TV Licensing is creating an unnecessary burden on the public purse by adjourning court proceedings and failing to notify the courts in question.
That's according to a recent post that featured on The Justice of the Peace (Magistrate's) Blog.
The JP author goes on to explain: "A trial had been listed for a Greek defendant accused of using a colour television receiver without a licence. My colleague knew the defendant was Greek before the case had been called because whilst the L/A (Legal Advisor) was temporarily performing ushering duties outside the courtroom a lady appeared who, on being questioned by my new colleague, said she was the Greek interpreter for Mr XX and inquired how long she would have to wait."
"Her query was answered and in due course the L/A returned to inform the bench that the defendant had not appeared nor answered the tannoy and that the TV Licensing prosecutor was not in the building. She told the bench that having telephoned said organisation she was informed that they (TV Licensing) had the week previously, written to the defendant to tell him they were adjourning the case, he would not need to appear and that he would be informed of the new date."
"He confirmed that no letter had been written to the court. My colleague`s bench was, he told me, on the verge of exploding."
Yet another example of TV Licensing thinking they write the law and are above it.
That's according to a recent post that featured on The Justice of the Peace (Magistrate's) Blog.
The JP author goes on to explain: "A trial had been listed for a Greek defendant accused of using a colour television receiver without a licence. My colleague knew the defendant was Greek before the case had been called because whilst the L/A (Legal Advisor) was temporarily performing ushering duties outside the courtroom a lady appeared who, on being questioned by my new colleague, said she was the Greek interpreter for Mr XX and inquired how long she would have to wait."
"Her query was answered and in due course the L/A returned to inform the bench that the defendant had not appeared nor answered the tannoy and that the TV Licensing prosecutor was not in the building. She told the bench that having telephoned said organisation she was informed that they (TV Licensing) had the week previously, written to the defendant to tell him they were adjourning the case, he would not need to appear and that he would be informed of the new date."
"He confirmed that no letter had been written to the court. My colleague`s bench was, he told me, on the verge of exploding."
Yet another example of TV Licensing thinking they write the law and are above it.
No comments:
Post a Comment