TV licensing threats

Cornucopia

Kayak10 wrote: »

Getting people's information by these firms is far easier than you seem to believe The so called data protection act is one of the most miss used and miss quoted acts out there
Any company only has to do a search on credit file company to get the name of a person
The latter letters and court letter were certainly addressed to me

Well, yes, they would be addressed to you. If they hadn't have had your name, they wouldn't have been able to summons you.

It raises three questions:

- How did they get your name?
- What evidence did they place before the Court and where did it come from?
- How was the evidence associated with you, and with your address if they had never been there?

I do sympathise with anyone finding their feet with this issue, There is a lot of misunderstanding out there amongst the public, and it's extremely likely that any given individual will have been given misinformation on the topic by friends and family.

Part of the solution is to begin to understand the varying levels of credibility of different sources of information: the highest being legislation, commentary by legally-trained persons and FOI responses. Everything else needs to be treated with cynicism and ideally rationalised with a high-credibility source before being accepted.

Hence: some random person on the Web may swear blind that their uncle was a radio engineer, and TV detection is perfectly do-able. However the FOI response in which the BBC say that detection evidence has NEVER been used in Court is a much more credible piece of information.

FidgitsID

Kayak10 wrote: »

....they came to my door Made me sign a document

Kayak10 wrote: »

.... I most certainly did not " sign a confession" or any thing else

Its hard to keep up with exactly what you say you did / did not do...

Cornucopia

FidgitsID wrote: »

Its hard to keep up with exactly what you say you did / did not do...

I think there were two separate occasions when Kayak fell foul of TVL prosecutions.

ricky_v

Kayak10 wrote: »

Dave
If only folk on here talked from experience as I am and not assumption Yet again I will repeat When I was taken to court It happened because I did what many others said I should do ie dump letters in bin and bury head in sand I most certainly did not " sign a confession" or any thing else

My letters are addressed to the "legal occupier". How on earth are they going to summons the"legal occupier" to court?

They also address me as "sir/madam" in the letters. They don't even know my gender !!!!!!!

[Deleted User]

Kayak10 wrote: »

It doesn't work as I and I'm sure many thousands have found out By ending up in court and a nasty fine With NO DOORSTEP SIGNED CONFESSION Just IGNORED letters that ended up with a court summons

Who exactly are these summonses addressed to?

[Deleted User]

Kayak10 wrote: »

If only folk on here talked from experience as I am and not assumption

I am talking from experience, four and a half years of it.

In that time, I have received 55 letters (13 of which were "What you need to know about the enforcement process/final stages of our investigation" letters, and 14 of which were "What to expect in court" letters), and 14 visits (three of which I was in for), and I have yet to get so much as a whiff of a summons.

[Deleted User]

Kayak10 wrote: »

As in Murphy's case his partner I believe " ignored everything " then ended up with a court fine as it was heard in her absence

Murphy's partner communicated with the "TV Licence inspector".

As for you, have you forgotten the form they "forced" you to sign, on your doorstep?

That's how you both came to be prosecuted.

ricky_v

A suprising weapon against TVL/BBC/Capita Business Services Ltd

Kayak10

wiogs wrote: »

As Bedsit Bob says that site is seriously out of date and the information contained in the section you mention is wrong.

Could make people who have no need of a licence rush out and buy one if they believed what is written there.

I know that site is a couple years old But I guess you didn't scroll down and read some of the bits I read BEFORE like others took a pop at me
The main bit I was referring to is how the BBC hijacked the TV licence to fund them as it was not originally set up to fund the BBC and all their inept operations over the years

Kayak10

Quote from bedsit bob " As for you, have you forgotten the form they "forced" you to sign, on your doorstep?"
Bedsit bob like others on here BEFORE you put stupid comments read my posts Once again I'm talking from EXPERIENCE not ASSUMPTION and stuff written all over the Internet and newspapers ONLY thing you can believe in a newspaper is front page top right hand corner ( on most ) and that's the date

I DID NOT SIGN A CONFESSION ON THE DOORSTEP BEFORE THEY TOOK ME TO COURT
The court action came about because I like others ASSUMED that if you IGNOR the letters NOTHING will happen Well as I said before like Murphys partner IGNORING does NOT stop the action
The signed paper was at my new flat and I committed to pay for my licence by payment card
But as I've said I'm sure it had somewhere on the form if I did NOT sign and did NOT keep up the payments they WOULD take me to court