tv licence court summons - non resident

Kurtis_Blue

mickaveli2001 wrote: »

Y You may be fine with bending over Kurtis, but we already currently get taxed around 74% (UK average) of what we earn. People are being pushed further down. When is enough enough?

I know I get taxed a HELL of a lot but it seems you do OK in the uk!

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=48648547&postcount=132

mickaveli2001

That isn't based on just tax brackets through earnings. This is income tax, national insurance, council tax, fuel duty, VAT, and all other taxable products combined that we spend money on every day.

I no longer get free dental or tax credits. I earn nearly double now than from a year ago from my pre-tax credits salary, thanks to the qualifications and still get child benefit but I am no better off financially. Only in the UK could you earn more on paper but be worse off

Kurtis_Blue

mickaveli2001 wrote: »

That isn't based on just tax brackets through earnings. This is income tax, national insurance, council tax, fuel duty, VAT, and all other taxable products combined that we spend money on every day.

I no longer get free dental or tax credits. I earn nearly double now than from a year ago from my pre-tax credits salary, thanks to the qualifications and still get child benefit but I am no better off financially. Only in the UK could you earn more on paper but be worse off

Only in the UK can you earn a small amount a money a year and get far more back in benefits, health care and free training too help you up the ladder.

And then when you get a couple of steps up still whine about the system that helped get you there, the rest of society helped you a lot and you don't stop whining about and dodging the tiny amount that society asks in return. lol.

Personally I think its a disgrace.

Cornucopia

mickaveli2001 wrote: »

I do not advocate in breaking the law, but when you have a corporation that in itself breaks the law, and doesn't play fair, it's hardly right that we have to fork out our cash for it.

This is the nature of our unfair society. And no, I don't know what the answer is. I can imagine one or more fairer solutions for the BBC. And then what does that mean for the benefit system, or Banker's salaries? And if we fix the UK and make it fairer, what about the rest of the World? And is wealth a good estimate of happiness, anyway?

I'm all for a revolutionary stance - in theory. In practice, I still want individuals with issues about the Licence Fee to get good advice.

Loanranger

mickaveli2001 wrote: »

If the Summons comes from TV licencing, then simply ignore it. They have no authority to issue a summons. Only the Magistrates court can do so, but even they are as crooked as the Capita Ltd staff (those that work for the BBC) are, who are paid £18+ per successfully completed form, and £21+ for conviction.

So you see, they try to get you in trouble through lies and deceit

If you need any help or info on how to avoid prosecution in the future - Even if you have a TV and pay for no TV licence, then let me know

Link, please, to where we can check on magistrates getting money for convictions.

mickaveli2001

You're not getting what I am saying.

I have no issue (not now anyway) with providing for those who require help. There are a lot of people that do. Providing "free" training for people isn't so much as a free giveaway for us as it is as a benefit for the government. UK government depend on a largely based internal skill set in order to bring in business and investment. They know not everyone can afford the education that enables this hence the help for those worse off. It's all in their interests, because as soon as you earn over £30,000 with your education, they swoop it all back "then some" by doubling your tax payments from 20% to 40% Don't think for one second you get your education for "free" because trust me - You pay it back later on once your education places you in a position where you pay it back, with huge interest. This was discussed by a former top University professor on the deception of "free learning". Regardless, I'm glad it exists and do believe that it does help people and has some good benefits.

Sure thing. The Magistrates courts are companies that work for profit. That's why all civil claims are held there - Parking tickets, speeding fines, wrong rubbish in the wrong bins fines, tv licences etc.

The Magistrates Association itself is a company and has the company No. RC000337. In fact, all Magistrates courts are listed as Private Limited Company's. Another is OC337119. Anyone familiar with LLP's know fine well that all Limited Liability Partnerships are corporate body's and the goal of any corporation is to make money. The fact that all these magistrates courts are intertwined with corporation titles, and registered companies and so on, it puts it into perspective. Paperwork and other info can be purchased via small admin fee. To gain brief summary of financial records, credit reports and so on require a very large charge, but why should courts need credit reports?

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/be0c7fefe04594cf5c18e2f46256614f/wcprodorder?ft=1

Nilrem

Are you really sure Magistrates courts are companies?
I was under the impression the courts were part of the Homeoffice the same as the Crown court, and the High court...

