Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good evening DX100   Here is a draft of my response to the court order.  I would be obliged if you could review it and avise me if I am on the right track.   Defendant Statement of Position in Response to the Order of the Sheriff   The defendant suffered Severe Depression illness almost 12 months prior to the closer of the Bank account. HBOS was made aware of the defendant illness.  A Medical Certificate dated 15 Sept 2017 was handed over to the bank as a proof. (A copy of the report will be submitted exclusively to the court review) The defendant, with the support of her ex-partner, sought a resolution from the OC regarding the escalation of her OD account, which it was mostly formed of extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. HBOS agreed to reduce the outstand OD sum to £XXX and closed the account. The defendant is confident that her ex-partner has settled the agreed sum with OC, but not absolutely certain, considering her health state at that time. She has been actively trying to reach for her ex-partner for documented evidence, but the fact that, we believe, he is a currently deployed by the UK military forces abroad and communication has been, to put it politely, very difficult due to the nature of his deployment. As the court is aware, the defendant has been trying to retrieve the data of her dealing with/from OC which it should reflect history of the above.  The defendant has already written twice to HBOS, as well as visiting her bank branch, on 01 March 2021, in person demanding the requested data.  HBOS promised to send the data to her as soon as they can. In addition to the above reasoning and contend, the defendant refute the claimants claim is owed or payable.  Due to punitive and extortionate fees the facility became untenable. Any alleged balance  claimed will consist totally of default penalties, punitive charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety and any alleged balance was due to punitive and extortionate charges . It is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:-               a.    Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and Conditions at inception, which this claim is based on.               b.    Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.               c.    Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account and justify how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.               d.    Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.               e.    Evidence how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.     10.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Same thing. The fact that you declared £4.99 means that is the extent of any reasonable foreseeably consequence. Just go for that small amount. If they cause any problems then you can have a laugh when they spend many times more than what you're claiming in order to resist you. In future, when you contract with somebody – you need to understand that effectively it is an exchange of the reasonable expectations which you create in each other by your agreement.  
    • Current situation: contacted myhermes website's robot talk about the parcel and waiting for their email response. Thanks @BankFodder   I understand that if I were going to pursue under contract law, £4.99 would be the amount that I am entitled for compensate. How about if I were going to pursue this matter under tort - negligence? Would this allow me to pursue them according the true value of the items?
    • Hi UncleB, thanks for responding. I did call them back and it appears to be hit & miss with Devitt and dependent upon which Customer service agent you get.   Spoke with a very pleasant lady and told her that I, like them recorded all calls and gave date time of call and specific time at which a green card was stipulated in order for me to take out the policy.   *Two days later a hard copy of the green card landed on my doorstep. *Free of charge too.
    • Have you received a Parking Ticket? - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group   please complete the above then we'll be best placed to advise further but the bottom line is no and don't ever appeal.    
  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 25 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2004 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

Hello

 

Can anyone please tell me if I am legally obliged to inform tv licensing that I do not need a license. I had informed them via their own website by completing the declaration form. I did this about two years ago when my tv broke and I never got it replaced. I recently had a visit from one of them and told them again that I do not have a tv and didnt let them in. I have now recieved a letter stating "We want to ensure you have the information you may need before a hearing is set at your local court".

 

I just wondered if I am legally obliged to inform them on a regular basis that I do not need a license.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi,

 

I have moved your thread to the appropriate Forum, hopefully you will get some advice shortly.

 

Regards,

 

Scott.

 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

tell us more about what happened on your doorstep. did you sign anything?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent an Email to Capita/TV Licence two years ago saying i do not watch live TV Broadcasts and stop their goons from knocking at my door or deluge with Pseudo official legal letters. They agreed and stated they will contact me in 2 years to see if there has been any change.

 

The legislation is watching live Broadcasts, not if you have equipment that can receive live Broadcasts. I have my TV hooked up to my computer for the simple fact i have bad eye sight with no Aeriel connected.

 

There is no statutory requirement to have a TV Licence if you do not watch live TV Broadcasts. Computer, DVD, Games Consuls etc

 

I now live in Northern Ireland. Just like Bailiffs, TV Licence would be suicide to show their faces around here

Link to post
Share on other sites

So why didn't you let them in to take a look, that would have been the easy way out.

Edited by Conniff
Not relevant to the original post
Link to post
Share on other sites

Because there are no statutory requirements that states i must let them into my home, let alone communicate with these tax inspectors

 

17% of magistrate court time is taken up with TV Licence issues, The majority are unemployed women visited in the afternoon to polite to refuse them access or refuse to sign their forms instigated by subterfuge. Not to mention the alleged commission payments these Tax collectors receive

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point i was making is that their is no statutory duty to even communicate with a private commercial company employed on behalf of TV Licence. That being Capita. On the door step or by email

 

There is no statutory obligation to have a TV Licence if you do not watch live TV Broadcasts

 

It is down to TV Licence to prove you are watching live TV Broadcasts, or on the balance of probabilities. If they come into your house and see the TV has the Aeriel connected then that will be sufficient. But you deny them access anyway unless they are using RIPA Legislation or a warrant secured through a magistrate. But that will need probable cause such as confirmation you are watching live broadcasts such as witnessing through a window etc and through a witness statement presented to the magistrate

 

Mollymop

 

Just do that declaration on line again will be sufficient

Link to post
Share on other sites
The point i was making is that their is no statutory duty to even communicate with a private commercial company employed on behalf of TV Licence. That being Capita. On the door step or by email

 

There is no statutory obligation to have a TV Licence if you do not watch live TV Broadcasts

 

It is down to TV Licence to prove you are watching live TV Broadcasts, or on the balance of probabilities. If they come into your house and see the TV has the Aeriel connected then that will be sufficient. But you deny them access anyway unless they are using RIPA Legislation or a warrant secured through a magistrate. But that will need probable cause such as confirmation you are watching live broadcasts such as witnessing through a window etc and through a witness statement presented to the magistrate

 

Mollymop

 

Just do that declaration on line again will be sufficient

 

And I agree with you fully. I don't think there is a need to do the declaration again. There is no lawful requirement to notify them at all, it's their policy to not believe anyone.

