Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I received £1500 from a friend and another £1000 another from their Revolut accounts, which are fine. I would be OK if Revolut just returned the money to them. Happy to provide proof of income and they are happy to do so, too.
    • POFA plays no part in limiting court costs.  costs recovery under the small claims track is very limited   2 cases heard together? 1st you've told us about this....        
    • Just a general comment - as I know nothing about legal procedures...   I agree with what I think BankFodder is suggesting - it really ought to be a straightforward question of a breach of contract.  You've paid for a service and the other party (or their sub-contractor) has failed to perform that service - safe delivery to the addressee.  It seems daft to me that the risk of non-delivery gets passed back to you because you've not paid for insurance against their failure to perform their responsibilities.  It's an inherently unfair* business model that has crept up by stealth, assisted by the growth of internet shopping.  Of course, a court may not agree...   I also agree with BF that you should be able to do some research yourself, and you should see this as an opportunity for self-directed learning as well as self-help!  You can always check back with BF, Andyorch and dx100uk that your understanding is correct.  You might get some ideas for final year dissertation - it's a bit of an academic problem with real-life commercial implications.   *Of course, in the absence of this business model, courier fees would go up, but I would argue that's a fairer way of spreading the risk of loss/damage etc   (PS - I was a law student a looooooooong time ago.  In your position I'd have tried my tutors as a sounding board as well.  I also thought SBU had it's own law clinic - although the advice is likely to be quite basic unless somebody sees this as an "interesting" problem)
    • Thanks EB, I will catchup on the mentioned thread as I had used it before the hearing.   I went for hearing. Rep approached mentioning settlement, talking about them having a strong case to which I pointed out their bundle which they were going through that it says Excel here so aren't you here for the wrong company.   They mentioned sister companies, I mentioned companies house and then I said let's leave it to the judge they went away from me. The rep went into a room presumably to call their firm Elms Legal I think probably for advice.   We ended up being the last hearing before lunch, as the Usher called out our names and said the judge will call you in shortly. The rep came over saying something like I'm surprised you're going in without submitting a WS!   I said it has been served they said well I haven't seen it, when was it sent, do you have copies as I could get the Usher to copy, I said I may,  rep - you either do or you don't Take care of yourself.I said well we will have to put this in front of the judge now.   Inside the rep said to the judge about my WS not being served and they asked me on multiple occasions for the WS I said 5 minutes before coming in is not multiple occasions. The judge said they had my WS along with an index of papers I had sent in that they have been looking at.   The rep started with their page contract and terms and conditions picture in their bundle saying they have a valid contract and that in the Tariff /T&C picture it mentioned about entering into a contract with VCS.   The judge asked me what I made of that I argued where is the contract giving them, a 3rd party, authority from Excel to issue proceedings in their own rights? The judge said to the rep, Defendant not accepting this so we are not getting anywhere rep raised WS issue again saying they asked on multiple occasions, again I repeated what 5 minutes before coming in. I said I had Cert of Posting.   The rep mentioned about being given a few minutes to read it and I said I had a copy but the judge was saying it's near lunch and it will take too much time even though the rep said there is still 35 minutes left.   I said the WS was served see COP but the judge said they may have lost it etc so to send it again. I said the rep could have a copy now but the rep was like I couldn't take pictures of it and send back to my client as they only get things from them via email.   I said you could post it but the judge said the rep is saying they can't use post for whatever reason so if I could send it again. Case adjourned.   The rep asked about costs and judge said reserved and I asked about my loss of earnings and that I would have to get leave booked again. Reserved seemed to be the answer but the judge was apologising about being the last morning hearing and said he would make sure we were first next time and the rep asked for an hour instead of 45 minutes so judge asked me and I said ok.   The rep asked about the reason for adjourning to give to their client as they would have had to pay them to attend. Outside at the ushers desk the rep had spoken to the Usher to make a copy from mine (didn't accept it Infront of the judge) and also asked to see the COP and I obliged saying I deem this served now but the rep said you have an order/instruction from the judge to send to VCS. I regret giving them a copy thinking I should have said you will have it once I send it again to VCS. Whilst inside, the judge said as the hearing never started it wouldn't be infront of him again and also the rep said it would probably be someone else as she also wasn't the person named in their WS. As per POFA my understanding is one cannot be made to pay costs more than in the NTK. As it will now be a 2nd hearing, 2 days off work for me and 2 representations for them, will there be double AL for me to claim if I win or double expenses if they win?   There was supposed to  be 2 cases heard together but I only had WS for this one am I supposed to have asked for another WS? Will they be claiming the fee/expenses for both cases with one hearing yet I could only claim for the 2 days AL?   What do you make of what happened at the hearing from their rep, maybe they realised it won't be straightforward especially when it was a judge they were not aware of perhaps they conferred with their team about ways to handle aswell as ways to escape? Thanks      
    • the sil landlord, it was for £20k plus he added £18k for rent and utilities bills.
  • Our picks

