Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I had a parcel that I needed shipped from Borehamwood WD6 to Edinburgh EH14 that was 12in x 12in x 12in & weighed just shy of 9kg. It was accepted at a Hermes Drop off point on the 9th Sept 2020 on a 48hr DELIVERY & on the 10th Sept showed as :On its way....12:59 - Thu 10 Sep...We've got your parcel and we're processing it for you. As of yet ( 1500hrs on 25/09/2020 ) I have still not received my parcel. This parcel was a wedding gift hamper of 'unknown goodies' so pretty important that I had it before 13th September 2020 The value of the parcel was £150.00 so I am not best pleased that it was lost by Hermes, as it was a Wedding gift I then felt obliged to give the Bride & Groom the cash to buy whatever they desired as the parcel was delayed. If the parcel was to have later turned up I would have still allowed them to keep both gifts, what annoys me is the lack of clarity that Hermes can offer me, I can't understand how a 12in squared box isn't traceable? ( maybe a member of staff has 'hidden it' for later enjoyment ). any assistance in this matter would be good because between Hermes & Packlink I am hitting 'brick walls'   Cheers, Peter  
    • All sent this morning registered delivery  let’s see what happens now 🤷🏼‍♀️  thanks dx for the above  MJ 
    • I am not sure what you are expecting. This is nothing new, it is just that the person concerned caught the incident on camera, that makes it newsworthy, apparently. Simply the EA fell foul of the regulation which defines "relevant premises". I can think of several judgments which agree with this, and found against the Bailiff..: 6)Otherwise premises are relevant if the enforcement agent reasonably believes that they are the place, or one of the places, where the debtor— (a)usually lives, or (b)carries on a trade or business. The bailiff may call at relevant premises, this may or may not correspond to any residential information suppled by the creditor or his office, the provision is permitted under his general powers.   The point is that the EA must have a reasonable belief that the person lives or works there. Once the EA acts outside the procedure authorised by his writ(Schedule( 12), he is open to actions under common law or those rules applicable under other legislation.   Problems only arise when people take this incident to prove something that it doesn't.     There is no disputing that the bailiff and the company behaved atrociously, and there is no denying that DCBL makes a habit of this kind of thing    
    • I feel a snotty something coming on. Whatever it is it's not Batflu 😂😂   It was an ANPR capture. ..... SMILE 🖕.....   Is this enough or should I write a proper defense??   A lack of contractual obligation makes your demands spurious, please refer back to your client and desist this harassment
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 4 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

TV License fines....BBC responsible for over 10% of all criminal prosecutions in Magistrates Courts


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2373 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

When I last purchased a telly the assistant asked me for my address , does any one know if this is a legal requirement to give it ?

 

Firstly, they no longer ask.

 

Secondly, while they were obliged to ask, you weren't obliged to give it, although they could, of course, refuse the sale if you didn't.

 

The alternative, from your POV, was to give false details.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 214
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

does anyone know how long the debtor is given to purchase a TV Licence

 

They're not given any time to purchase a licence.

 

If they admit to watching without a licence, a "Prosecution Statement" is taken immediately.

 

does anyone know the approx length of time from when the inspector visits to the matter being heard in court?

 

It's usually around 5-6 months.

 

This is because, information must be laid, within 6 months of the date of the alleged offence.

 

Leaving it as long as possible, means the accused is less likely to be able to accurately recall what they said, hence less likely to put up a believable defence, under questioning in the Dock.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So am I correct in saying that if they are denied entry to your house, they have no proof of a tv device being used =no proof to show to a magistrate to gain a warrant, meaning they are stuffed either way?

 

A SW application doesn't require PROOF, merely "reasonable grounds to believe".

 

More importantly however, not talking to them means no risk of inadvertently giving information that could be used to fit you up.

 

And before someone says "nobody has ever been fitted up", Capita/TVL employees have been convicted of falsifying evidence.

 

So, don't give your name or other details, and exclude yourself from the edited version of the Electoral Register.

Edited by Bedsit Bob
Link to post
Share on other sites

A solution to this nonsense? Someone on another forum posted one.

 

Digital TV is encrypted with a 128 bit rotational rolling encryption codec.

Your decoder has a shared key for open channels, hence why you can see them.

The licence could quite easily be your key for subscription.

No licence = no key= No BBC.

 

So no licence inspectors, no courts, you don't pay you don't watch .

Makes sense to me, however I imagine the BBC would object to losing revenue from those that don't subscribe, and no doubt Crapita would lobby vigorously against it.

 

Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

 

Being poor is like being a Pelican. No matter where you look, all you see is a large bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Firstly, if Capita TVL are now responsible for "Licence Enfarcement" then how can they actually sue anybody for not having a TV licence?

 

They don't sue anybody.

 

TV Licence evasion is a criminal offence, hence alleged evaders are prosecuted, not sued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Digital TV is encrypted with a 128 bit rotational rolling encryption codec.

