tv licence court summons

HappyMJ

piglet74 wrote: »

Yes, that's the thing, there is a good chance I will incriminate myself!!

It doesn't matter about previous days, weeks or months that you didn't have a licence. What matters is what happened on the day in question. You didn't even have a television and cannot be accused of having no TV licence. If you had a television last month then they should be charging you with an offence for which they have evidence of you watching a television program on that day not for the day they have taken your statement.

Don't worry too much about the court. TV licensing generally withdraw the "too hard" cases.

ljonski

Therefore you need to know what to say and what not to say and how not to put your foot in it. if you are convinced that you are not guilty of this particular offence on that particular date.- make sure to keep to the facts and not let the conversation lead to irrelevant time periods.

piglet74

I wish to complain about one of your inspectors.

I got a date for court today for not having a tv licence

Inside is a copy of the paperwork signed by both myself, and your inspector.

This court date was sent to my old address, I no longer live here, but just got the letter by chance when I seen the postman. I now live outside the UK. I made it clear to him I was moving, and had he asked to enter the property it would have been clear I was moving as by 26th October 2012 when he made his visit, the house was practically cleared out by this stage.

On the day your inspector visited I had no licence, But, I had no tv in the property on that date,

He called on 26th oct, I had the keys of my new house from end of sept. And I was moving gradually over the month, I have a letter from the new electric company dated 2nd nov

The paperwork has been filled in by the tv licence guy under the caution section as me saying I had no licence as I "was moving out next wk"

He didn't caution me, he totally glossed over the seriousness of the whole thing, he did have some payment cards but said "there is no point me giving you one of these as you are moving" and he also said "just sign this to say that I have called, and by the time its back to the office you will have moved"

So I signed it, (daft, I know!!! Esp as I was given no opportunity to read the notes) And now when I read it back today I can see things he wrote but didn't ask me eg under the question where he is meant to have asked "can I come in and inspect the tv equipment".. I am meant to have said "no", but he didn't ask me.

He cautioned me at NO point, when I told him I was in the process of moving he did not ask if I still had a tv in the property, if he had asked to enter the property he would have seen there was no tv.

At the question "when did you last use the tv...." He has written "now".. This is also false, the tv plus almost the entire contents of the house were gone by this stage.

He also signed the declaration stating "after my interview I give the defendant an opportunity to read my notes..." At NO point was I given an opportunity to read his notes.

So he has signed a false declaration and now this has been submitted to court!

He signed to say I was cautioned, and I wasn't.

He signed information which has been recorded inaccurately.

He did not even ask me if I still had a tv in the property. Tho all of these points are really mute, the main one being, he has falsely signed a declaration.

He did not even turn the form over to show me the "very important notes" on the back of the form. I did not even see this until I got it in the post, surely this, coupled with him falsely signing the declaration is an offence?

There is a list of dates on the back of the form which I assume are follow up dates, as he found no one home, and it was more than clear from looking at the property that it was empty, then why was a letter sent to me at this address?

He has written I don't know my national ins.no, which I do, he never asked me for it.

His declaration is riddle with false information, and inaccuracies.

He did not warn me I could be prosecuted.

He did not complete all sections in front of me, some of this information (including the signing of the back of the form by the agent) were done after he left me.


Thanks, that's exactly what I meant, that I might say I had a tv on a dif date.

This is a copy of the email I sent, the only thing I have removed is the agents name and my former address

HappyMJ

Sounds quite good...but really you should forget about them now and concentrate on the court case. Before your court case you have the opportunity to call for witnesses. Make sure you call the TV licence inspector himself as a witness. So really you don't want to be sending that email until after the court case as you will be directly asking him questions and you don't want that email leading him to answer otherwise.

Ask the TV licence inspector in court questions which will cast doubt on your guilt. If the magistrates see doubt they will acquit you.

piglet74

Thanks very much for ur advice

The forum mentioned above (licence resistance I think it was called) has suggested I print off the email and send it to the bbc (I can't recall which dept but have kept a copy of their message)

The woman in tv licencing said the inspector won't be there on the day, and I would have to ask for an adjournment if I wanted him there.

Thanks everyone for all the help

spacey2012

This is going in to the realms of stupidity.

You have these choices:
Dont turn up = Guilty in your absence
Turn up - plead guilty
Turn plead not guilty = case is adjourned for trial at a separate date, where the signed confession statement will be used against you as evidence.
Do you really think that you are going to stand and argue "I did not have a TV"
When you have signed the statement to the effect that you were watching TV without a Licence.

Some of the freeman bollox on this site is hilarious.
Follow it at your expense and foolishness.

closed

a little daft to admit guilt on the net too - seek legal advice.

ljonski

I think a lot more people with the loss of a chunk of legal aid will end up representing themselves.

This is a serious matter, so i would also suggest getting legal advice, if only a free consultation.

However if you still want to pursue the case by yourself- it is absolutely important that you make out the Tv license man to be untrustworthy. and his evidence unreliable.
Be extremelypolite to the Judge as you need him on your side. Watch an episode of Rumpole before you go !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=353L_1DrtoM

You will need to set traps for him, and allow him to incriminate himself if he is lying.

For instance if he says he went into the property. Where exactly was the tv ? was it in the corner ? Could he describe the room? What kind of tv was it ? make , or box etc what programme was on if switched on. Find out what programmes were on on terrestrial at the time ! How long did this interview happen? Be confident , assertive but don't ramble and spend your time searching through your papers.
Treat the whole thing as if your life depends on it. its possible that the agent has done this before - so try to find out if there have been other complaints against him. If so ask him at court and be ready to contradict him if he says no or only a few -if there have been many.
Make him appear hesitant and don't be afraid to be firm with him etc etc

Cornucopia

spacey2012 wrote: »

People will want you to fight their grudges with TVL through you.

No. People just want him to fight his grudges with TVL, as the law permits.

Can you please stop posting misinformation on this topic - it is very tedious.

unholyangel

spacey2012 wrote: »

This is going in to the realms of stupidity.

You have these choices:
Dont turn up = Guilty in your absence
Turn up - plead guilty
Turn plead not guilty = case is adjourned for trial at a separate date, where the signed confession statement will be used against you as evidence.
Do you really think that you are going to stand and argue "I did not have a TV"
When you have signed the statement to the effect that you were watching TV without a Licence.

Some of the freeman bollox on this site is hilarious.
Follow it at your expense and foolishness.

While I havent pushed the OP to defend it.....

IMO its very believable that the OP signed the form to get rid of them at the door or even signed trusting that this person presenting themselves as an authority figure (lol) was acting entirely in good faith.

They werent acting in good faith though. They were acting as persecutors and they should have made their intentions known.

There has been video evidence against a defendant in a previous TVL case......TVL didn't win. Perhaps because they fabricated that evidence too.

Not speaking about the OP here but do I think people should just give in when they're being shafted by our legal system? Never.

Accept the things you cannot change. But change the things you cannot accept.