PRS / PPL Music licence issue for a small business.
Discussion
Many thanks for all your replies. My GF is still scared stiff but is going to write another letter again stating that she was not nor is playing music and ask them to provide proof of this.
PPL are persistently calling every few days asking if she is playing music etc and the actual officer who visited the shop has been seen driving past the shop almost straining his neck to look in which is very strange!!
PPL are persistently calling every few days asking if she is playing music etc and the actual officer who visited the shop has been seen driving past the shop almost straining his neck to look in which is very strange!!
roscopeco said:
Many thanks for all your replies. My GF is still scared stiff but is going to write another letter again stating that she was not nor is playing music and ask them to provide proof of this.
PPL are persistently calling every few days asking if she is playing music etc and the actual officer who visited the shop has been seen driving past the shop almost straining his neck to look in which is very strange!!
I did you a letter on May 6th.PPL are persistently calling every few days asking if she is playing music etc and the actual officer who visited the shop has been seen driving past the shop almost straining his neck to look in which is very strange!!
The more you ask for proof yada yada, the more you entertain something untrue.
Say it straight.
They'll chase someone else.
apologies for dragging this up again
we have been getting the usual phonecalls from ppl about their license,we always deny we have any form of music playing equipment(we do not play any music),i keep sending the letters back saying the same,i was not worried until this morning i received a letter from jeffersonbutler(an independent collections agency)demanding payment
my wife phoned to find out what's going on and was told to phone ppl,when speaking to them they informed her that "chloe" one of my members of staff told them the shop had played music for a week,we inherited chloe through the purchase of the shop and can only presume the previous owners had played music for a while which chloe was referring to
the phonecall my wife had with ppl was heated,due to we do not owe them any money
surely they cannot enforce this debt without proof
we have been getting the usual phonecalls from ppl about their license,we always deny we have any form of music playing equipment(we do not play any music),i keep sending the letters back saying the same,i was not worried until this morning i received a letter from jeffersonbutler(an independent collections agency)demanding payment
my wife phoned to find out what's going on and was told to phone ppl,when speaking to them they informed her that "chloe" one of my members of staff told them the shop had played music for a week,we inherited chloe through the purchase of the shop and can only presume the previous owners had played music for a while which chloe was referring to
the phonecall my wife had with ppl was heated,due to we do not owe them any money
surely they cannot enforce this debt without proof
We have an update to the situation but it is still ongoing!
G/F had a visit from a neighbouring shop who does not play music either. She had also had a visit from the same guy. She recieved a bill saying exactly the same as the girlfriends. saying that she was being billed for playing music!!
Same day G/f recieved a call from PPL asking her questions about the visit but trick questions whereby she could only agree so to speak. She told them that they were welcome to visit the shop and see for them selves why music wasnt played etc and informed them that she has no need to lie. The guy on the phone said he would speak to his manager and ring back the following day but still has'nt.
Although it is still ongoing my girlfriend feels that her case is alot stronger now that this representative is clearly making false accusations against 2 of them.
G/F had a visit from a neighbouring shop who does not play music either. She had also had a visit from the same guy. She recieved a bill saying exactly the same as the girlfriends. saying that she was being billed for playing music!!
Same day G/f recieved a call from PPL asking her questions about the visit but trick questions whereby she could only agree so to speak. She told them that they were welcome to visit the shop and see for them selves why music wasnt played etc and informed them that she has no need to lie. The guy on the phone said he would speak to his manager and ring back the following day but still has'nt.
Although it is still ongoing my girlfriend feels that her case is alot stronger now that this representative is clearly making false accusations against 2 of them.
mark165 said:
I don't have an issue with the licence! She didn't have one, she has to get one. Fair enough.
It's the 50% surcharge that's put on not once, but twice- to me the whole surcharge thing is quite unjustified.
"Consumer organisation Which? has fired the starting gun in a contest over credit and debit card surcharges.It's the 50% surcharge that's put on not once, but twice- to me the whole surcharge thing is quite unjustified.
It has described the charges levied on customers who pay online by debit or credit card for flights and other services as a "murky practice".
It is to call on the Office of Fair Trading to investigate these charges, by submitting a super-complaint to the regulator."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12430635
rog007 said:
"Consumer organisation Which? has fired the starting gun in a contest over credit and debit card surcharges.
It has described the charges levied on customers who pay online by debit or credit card for flights and other services as a "murky practice".
No doubt but this is not about credit card surcharges It has described the charges levied on customers who pay online by debit or credit card for flights and other services as a "murky practice".
OP: 'What gets me is the 50% surcharge to cover the costs of 'infringment' for both years.'
dryden1407 said:
ppl,when speaking to them they informed her that "chloe" one of my members of staff told them the shop had played music for a week,we inherited chloe through the purchase of the shop and can only presume the previous owners had played music for a while which chloe was referring to
Ask them for proof of the convetrsation.They treid this with us and blatantly lied saying that an employee had told them we played music.We knew the employee, the employee knew what she'd actually said, we trusted her, so we called their bluff and they backed down - as they had to because there was no proof.
Their tactics cross the border of legality IMHO.