 

The only time you need contact is if you are claiming back 3 months or more license fee that won't be used.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we address this issue for the OP please

 

" I have now recieved a letter stating "We want to ensure you have the information you may need before a hearing is set at your local court"."

 

Op stated they had a visit from the goons. We need to know what happened at the doorstep so we know whether or not the OP has been spoofed by Goon'd'Crappia

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My son has a TV but it has NOT been used to watch live tv for the past two years since the aerial broke and we never got it replaced. He only uses it to play on x-box and watch films on netflix. I do watch programmes but this is on my tab through itvplayer or 4od.

 

I didn't sign anything on the doorstep. I told the guy I didn't have a tv and he said in a very intimidating way, I need to come in and check. I said to him, sorry but you are not coming in and I don't have to prove anything to you. I also told him if TV licensing want to take me to court, that's ok with me.

 

The letter received gave me the impression that I should have contacted them. The first line reads "you have failed to respond to any of our letters", blah blah blah.....

 

As long as I am not breaking the law by not informing them, I'm not worried as I have absolutely nothing to hide.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My son has a TV but it has NOT been used to watch live tv for the past two years since the aerial broke and we never got it replaced. He only uses it to play on x-box and watch films on netflix. I do watch programmes but this is on my tab through itvplayer or 4od.

 

I didn't sign anything on the doorstep. I told the guy I didn't have a tv and he said in a very intimidating way, I need to come in and check. I said to him, sorry but you are not coming in and I don't have to prove anything to you. I also told him if TV licensing want to take me to court, that's ok with me.

 

The letter received gave me the impression that I should have contacted them. The first line reads "you have failed to respond to any of our letters", blah blah blah.....

 

As long as I am not breaking the law by not informing them, I'm not worried as I have absolutely nothing to hide.

 

You say you're watching programmes on your tablet. Are these live? Or just on-demand after the live transmission?

You still need a license if you watch live programmes on a device other than a TV, such as a PC or tablet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No live tv whatsoever, only catchup tv after it has been broadcast through, itvplayer and 4od. It's not possible to watch live tv on either of those as far as I am aware.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK no signature thats good

 

Unless you get a summons form the court, ignore them and tell them to sod iff

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

in fact as soon as a goon turns up on your door, start filming them :) they love that

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No live tv whatsoever, only catchup tv after it has been broadcast through, itvplayer and 4od. It's not possible to watch live tv on either of those as far as I am aware.

 

ITVplayer does have a live tv option, at least through the website, so that's why I wanted to check after you mentioned that service :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read what that letter said. Its a very carefully worded threatogram.

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

Damn, I wish I had not thought of filming.

 

 

Thank you MaxxPower, I didn't know there was a live option. It got me thinking that I may have accidentally gone onto the live option but I doubt it as I only watch via the app on my tablet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Damn, I wish I had not thought of filming.

 

 

Thank you MaxxPower, I didn't know there was a live option. It got me thinking that I may have accidentally gone onto the live option but I doubt it as I only watch via the app on my tablet.

 

They won't know even if you have. They just hope you admit to having a TV or watching live TV broadcasts.

 

As above, they won't know, all they know is that there is no license issued for that address so they go on the attack as if there is a tv, what they are really saying is everyone without a tv license is a liar. I think they must have been schooled at the same doh school at traffic wardens and bailiffs, not everyone wants to watch crap tv.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are about four cleverly worded missives they get their computers to spit out on a monthly basis, in order to intimidate the uneducated into

funding the corporate elite in the guise of the TV tax.

 

When you ignore them for a while, and don't speak to them, then they all come addressed to ''The Legal Occupier''.

At this point you can sit back and continue to ignore them as you know you've won.

 

At the beginning it starts off with, unlicensed property, visit being authorised, what to expect in court, visit, all cleverly worded,

all as equally desperate.

 

Then they move onto printing some of them in red ink!!! OOoohh scary! Headed ''OFFICIAL WARNING WE HAVE OPENED AN INVESTIGATION''

 

And when you read their missives carefully, they even use the phrase;

A reminder of the Law,

It is illegal to watch or record blah blah blah.....lie lie lie...

 

It can't be both, it's either 'illegal' or it's 'unlawful'. They just think were too dumb to question that!

 

I have around two hundred of their threat letters, I have never paid the TV tax and never will, I have had one ''enforcement'' visit where I simply stood there, arms folded, said nothing, leaning up against MY door staring at him, and when he realised he wasn't going to get his bit of commission, he scurried away.

 

The very best way to deal with these clowns, is to do nothing, keep the front door firmly shut, if they are dumb enough to start peering through windows, film the goons and report them to the police. You are under absolutely NO legal obligation to even tell them that you don't need a TVL, even though their silly little missives claim that you ''have not responded to our previous letters'', (that's because I'm ignoring you!).

 

I don't have a driving licence but DVLA don't harass and threaten me with intimidating letters to get one!

 

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...