not helped by sensationalist media who claim that conviction for things like putting non recyled materials in recycling boxes will prevent you entering the USA without a VISA.

 

On the I-94 question, and the ESTA visa waiver electronic waiver, you have to answer this question.

 

Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or been controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral activities?

 

The key words in this case are "moral turpitude" and the definition of what the USA calls crimes of moral turpitude. If you have been caught without a licence trrough an oversight, then that would not be considered to fall in the catagory.

 

Probably the most helpful page of definitions is on Wikipedia

Moral turpitude - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

I would suggest that the best thing would be to apply for a visa waiver through the ESTA program Embassy of the U.S. London: Consular Affairs: Visa Wizard and apply several weeks beforehand.

 

If you are approved, I wouldn't overly worry, as the US imigration do not have access to the UK criminal records system. You'll still have to complete an I-94 visa waiver form on the plane by the way as the ESTA program is not fully up and running in the States.

 

In the worst case scenario, even if you are declined a Visa Waiver there is always a B2 Visitor visa, which can be issued to allow multiple entry for up to 10 years, but must be issued by the American Consulate.

MBNA - Agreed to refund £970 in full without conditions. Cheque received Sat 5th Aug.:D

Lloyds - Settled for an undisclosed sum.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

 

i've found no concrete answer for this question!

 

if you are stupid enough to get caught with no tv licence (and yes, i was, today) then does the resulting fine leave you with a criminal record?

 

i travel to the USA quite a lot and i read on the web that it means i can no longer travel on a visa waiver for example!

 

i'm kicking myself!!!!!

 

How on earth do u manage to get caught ?.

 

Dont talk to them when they call and never ever sign anything.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

In reply to your question, yes it is a criminal offence and you will have a criminal record.

 

If you have now bought a license and can show that you had only been home a few days then I think action would be dropped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also you should pay any fine as soon as possible. The next thing you will have is a CCJ for non payment, so make sure its paid.

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you're not a single mother, you may find they will not prosecute formally. Many cases are taken on their merits, and whilst it is unfair to those who are caught and taken to court, they are allowed discretion. If you've not come to their notice previosuly or made a false declaration, there's every chance they may threat the issue as closed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i got caught because the wife, who deals with all the bills etc, called me to ask if i could come home and sit with our 3 year old son who had fallen asleep while she nipped out.

 

i came home, she left, two minutes later theres a knock at the door. i genuinely had no clue as to whether we had one or not, i answered his questions, (with hindsight) stupidly signed his piece of paper (in which he completely glossed over the seriousness of and didnt mention the caution until after he'd filled it in) then he left. i wasnt even watching it, our 3 year old was - i was on my computer working.

 

two minutes later the wife comes home, realises her oops and i get online and buy a licence for the year. time on the inspectors form 15:06, time on the email from tvlicence confirming the new licence 15:27

 

do you think i should write to TVL? doesnt the licence get backdated to the beginning of the month and therefore i was effectively covered when he called?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd leave it and see what transpires.

 

The fact the licence is backdated is immaterial, as on the day of the inspection you were not covered, but you can now prove you were licenced on all the other days. (Think of the road Tax argument, even if you retax after (say) an argument, the police still refer to the car as being untaxed at the 'time of the incident'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming back to the original question that the OP asked, ignoring the issue of the TV licence and the rights and wrongs for now, I would say that you have not got anything to worry about as far as using the Visa Waiver scheme is concerned, even if you were prosecuted.

 

Willful evasion of tax is a qualifier for exclusion form the waiver program, tax evasion without intent to defraud is not. From what you have described, there was not a deliberate attempt to defraud and so you can accurately and truthfully answer NO on the I-94 form to the pertantent question.

 

Incidently, most PPC's, bailiffs and debt collection agency staff would be excluded from the visa waiver program if there was ever a crackdown on their behaviour. Making false representations, attempting to defraud or intent to defraud are all offences that will exclude you from obtaining a visa waiver.

Edited by RichardM

MBNA - Agreed to refund £970 in full without conditions. Cheque received Sat 5th Aug.:D

Lloyds - Settled for an undisclosed sum.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidently, most PPC's, bailiffs and debt collection agency staff would be excluded from the visa waiver program if there was ever a crackdown on their behaviour. Making false representations, attempting to defraud or intent to defraud are all offences that will exclude you from obtaining a visa waiver.

 

These would be corporate issues - and not affect an individual. There would have to have been a successful criminal conviction of a named individual to be of relevance to a visa declaration. As most of the enterprises you mentioned are legal entities in their own right, the activities they condone would not be an issue as it won;t be the Parking Company requesting a visa.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As it is a criminal offence, if it goes to the magistrates court and you are subsequently found guilty (for whatever reason or any mitigating circumstances are not accepted), then you will, strictly speaking, have a criminal record. The offence is an summary offence, and one which is absolute with a fine, on average, reaching £200 + court costs. But can vary from court to court, but most people pay around this amount.

 

I'm not sure how it affects your travel to the USA, however the moral of the story would be....don't break the law?

 

It's the same process as those who commit benefit fraud, and follows the same jurisdiction process.

Lived through bankruptcy to tell the tale! Worked in various industries and studied law at university. All advice is given in good faith only :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...