Your decoder has a shared key for open channels, hence why you can see them.

The licence could quite easily be your key for subscription.

No licence = no key= No BBC.

 

So no licence inspectors, no courts, you don't pay you don't watch .

 

 

 

That's too much like common sense and you're right, both the BBC and Capita would object strongly!

Perhaps it's because deep down they know they have a product very few would willingly pay £150 (or thereabouts) a year for. What gets me as well is that in common with Road Tax (sorry, Vehicle Excise Duty), this is an outdated, overpriced ownership tax that must be paid in full with no sensible options for monthly payment. Also both are administered by private copmanies these days, not by the government who are meant to be above corruption etc.

When i say sensible options for monthly payments, yes you can pay for a TV licence monthly but the first 6 months payments are doubled so that because of subtle wordings, if for any reason a direct debit payment goes AWOL, they can then charge you with not having a tv licence from day1 of when it was meant to be effective from. Nasty!

Link to post
Share on other sites
They don't sue anybody.

 

TV Licence evasion is a criminal offence, hence alleged evaders are prosecuted, not sued.

 

When i said sue, i A) used the term loosely and B) was under the impression it was still a civil offence.

 

Considering most of the detritus the BBC produce, they should be prosecuted for poluttion of the airwaves!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, some on here are blatantly advising people how to avoid tvl folks when some would require a license and should pay it. How people think they should be allowed to avoid paying when they need a license is beyond me and its surely not what this forum is for. The advice should be if you need a license, pay. If you don't, then you can ignore the tvl folks

Link to post
Share on other sites

tomtubby - if you bothered reading my reply a couple of posts above, i pointed out i used the term loosely and why!

 

porkyp1g - i think it's more a case of people trying to advise when people DON'T need to buy a tvl rather than deliberate avoidance techniques - that in itself is probably some sort of offence?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, some on here are blatantly advising people how to avoid tvl folks when some would require a license and should pay it. How people think they should be allowed to avoid paying when they need a license is beyond me and its surely not what this forum is for. The advice should be if you need a license, pay. If you don't, then you can ignore the tvl folks

.

.

 

 

I started this thread and have made the majority of the posts and I wish to make it CLEAR that at no time have I indicated that people should not buy a TV licence. Instead, I have merely outlined the frankly worrying way in which non payment is ENFORCED and the role that is played by Capita in the subsequent court hearing.

 

Most importantly, I have tried to stress as well that anyone visited by Capita should NOT ignore the summons from the court and should at the very least, plead guilty ( if this is the case) and complete a Means Enquiry Form.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, some on here are blatantly advising people how to avoid tvl folks when some would require a license and should pay it. How people think they should be allowed to avoid paying when they need a license is beyond me and its surely not what this forum is for. The advice should be if you need a license, pay. If you don't, then you can ignore the tvl folks

 

Anyone that follows that advice will only have themselves to blame if they end up with a claim form land on their mat or a bailiff at their door.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people convicted, even those with NO TV and no need for a licence stitch themselves up at the doorstep, NO TV no problem for Crapita they will insinuate your PC needs a licence and get you to admit to watching Eastbenders over that dial up connection.......

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I started this thread and have made the majority of the posts and I wish to make it CLEAR that at no time have I indicated that people should not buy a TV licence. Instead, I have merely outlined the frankly worrying way in which non payment is ENFORCED and the role that is played by Capita in the subsequent court hearing.

 

Most importantly, I have tried to stress as well that anyone visited by Capita should NOT ignore the summons from the court and should at the very least, plead guilty ( if this is the case) and complete a Means Enquiry Form.

 

My point was more aimed at the post by fulhamboy on the 28th August. It's blatantly just saying dont pay till your caught and then try and pay up. That's not what the threads are for?

Link to post
Share on other sites
My point was more aimed at the post by fulhamboy on the 28th August. It's blatantly just saying dont pay till your caught and then try and pay up. That's not what the threads are for?[/quote

 

I stated in a previous post that I have a license and will continue to buy one , but if caggers have more pressing debts to pay then a license could wait .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I routinely wait till a few months after the license is due before actually buying it and I've never had visitors or anything problems. It's backdated when you buy it like that anyway, assuming it carries on from your last license. I'm seriously considering genuinely ditching the license and the tv channels which come with my broadband both as I watch so very little on it now. If I do that I'll deffo send the withdrawal of implied rights letter because I remember a time many years ago when I didn't have a tv they came round and came round and came round... I can do without the pointless hassle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is pointless hassle. I used to ignore them apart from the odd occasion when I had conversations with them on the doorstep. They used to act as if they had such authority and to which they had none. I did really feel sorry for them..

Link to post
Share on other sites

"If I do that I'll deffo send the withdrawal of implied rights letter". There is a potential downside to that should Crapita be so minded. I cannot estimate the odds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely only if they have evidence that a tv is being used without a licence..

Crapita have been known to lie in order to gain a warrant.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...