Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi LFI, With regard to the ANPR cameras in your post #65, while I was on the phone to the Planning Department, they did take a look at Google Streetview and went back to 2012 where they could see the ANPR cameras in place so therefore they would have deemed consent. I had previously read the T&C Planning Regulations and had read the section on deemed consent so I understood the point they made on the phone. It doesn't matter though, that doesn't harm my case any, and I shouldn't really mention this now, (this is what you reminded me of on another thread) but in the past I was a member of a scheme that gave me access to legal advice, I have spoken to a barrister previously through this scheme on another matter and I think I am still a member. I am going to check if I am still a member of the scheme, and if I am I will discuss my case with a barrister or solicitor, whichever the scheme deems appropriate. I will let you know the outcome. I am also going to take Bankfodders advice in the sticky and go to the local court and ask if I can sit in on a case in the Judges office.
    • deed?  you mean consent order you and her signed? concluding the case as long as you nor she break it's conditions signed upto? dx Yes sorry. they called it a deed at first in court.  Then Judge said she was happy to have it sealed as something else  exact names of orders in message above.     The disease was tested for when his cardiac testing was done immediately after purchase and part of the now sealed case.   However, results were disclosed incorrectly and I only found out  two days ago.   This disease did not form part of my knowledge during the case as I had been informed of a normal result that was not the case.   it is perfect clarity of a genetic disease where as the previous cardiac issue could be congenital until the pup is genetically tested. 
    • Hi, Halifax recently sold a credit card account of mine to Cabot. I am unemployed and have no assets and was thinking of making token £1 payments for 12-18 months in order to drag things out a bit and reduce the chance of Cabot being able to get the correct CCA documents from Halifax if I requested them in future. However, I saw on the pages on this forum about defending county court claims that one of the standard approaches when defending such claims is to say “I had an account with bank X, but I don’t remember the details and so don’t know if I owe this debt…”. If I made £1 payments to Cabot, would it prevent me from using such a defence in future? OC: Halifax DC: Cabot/Wescot Card account opened: 2016 Defaulted: 2023
    • Paperwork says sealed consent order and composite settlement agreement      YES  ADDISONS DISEASE 
    • Hi, This may be the wrong place for a thread BUT If you receive a defence, can you send a CPR 31.14 request for document mentioned in the defence, and then apply to proceed with the case only after (14) days passed or they respond OR is it only if you receive a claim I see @dx100uk thread is for when you receive a claim, but can you also do the same when you receive a defence?
  • 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 License Enforcement Process!?


tom6195
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3414 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,

 

The flat which I am currently sharing (with a friend who is a serving officer in the army and I am sort of house sitting for him) recently started receiving letters from the TV license folk.

 

They first sent one letter in August to say that they have been writing to the 'Legal Occupier' and have had no reply so the property was being investigated. I ignored this letter as it was nonsense, it was the first time they'd written to us and besides I do not watch or record live tv despite owning a tv set which is used just for netflix and games from my ps3.

 

They wrote to us again this October, this time saying as we've not yet replied they are moving to the final stages of their investigation and the matter has been handed to the local enforcement division. Apparently, they can apply for a search warrant from the court to gain access to the property (which would be very difficult as I live in a huge block of apartments and am currently the only person staying in the flat but also work 8-6 and am away most weekends so would be unable to let anyone in anyway).

 

I'm now both concerned and annoyed, as I don't want some random bloke knocking on my door asking to look inside my living room nor do I want to be taken to court.

 

Can someone please advise on what to do?

 

Thanks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya,

 

Ignore, the letters (currently a rotation of 4 at the moment) are computer generated rubbish, as you are not watching live TV & via online catch up, netflix, watching dvd's etc. then you do not need a licence.

 

If anyone ever turns up, refuse to say your name and tell them to leave your property, they have no powers, they like people to think that they have some special enforcement power & they can gain access to your property, question you etc.

If anyone turned up at your property and asked you to be let in so they can inspect your kitchen for toasters, would you let them in?

Exactly, refuse to give your details and tell them to leave your property or you will call the Police for Harassment & Tresspass.

 

You will keep receiving these letters every 4 - 5 weeks, best thing to do when one comes through the post is a guessing game of which stupid threatogram is in the envelope.

 

I get these letters and no one has ever visited in over 2 1/2 years here at our current property.

 

Stigman

NEVER telephone a DCA

If a DCA rings you, refuse to go through the security questions & hang up!

 

If I have helped you, click on the star & say thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you search the forum for threads on TV licensing

you will see that the letters are part of a standard series

which apparently goes right back to the beginning if you ignore them all.

 

 

There is a remote possibility someone will turn up on your doorstep

but if they do you are perfectly entitled to tell them to leave

- they have no authority whatsoever to enter your home

and you are not obliged to answer any questions

and most certainly should not sign anything.

 

I know from experience that telling them the property is empty/unoccupied/

does not have a tv/is a figment of their imagination has no effect whatsoever

and actually seems to encourage them to send more letters.

 

 

Ignore them.

 

 

If you do not watch live tv you do not need a licence, end of.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Just an update to this:

 

Received another letter last month, starts with:

 

"Dear sir/madam

 

You have not responded to our previous letters. We want to ensure you have the information you may need before a hearing is set at your local court".

 

Right, now I'm a little worried however there has been no inspection in between this letter and the last one. How can they possibly threaten me with a court appearance when they haven't even come to check whether or not I am indeed watching "live TV" as they put it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...