And you miss out the fact that many of the cases they deal with are minor criminal offences such as assaults, theft, shoplifting, burglaries....
It is also worth noting that all criminal cases start out in a Magistrates court, where things like bail or remand conditions are decided, and the Magistrates can for a number of offences either deal with it in their court, or if they think the possible requisite punishment for a guilty verdict will be higher than they can deal with, will pass it up the chain.

Civil claims are dealt with by them because they have to be dealt with somewhere, and it's better to deal with many of them in a court that doesn't cost tens of thousands a day for things where the sums involved are in the hundreds of pounds.

I would also respectfully point out that from memory, membership of the Magistrates Association is not a requirement to be a Magistrate, it is rather from what I've read/heard from fairly reliable sources rather something like the WI or a Union, in that it represents the interests of it's members collectively.
Indeed I believe a number of senior and long serving Magistrates are not members of the Association for various reasons (including things like the fact they don't agree with it, or feel it has failed to represent them when the government has gone for changes that reduce the courts powers to be an independent arbiter, and handing them over to the likes of the Police for on the spot fines without independent oversight).

Indeed a five second google (most of it spent typing) brings up the Magistrates association site, and on it's front page.

The Magistrates' Association is the membership organisation for magistrates in England and Wales. It is funded by its members to represent their interests.

The Association supports magistrates in dispensing justice fairly and efficiently within their courts, and works to promote confidence in the magistrates' courts system.

The objects for which the Association is established and incorporated are to promote the sound administration of the law by educating and instructing magistrates and others in the law, the administration of justice, the treatment of offenders and the best methods of preventing crime; and promoting discussion on developments in the law and the administration of justice.

My emphasis, as the very first paragraph makes it clear it's an organisation for Magistrates, and not somehow something you have to be a member of to be a Magistrate (a subtle but vitally important difference, rather like the Police union generally requires you to be a Police officer to join, but you don't have to be a member of the Police union to be a Police officer).

And like any union or most charities and the like, it has to have it's accounts done, and will likely be incorporated because that makes accounting sense and covers it legally.

mickaveli2001

Nilrem wrote: »

My emphasis, as the very first paragraph makes it clear it's an organisation for Magistrates, and not somehow something you have to be a member of to be a Magistrate (a subtle but vitally important difference, rather like the Police union generally requires you to be a Police officer to join, but you don't have to be a member of the Police union to be a Police officer).

Yes, agreed. It does in theory make sense by handling their accounts but probably more so for the likes of local authority. I always assumed the courts (any court) would be incorporated into the royal charter first and foremost rather than simply becoming a corporate entity first.

There was a huge volunteered investigation into all councils, civil claims courts, police departments etc. and majority were all in fact private ltd companies. This was touched on, but only briefly during a seminar in London over the UK PLC fiasco, and how the UK is in Chapter 11 bankruptcy and has to have all these body's draw in as much money as possible. It related to financial paperwork and banking documents from the end of the World war 2, when the banks were pulling back all the credit. Really interesting, but very very easy to go way over your head. A lot to sink in

Cornucopia

This doesn't make any sense. There is a vast amount more money that could be extracted from the population through fines (by increasing the ones we already have, or by zero-tolerance for common offences like speeding or copyright infringement).

Or Government could simply raise taxes.

The fact that we have a reasonably stable situation with respect to fines suggests that they are not seen as a cash-cow. The fact that we have a reasonably stable situation with respect to taxes suggests that Government does not see raising taxes as a solution to the economic issues that we face.

Whatever way you cut it, public services need to be paid for. The only issue is which ones are needed, and which are not.

edit: The fact that public services are provided by a company or a corporation is not suspicious - what other entity would they be?

edit2: Chapter 11 is a concept in US law. In what sense is it valid to use it here?

Loanranger

Of course Magistrates' Courts are part of the Home Office! They are not profit making bodies and neither do they deal only with civil cases.

Mickavelli, you are seriously wrong about every aspect of the legal system in this country. Are you from another country? Did you not go to school in this country?
Whatever, you must stop posting rubbish on public forums before someone gets hurt by your incorrect 'advice'.
BTW, the verb to license is spelt with a C and the noun, the licence, is spelt with an S. S is the verb and C is the noun. Goddit?
Oh, and Machiavelli is spelt like this: Machiavelli.