Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi,   Having had a PM exchange with Shamrocker (thank you) I've been advised to upload the General Order/Judgement that was sent to me at the end of September.  Can someone (possibly Andy) clarify that I need to complete a WS for my "side of the bargain".   Obviously, I have just received and uploaded the claimant's WS so I suspect I do, but the actual order was "vague".    Many thanks B   General Order & Direction Oct19.pdf
    • Hmm, so.. basically have to rely on the default notice not containing all that it should and the claimant misleading the court for the reason for the application.. and judge lottery : /
    • Which would require a hearing....so the fee would be £255.00
    • When providing a copy of an executed agreement in response to a request under section 78(1) of the Act:   a.     must a creditor provide a photocopy (or other form of complete copy) of the original agreement that was signed by the debtor or at least provide a copy which is derived directly from the original agreement or complete copy thereof? or b.     can a creditor provide a document which is a reconstitution of the original agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself?   It was held that a creditor can satisfy its duty under section 78 by providing a reconstituted version of the executed agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself.   The judge accepted that as a matter of law, section 78 does not itself require any particular explanation as to how the copy was made. However, as a matter of good practice and so as not to mislead the debtor, it is desirable that the creditor should explain that it is providing a reconstituted as opposed to a physical copy of the executed agreement. This will also explain why the copy might otherwise look a little odd. The creditor can also explain in the letter that this procedure is satisfactory under the Act. The judge also provided that the following information needs to be included in the reconstituted copy agreement (assuming of course that it was present in the original):   1.     Heading: Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 2.     Name and address of the debtor 3.     Name and address of the creditor 4.     Cancellation clause applicable to the executed agreement.   All of the above may be provided on a sheet which is separate from the full statement of terms and conditions which also forms part of the reconstituted agreement. The creditor may, however, decide to reconstitute the agreement in a different way so that, for example, the information above is populated electronically onto the same sheet as that which sets out the terms and conditions, or some of them. The judge stated that he did not intend to prescribe the precise form of the reconstituted agreement. The key point is what information it should contain, subject to the point that its format should not be such as to mislead the debtor as to what he agreed to.   The judge also considered whether a statement like the one appearing in the reconstructed application form in Carey referring to the agreement to the terms and conditions "attached" needs to be included in the reconstituted copy. Alternatively if the application form had said "I agree to the terms overleaf", should that statement be included. The judge held that this aspect of the form is not necessary for the purpose of the section 78 copy, although there is nothing to stop a bank from putting it in or indeed from furnishing a copy of the type of application form or signature page that the debtor would have signed, as some banks have done. The statement referring to terms and conditions is not itself prescribed information and the supply of the terms and conditions which were applicable at the time will tell the debtor what he needs to know in terms of the content of what he signed up to, including the presence (or otherwise) of the prescribed terms.   In practical terms what this is likely to mean is that if the creditor chooses to use as the section 78 copy the section 63 copy, which would have been provided to that particular debtor at the time following execution of the agreement, this will be sufficient provided that the information referred to above is supplied. This exercise is not a mere formality. The creditor will need to check carefully that the details of the debtor at the time are correct and that those are the particular terms (including prescribed terms) that he/she agreed to. This is to ensure that it is an honest and accurate copy.   Must a creditor provide a document which would comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (Regulations) as to form, as at the date the agreement was made in order to comply with section 78?   A creditor need not, in complying with section 78, provide a document which would comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Regulations as to form, as at the date the agreement was made.   Must the copy provided under section 78 include the debtor's name and address as at the date when the agreement was made, and if so in what form? The section 78 copy must contain the name and address of the debtor as it was at the time of the execution of the agreement. But the creditor can provide the name and address from whatever source it has of those details. It does not have to take them from the executed agreement itself.     If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, is a copy of the executed agreement as varied, a sufficient copy for the purposes of section 78(1), or must the creditor provide a copy of the original agreement as well?   If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, the creditor must still provide a copy of the original agreement, as well as the varied terms.     As your agreement is post April 2007  Section 61(1)(a) and 127(3)   Consumer Credit Act 1974 would not apply.   Andy
    • well start a new thread for the court claim.   as for this one i'd await the letter of claim  
  • Our picks


TV license summons

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2479 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,


A few months ago i received a visit from a TV licensing officer and agreed to sign up for a payment card as well as signing their paperwork saying i was unlicensed.(stupid I know :sad: )


On saturday just gone I received a summons for not having a TV licence between the dates 21/08/2012 - 29/08/2012.


I have tried logging onto my tv licence online and the only information i can get is that my licence expires on 31/07/2013.

Counting back from the end of July this year it seems to me that my license should be valid for the period they are trying to charge me.


I phoned up TV licensing and the guy on the phone said I still had to goto court, when i asked about the dates he said licenses only last for 11.5 months!!

This can't be right surely!!

I really don't know what to do here, have I got a leg to stand on or should i just plead guilty by post?


Thanks in advance for your help

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

i always thought it was a years licence


If you challenged the fact they said it was 11.5 months they would deny saying that


so stay off the phone write to them if you are covered you will get a quick reply and case dropped

If i have helped in any way hit my star.

any advice given is based on experience and learnt from this site :-)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

If 11½ months comes into the equation, that will be an accounting period not the length of time the license is valid. I would plead not guilty, but the choice is yours.


Have you not got the license which show the expiry date.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies.


No i haven't got a copy of the license, when you have a payment card they don't issue you with one for some reason.


The only proof i have of my license is my payment card and the information i can get while logged into the site.


This is pretty sketchy though and only provides dates of payments and license expiry date.


When i login to the proper TV licensing site and click view my license all it shows me is my license number.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also send that saying you cannot see when the license expires as TVL doesn't show it.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...