Akinika debt collection for tv license

mark_steps

Move if this is in the wrong place.

Usually pay my £13 or so each month via the online system but have not since September. Im overdue by £33 or so.. I got a letter from the above said company so today I called and offered £6 until January when I will clear it. They said I have to pay 50% of it today otherwise the next steps is court. I told him look I have offered something to which he again said it needs to be 50%.. I said I'm recording this call to which he told me he was terminating the call. So maybe I shouldn't have said that but it angers me that I tried at least to pay something! He then hung up. What do I do? Do I just need to make the full payment? The letter said if I don't pay within 72 hours they will send bailiffs. Ps I'm in Scotland if that makes a difference to bailiff laws...

hop3y

Why haven't you paid it previously?

Dan-Dan

mark_steps wrote: »

Move if this is in the wrong place.

Usually pay my £13 or so each month via the online system but have not since September. Im overdue by £33 or so.. I got a letter from the above said company so today I called and offered £6 until January when I will clear it. They said I have to pay 50% of it today otherwise the next steps is court. I told him look I have offered something to which he again said it needs to be 50%.. I said I'm recording this call to which he told me he was terminating the call. So maybe I shouldn't have said that but it angers me that I tried at least to pay something! He then hung up. What do I do? Do I just need to make the full payment? The letter said if I don't pay within 72 hours they will send bailiffs. Ps I'm in Scotland if that makes a difference to bailiff laws...

£33 ? , err yes , then get on with your life

maninthestreet

Is TV licencing in Scotland different compared with England? AFAIK, the TV licencing authority don't threaten to send in the bailiffs, they just threaten prosecution for using a TV without a valid TV licence.
However, I would just pay the £16.50 they require now, and the rest in early January.

sniggings

mate pay what you can, the reason he hung up on you was because he was being unreasonable, if they took you to court for £33 ( which they never would) and the judge heard you offered to make a payment plan, the judge would laugh them out of court.


And just so you know, you don't have to tell them you are recording them, as long as one person that is being recorded knows about it (you do), it's fine, you just can't hide a recorder somewhere and record people, then come back and collect the recording.

Consider just watching catchup TV, then you don't even need to pay for a license.

Marktheshark

muckybutt wrote: »

Really ? where is this info from ?

As far as I am aware if a device ( tv, laptop etc) is capable of receiving a live broadcast signal then you have to pay the applicable license fee.

I may be wrong if I am can you provide the links.

Totally wrong !
Watching Live TV requires a licence, owning a device capable of doing so does not require any licence.

muckybutt

Marktheshark wrote: »

Totally wrong !
Watching Live TV requires a licence, owning a device capable of doing so does not require any licence.

Just read it hence deleted post you live n learn and I stand corrected

southcoastrgi

Marktheshark wrote: »

Totally wrong !
Watching Live TV requires a licence, owning a device capable of doing so does not require any licence.

that is totally wrong, if you have a tv or laptop capable of recieving a signal then you need a licence

sniggings

southcoastrgi wrote: »

that is totally wrong, if you have a tv or laptop capable of recieving a signal then you need a licence

wrong, the law is receiving AND watching a live broadcast.

but it's aways best to not be able to receive a live broadcast on the device, because if the device is ever tested then you would have to prove you were not using the device to watch the live broadcast, just having a TV does not need a license.

southcoastrgi

I've just checked & you are correct every day is a school day

I guess this has changed with the invention of catch up tv

JohnB47

sniggings wrote: »

wrong, the law is receiving AND watching a live broadcast.

but it's aways best to not be able to receive a live broadcast on the device, because if the device is ever tested then you would have to prove you were not using the device to watch the live broadcast, just having a TV does not need a license.

Not that I'm going go do it mind but how could you own a tv and prove that you never watch live tv. Also, would it not be for the Licencing people to prove that you did watch live tv? Otherwise, what happened to 'innocent until proved guilty'?

Just interested, as a long standing licence payer.