TV Licensing CCJ - Need urgent help

Kirkv3

My boyfriend has a TV Licensing court case tomorrow. He moved in with his ex somewhat 2 years ago. He answered the door to the TV licensing guy who said they had no TV license. He paid 6 months there and then.
From then on bills and money was left to his ex girlfriend. He paid all of his wages into their joint bank account and gave her all his tips etc.
She did not pay the TV license (or anything else including rent), and just spent his money. As he opened the door, this was in his name..
When he left he took his name off all the bills, tenancy etc.
He rang up the fines company about a train fine he had received to her Mums address, yet baliffs had turned up at his care of address (his dads). He does not know the address of his exs Mum and so was trying to sort this out. He was told there was a warrant out for his arrest with no bail for not paying the TV license!?
He had no received any letters in the time he was at the property and left January this year. His ex did not inform him of any letters, nor did she inform TV licensing of the change and continued not to pay.
Can he say he didn't know or will they just say negligence is not an excuse? Can anyone give me any advice on what he should say at court tomorrow?
Thanks!

EDIT: The address Marstons group have is my boyfriends Care of address, he does not have a permanent address. He has no possessions to take and is working part time around 15 hours a week, he also has a son to pay for. He has also been suffering really bad depression since finding this out. Literally punching himself when angry, punching walls etc. crying, not going out etc

HappyMJ

It's not a CCJ. It's a magistrates court fine.

If he is being taken to magistrates court then he could go and defend the case. What to say...not sure. Just tell them the truth and the magistrates might consider not giving him a fine.

artbaron

What evidence do they have that he has a TV? They can't just fine him on the supposition that he has a TV, they need evidence.

Cornucopia

This will be another of those cases where someone has been found guilty in their absence and with no knowledge.

They just need to make representations to the court to have the verdict set aside and the case re-opened.

From the OP's account, TVL cannot possibly have any evidence on him, so he should walk away with an apology. It's highly unlikely to be a two-year old case.

We really need to find out why this keeps happening and get it stopped.

spacey2012

If he signed the paper work they gave him and provided his details.
Do not argue with the Magistrates, he is guilty by signed confession.
All he can do is learn not to give people his name and never sign anything.

Cornucopia

Once again, there is no such thing as being "guilty by signed confession" in UK law. Did you not read the long list of reasons for which an unreliable confession may be struck out in the other thread?

You are not helping people if you give them incorrect and unnecessarily negative advice.

Savvy_Sue

But this is a case, surely, where at the time of the TVL visit, the OP's boyfriend DID have a TV, and no licence.

He may not have one any more. Has he any evidence of when he moved out of this property?

spacey2012

Cornucopia wrote: »

Once again, there is no such thing as being "guilty by signed confession" in UK law. Did you not read the long list of reasons for which an unreliable confession may be struck out in the other thread?

You are not helping people if you give them incorrect and unnecessarily negative advice.

A signed confession statement is what is know as Evidence.
The fact that you did not realise what you were signing is hard luck.
Magistrates sit and form a judgement based upon the balance of the evidence presented to them.
Legal guidance is issued by the court clerk.
The magistrates can make any decision they choose.
Appealing when you have signed what is a confession statement will usually result in one thing, a huge legal bill.
I do feel your resentment at how this sham works, but it does and it works well.
Your ideas could lead to legal bills in the ten of thousands.
Use your energy to educate people not to give details to Capita and not to sign documentation or to be fooled they are filling in a form to buy a licence.
I can tell you and everyone else that once you sign any paper work they give you, the game is over.
What is written law and Legislation and what passes for justice are not the same.
I do not agree with the TV licence, I do not agree with how it is enforced.
However I also do not agree with fighting your battles through other people who could be landed with huge Legal bills.

Cornucopia

spacey2012 wrote: »

A signed confession statement is what is know as Evidence.

Yes.

The fact that you did not realise what you were signing is hard luck.

Any magistrate is obliged under the law to look at any allegation that the confession is unreliable for any of the reasons stated for PACE s.76.

Magistrates sit and form a judgement based upon the balance of the evidence presented to them.
Legal guidance is issued by the court clerk.

Yes.

The magistrates can make any decision they choose.

No - they are bound by the law.

Appealing when you have signed what is a confession statement will usually result in one thing, a huge legal bill.

We aren't talking about appealing, we are talking about contesting the confession evidence at the Mags court. And we aren't talking about contesting the confession evidence arbitrarily, but for one of the reasons stated by the Home Office.

Your ideas could lead to legal bills in the ten of thousands.

Again - unsubstantiated negativity. Why do you not want people to challenge this? Costs at Mags court are very limited - typically people who lose in even more complex cases are paying c. £200. (These were the costs for the guy who contested his evasion offence on the basis that the BBC were supporting terrorism through 9/11 bias).

I agree that the costs of justice are being used to deter people from seeking it - and that is a scandal in itself.

I would also urge anyone faced with this kind of trial to investigate Legal Aid.

However I also do not agree with fighting your battles through other people who could be landed with huge Legal bills.

That isn't how this works.

It's one of the troubles of the interweb, that people who think they know something are all too prone to write it.

[Deleted User]

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

the OP's boyfriend DID have a TV, and no licence.

You do not require a licence, to OWN a TV.

[Deleted User]

spacey2012 wrote: »

Magistrates sit and form a judgement based upon the balance of the evidence presented to them.

No they don't.

They base it on "Proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt".

"Balance of probability" is for Civil Cases.