Hobo123

Child used BBC iplayer and have an email saying i need to buy TV licence

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 439 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

Hey CAG,

 

Posting on behalf of a friend. In short she doesn't have a tv licence as doesn't watch live tv only netflix. However her young daughter downloaded BBC iplayer on her tablet and signed up and gave her mums post code etc and obviously must of said she had a TV licence.

 

Fast forward a few weeks and my friend gets an email that says "Our records show you've used BBC iplayer on a number of occasions in recent weeks. As your no licence need status is now invalid you need to buy a TV licence" and gives her a link to buy.

 

Does she need to buy one, her daughter being on early teens did not know her mum needed a TV licence. Anything she can do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did she watch live tv?

if not no.

 

she'll get scary letters and even a doorstepper possibly.

don't entertain them,

they are totally powerless

simply say nowt and close the door on them.

 

if ANYONE in the household watches LIVE TV from WHATEVER platform, then a licence must be purchased.

 

dx


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, the whole DCA industry would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that iplayer is also subject to licencing


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that iplayer is also subject to licencing

 

Yes, watching any BBC programmes on iPlayer, whether live, catchup or on demand, needs a licence.

 

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/bbc-iplayer-and-the-tv-licence

 

It's irrelevant that it was a child watching.

 

I often wondered whether they check when you tick 'I have a TV licence' when you sign in to iPlayer. Now we know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've got to prove that you were actually watching it from that specific address though


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They've got to prove that you were actually watching it from that specific address though

Well we wouldn't recommend telling porkies.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They've got to prove that you were actually watching it from that specific address though

 

Not really difficult to trace an IP address back to a specific address. Given that violating the TV License is still a criminal offence then they can probably report it and get the ISP to provide an address of which house had that particular IP at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which could be someone sitting outside your house using your wi-fi. Most routers have free wi-fi to other members like bt sky etc


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, the whole DCA industry would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really difficult to trace an IP address back to a specific address. Given that violating the TV License is still a criminal offence then they can probably report it and get the ISP to provide an address of which house had that particular IP at the time.

 

And to do that... theyd need a court order . Something that is unlikley to happen unless they do it en masse, and that would be costly. Then they still need to prove the householder actually did it, as IP's etc can be changed, faked, redirected etc.

 

They dont stand a chance. Theyd have to get you to admit it so they have complete proof.

 

As for Telling porkies BF... i didnt say for anyone to do it. What i meant is they would have to show unequivocal proof that the householder actually did it. And it wasnt someone else... :) Same as the doorsteppers have to have proof of either seeing the tv on and receiving live broadcasts or a householder filling in their forms.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really difficult to trace an IP address back to a specific address. Given that violating the TV License is still a criminal offence then they can probably report it and get the ISP to provide an address of which house had that particular IP at the time.

 

violating? Its unlawful. Not illegal. And they would still need to get an IP address, and then prove beyond a doubt the householder did it. Remember goldeneye and all the trouble they had proving a user with an IP downloaded their content?


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless they have been to the actual ISP they can only have traced it back to a Point of Presence and no further. Who is the email actually from?


Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, your friend only had an email. That means nothing. They have no idea if that email is still used or not. Same as when a DCA emails you, hoping youll bite.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant thank you all for the replies.

 

The email is from the BBC. However her daughter used her own email address and not her mothers. When she got the email she got scared and showed her mum. If she didn't she would of been none the wiser.

 

I've told her to ignore this email and keep me informed if she receives any more and remove all BBC iPlayer apps from any device she has in the house. She has confirmed she does not have the TV aerial plugged in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore the email. Only bother with anything they say if its via post.

 

Dont really need to remove BBC apps, as theres no way they could ever check it without a court order, and its extremely unlikely tv licencing will ever get a court order to check someones computer.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC may forward the info they have to TV Licensing - Capita - but as far as I am aware they have to see it themselves and of course if they do visit then you do NOT have to allow them access.


Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

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...