Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi. Could you post up what they've sent please so we can see what the charge is? Cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • I've looked through all our old NPE threads, and as far as we know they have never had the bottle to do court. There are no guarantees of course, but when it comes to put or shut up they definitely tend towards shut up. How about something like -   Dear Jonathan and Julie, Re: PCN no.XXXXX cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea that you actually expected me to take this tripe seriously and cough up. I'll write to you not some uninterested third party, thanks all the same, because you have are the ones trying to threaten me about this non-existent "debt". Go and look up Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd, saddos.  Oh, while you're at it, go and look up your Subject Access Request obligations - we all know how you ballsed that up way back in January to March. Dear, dear, dear - you couldn't resist adding your £70 Unicorn Food Tax, you greedy gets.  Judges don't like these made-up charges, do they? You can either drop this foolishness now or get a hell of a hammering in court.  Both are fine with me.  Summer is coming up and I would love a holiday at your expense after claiming an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g). I look forward to your deafening silence.   That should show them you're not afraid of them and draw their attention to their having legal problems of their own with the SAR.  If they have any sense they'll crawl back under their stone and leave you in peace.  Over the next couple of days invest in a 2nd class stamp (all they are worth) and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.
    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
    • Okay please go through the disclosure very carefully. I suggest that you use the technique broadly in line with the advice we give on preparing your court bundle. You want to know what is there – but also very importantly you want to know what is not there. For instance, the email that they said they sent you before responding to the SAR – did you see that? Is there any trace of of the phone call that you made to the woman who didn't know anything about SAR's? On what basis was the £50 sent to you? Was it unilateral or did they offer it and you accepted it on some condition? When did they send you this £50 cheque? Have you banked it? Also, I think that we need to start understanding what you have lost here. Have you lost any money – and if so how much? Send the SAR to your bank as advised above
  • 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

had a visit from tv licencing


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4026 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

  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

the point i was making was that you asked if he was guilty before proven facts were available, that being paying by direct debit, how long remained on his licence etc

 

i am not having a go so i apologize if it seems that way but a normal lay person cannot be expected to know if they are guilty or not without the prima facie case being made against them

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll need some precise information, to determine if you were unlicensed at the time of the visit.

 

Eh? Do you work for the BBC then?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard these people carry devices that can tell if you are watching TV but i doubt this is true. He tried getting me to pay because I had a laptop which ment I could watch BBC iplayer, but I refused and he backed down. I then showed him that I hadn't tuned my TV because I only used it for DVDS and playstation (also to watch telly online) but forgot to mention that! Theyll try to ctach you out just to make a quick buck

Link to post
Share on other sites

started in may, they wanted yearly so tried to take a yearly one in June but I couldn't afford took a monthly payment in July but missed Aug/Sept so rang and asked for cash plan at 1st said no as already doing a dd for monthly.

 

eventually got them to agree cash plan but heard nothing till after this guy came round my current license expires Oct 2013, they want taking me to court for no license from Oct 12 - Nov 12

Link to post
Share on other sites

the point i was making was that you asked if he was guilty before proven facts were available, that being paying by direct debit, how long remained on his licence etc

 

i am not having a go so i apologize if it seems that way but a normal lay person cannot be expected to know if they are guilty or not without the prima facie case being made against them

 

I wasn't talking from a proof beyond reasonable doubt position.

 

I was talking from a, determining if he has a usable defence, position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but how can a lay person know if they have committed an offence or not

 

for all we know he might be a pensioner entitled to a free TV licence so not subject to enforcement measures as an example

 

again the point i am making is that an individuals own mouth is their worst enemy, nothing is ever black and white

 

i will now retire for the time being

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what you said, you made a payment in May, a payment in June, and a payment in July, this year?

 

Is that correct?

 

These payments were in the region of £25 each?

 

Is that correct?

Edited by Bedsit Bob
Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember they backdate the licence to cover you from when you should have had one.

 

When i had a visit i explained that i didn't watch the tv as i was always at my partners. I was asked if it was connected as if it was i needed a licence. I asked him if he would give me two minutes to tidy up then let him in to see no tv there. Job done and not heard since. He was really nice about it all.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

all the guy asked was, are you watching tv (not live tv) my reply yes as we just watched a DVD. He asked to come in said no as I was leaving to go on school run!

 

The that would be all he needs to fabricate his report.

You admitted to watching TV, they don't care whether it was a DVD or not, that's why it is always best to ignore them, no contact, you are under absolutely no legal obligation to answer any of their questions, these people are on commission, they have no legal rights whatsoever, just ignore them.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No set up license in may but they took a year dd in June couldn't afford so they took a month in July and I then asked for weekly cash plan but they said no as I already started the monthly dd missed Aug and Sept payments

Link to post
Share on other sites

They got their proof, by the OP admitting they were watching TV.

 

Unless of course the BBC don't know the name of the occupant, then they will be unable to issue a summons. But I fear they already have that information unfortunately..:fear:

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you bought a TVL in Oct 2012 it will last for 12 months yes.

 

Without seeing the summons, if indeed it really is one? it will be difficult to advise. What do their POC say?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It deffo a summons, it from magistrates stating summons.

 

POC?

 

im looking at the license and the letter is dated 23 Jan.

It says customer number,

Valid until expiry on 31/10/2013

Payment type: payment card

 

The licence is only valid if you keep up the regular payments by the datex set out in your schedule

Link to post
Share on other sites

They got their proof, by the OP admitting they were watching TV.

 

Unless of course the BBC don't know the name of the occupant, then they will be unable to issue a summons. But I fear they already have that information unfortunately..:fear:

 

OP says he told them that they were watching Dvd not live TV

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. OP said he told them he was watching tv. The licence guys would have taken this to mean live tv. They couldnt care less about the circumstances. As far as they are concerned, the accused admitted it, they get their commission, and the stats go up.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. OP said he told them he was watching tv. The licence guys would have taken this to mean live tv. They couldnt care less about the circumstances. As far as they are concerned, the accused admitted it, they get their commission, and the stats go up.

 

I was looking at post # 62 all the guy asked was, are you watching tv (not live tv) my reply yes as we just watched a DVD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats correct matt, but as you saw, when asked if he was watching tv, the poster said "yes". Thats all the licensing people need to get a summons. They dont care what else you said, the key for them is the accused answered YES to watching tv.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doubtful. As far as they are concerned, they gained a full admission that they were watching tv.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The very best defence you can have is to laugh at them and ignore them.

These guys are as powerless as DCA's.

 

They simply control you through the fear they have created.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...