TV Licensing taking the old girl to court

Those saying to contact the media/newspaper etc. do you really think this story is interesting enough for them to bother coming down?

"Woman taken to court after incorrect details on file" is hardly an exciting story is it and probably happens loads of times.

Something for the Daily Mail I reckon :)
 
I wish it was as easy Samx

Although no a tv licence thing, i have been harrased by the tax credit office for 6 years now, even though I am not at fault they said they over paid me because my daughter was 19 years old in 2004.
I did write and tell them my daughter was 16 not 19 and sent proof.
Anyhow after being taken to court 5 times and before the hearing explaining each time to the court the problem they always drop the case.
Funny thing is the tax office still insist i owe them the money lol.
But with the tax credit the case will always be found against you if it goes to court as you cannot present evidence otherwise on the day and must then counter claim.
 
Can she claim for loss of time, earnings, travel etc ?

This isn't a small claims proceeding so with my limited knowledge I'm not sure if she can counterclaim /confused smileface

Nothing to worry about, just let them put across their case, look worried............. Then step up presenting all the licenses and threatening letters. They will be laughed out of court.
 
and teke them to the cleaners!!!

khushy

How and for what, we don't have punitive damage in UK.
So any loss of money has to be proved. No time of work, no medical records ect.

You could see a solicitor most will give you 30mins free of charge so you can find out if you can do anything to them, but what ever you can do wont be worth the hassle unless you really want to.

Although contacting the papers is a good idea, especially your local one. Most media outlets have done articles on TV licensing threatening people.
 
Last edited:
What's to say they don't go after her for pre-2004 (when she can't prove it)?

"Here is my evidence..."
"What year is that dated?"
"2009-2010"
"Hmmmm, what about 2008?"
"Here"
"2007?"
"Here"
"2006?"
"Here"
....
....
"ahh but what about 2000?"
"Sorry I don't have that"
"we got her now!!!"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A debt can only be 6 years old I thought, so 2000 would be well in the clear now. If the worst came to the worst and they moaned about 2003 or something then she could always get bank records to prove she bought one.
 
What's to say they don't go after her for pre-2004 (when she can't prove it)?

"Here is my evidence..."
"What year is that dated?"
"2009-2010"
"Hmmmm, what about 2008?"
"Here"
"2007?"
"Here"
"2006?"
"Here"
....
....
"ahh but what about 2000?"
"Sorry I don't have that"

They need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she didn't pay it as it's a criminal case. With the **** ups they've made I don't see how they can prove that.
 
Their incompetency aside, I don't understand how you/her could have let this escalate to this stage. Surely after the first 2 or 3 follow ups, she ought to have written a strongly worded letter quoting them the protection from Harassment act (or something like that) and tell them to bugger off because she's already presented the evidence so many times? Did she ever write to them?

She has written to them numerous times.
She has called them numerous times.
She has spoken to them when they have called her.
She has shown them the licences when they come to the door.

Even with their acknowledgement somewhere, somehow they still have her down as not having a license.

Nothing works with these people, she has gone far and beyond the call with regards to trying to clear this up and i'm sure if it continues after this court case it will come down to harassment. She works for the police so getting a bit of harassment reported is not even an inconveniece for her.
 
She has written to them numerous times.
She has called them numerous times.
She has spoken to them when they have called her.
She has shown them the licences when they come to the door.

Even with their acknowledgement somewhere, somehow they still have her down as not having a license.

Nothing works with these people, she has gone far and beyond the call with regards to trying to clear this up and i'm sure if it continues after this court case it will come down to harassment. She works for the police so getting a bit of harassment reported is not even an inconveniece for her.

When she calls them and quotes her license number does it bring up her address exactly as it should be including postcode, one of the problems with the licensing database has always been addresses, i.e letters etc getting sent to an address automatically because the address appears twice though with a slight difference on the system. Just an idea
 
A debt can only be 6 years old I thought, so 2000 would be well in the clear now. If the worst came to the worst and they moaned about 2003 or something then she could always get bank records to prove she bought one.

Even less if they cant prove they went after you for it within 12 months of the work done/goods supplied.
 
She has written to them numerous times.
She has called them numerous times.
She has spoken to them when they have called her.
She has shown them the licences when they come to the door.

Even with their acknowledgement somewhere, somehow they still have her down as not having a license.

Nothing works with these people, she has gone far and beyond the call with regards to trying to clear this up and i'm sure if it continues after this court case it will come down to harassment. She works for the police so getting a bit of harassment reported is not even an inconveniece for her.

Wow, in that case, they are a bunch of chimps.
 
TV licensing are also breaking the DPA by not ensuring the personal information they hold is correct. Report them to the information commissioner.
 
To the OP, if your Mother has repeatedly told them that they hold incorrect information and they are still not listening, then I would suggest she takes look at the Informaiton Commissionaires Office website which can be found here:-

http://www.ico.gov.uk/

The information held about your Mother is going to be on a Database. The information obviously appears to be incorrect and it appears from your story that they have been spoken to time and time again - giving them ample opportunity to rectify their faults. Clearly they have failed to do so and their behaviour is now bordering on Harassment. I would also suggest that there will be a degree of upset and stress caused to your mum.

This page

http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/data_protection.aspx

tells you about the Data Protection Act and how to make a complaint. I suspect your Mother has a good case against them.
 
I've had a letter from TV Licensing today... at work.

I ordered a Freeview DVD recorder online and had it delivered to work.

TVL are now gobbing off that the retailer told them what I purchased but I don't have a license at this address (work).

<Goes off to quake in boots>
 
I've had a letter from TV Licensing today... at work.

I ordered a Freeview DVD recorder online and had it delivered to work.

TVL are now gobbing off that the retailer told them what I purchased but I don't have a license at this address (work).

<Goes off to quake in boots>

We get letters from them fairly regularly at work.

There's a machine in the corner to deal with them... you put the letter in, the gears whir away for a while, and then the answer drops into the box underneath. ;)
 
When she calls them and quotes her license number does it bring up her address exactly as it should be including postcode, one of the problems with the licensing database has always been addresses, i.e letters etc getting sent to an address automatically because the address appears twice though with a slight difference on the system. Just an idea

This is true, use to live in a flat that would be first floor flat or simply 33a depending on the database used, TV Licensing kept sending letters to one while my license was in the other. Didnt live there long enough to get a visit from them but if i did i would have made them look a bit stupid

Maybe they should invest in a computer that can semanticly read the address they are sending letters to or use a human to vet them all. Or would that be to easy!
 
Back
Top Bottom