Digga said:
Their tactics cross the border of legality IMHO.
I've said a lot about this previously, and whilst the underlying concept is correct, I don't like the PRS/MCPS as an organisation.The problem they have is asking people to pay for what they use is difficult. The are often chasing companies who know full well they play music but because they either think it should be 'free' or that they can get away without paying, so they will be deliberately evasive.
It takes a certain 'type' of person to deal with people like that. It is not the cute, polite type of informative selling. It is effectively debt collection tactics.
The problem is in bringing in heavy handed 'types' who are effective at legitimate collection, through commissioned targets, there are a certain number of totally innocent people who get caught up in this, and there are a certain number of staff who are willing to 'push the boundary' on how they get results. Whilst that may 'call the bluff' of someone who legitimately owes, it is wrongful against an innocent party.
To give an example of the morals of the people who chase this, I once interviewed an employee tho did this for the PRS for a sales job. He was good. So, I brought him in and formally offered this the job, went through pay, conditions etc, and he shook my hand and accepted.
I got a call the next day asking if I could put this, including the salary in writing to him. Which I did. 72 hours before he was supposed to start (and after I of course let down the other candidates) I received an email telling me how sorry he was that because of 'medical issues' he would not be able to fulfil the role any more.
In short, when I investigated, I found out that the only reason that he applied for a job, did an interview, and wanted the offer in writing was to take that letter back to the PRS and increase his own basic wage. Nice.
rog007 said:
Give me some credit; I know.
If you want credit there'll be a surcharge 
To me a surcharge is a small amount to cover some additional cost, eg fuel or some admin cost, with little profit margin. What the music boys proposed is simply a fine, and quite a ridiculous unenforceable fine too I suspect.
Again, playing Devil's Advocate here, a surcharge, even of 50% could be justifiable.
In short, if someone in full knowledge has been using copyrighted work without permission, and has failed to obtain a licence, that costs the PRS a lot of money to chase up. In some cases for example where a licence may cost £100 a year, and they have visited a site, written letters etc, the cost of following up the situation eats into the licence itself considerably.
Who should pay for that?
The copyright owners they represent, or the person breaking the law?
The concept itself it not really that abstract. Many supermarkets and shops warn of a civil recovery scheme when thieves are caught. So, it is they that end up contributing to the otherwise wasted cost of security rather than the shoppers themselves.
In short, if someone in full knowledge has been using copyrighted work without permission, and has failed to obtain a licence, that costs the PRS a lot of money to chase up. In some cases for example where a licence may cost £100 a year, and they have visited a site, written letters etc, the cost of following up the situation eats into the licence itself considerably.
Who should pay for that?
The copyright owners they represent, or the person breaking the law?
The concept itself it not really that abstract. Many supermarkets and shops warn of a civil recovery scheme when thieves are caught. So, it is they that end up contributing to the otherwise wasted cost of security rather than the shoppers themselves.
A request for help.
I was recently called by the PPL and what i can only describe as strongly coerced/harassed by them. I have heard of the PRS and I know I don't need a license from them, I have never heard of the PPL before, the way he spoke on the phone made me think that he was trying to scam me. I run a small business with a small shop and workshop, music is not played or audible in the shop/to my customers, I am the only person who can hear it. At the beginning of the week I received, "A Request for Payment," from the PPL backdated a year and also for the year coming + a 50% surcharge. A bill totaling almost £200. In the letter it states that I supplied the information about the size of the audible space, an exact size, which I didn't. It also states that I supplied the date of when I first started using the radio, which I also didn't. I used the words almost a year, they have taken that to mean a year before the day they called me. I have subsequently found the receipt for the radio so can supply that as evidence. Could anyone offer me some help/advice about the content of my reply. Would anyone have a license free template letter or something similar of help?
I am trying to find a favorable outcome as I feel like they are taking the p*** and I have never heard of having two licenses for listening to the radio. I probably would have paid it if they hadn't been so greedy!!
I was recently called by the PPL and what i can only describe as strongly coerced/harassed by them. I have heard of the PRS and I know I don't need a license from them, I have never heard of the PPL before, the way he spoke on the phone made me think that he was trying to scam me. I run a small business with a small shop and workshop, music is not played or audible in the shop/to my customers, I am the only person who can hear it. At the beginning of the week I received, "A Request for Payment," from the PPL backdated a year and also for the year coming + a 50% surcharge. A bill totaling almost £200. In the letter it states that I supplied the information about the size of the audible space, an exact size, which I didn't. It also states that I supplied the date of when I first started using the radio, which I also didn't. I used the words almost a year, they have taken that to mean a year before the day they called me. I have subsequently found the receipt for the radio so can supply that as evidence. Could anyone offer me some help/advice about the content of my reply. Would anyone have a license free template letter or something similar of help?
I am trying to find a favorable outcome as I feel like they are taking the p*** and I have never heard of having two licenses for listening to the radio. I probably would have paid it if they hadn't been so greedy!!
Ignore them, they will go away eventually.
If they carry on sending letters, write back to them telling them that, with immediate effect, there will be a £25 administration fee for all subsequent letters that they send you, phone calls they make to you, and visits they make to your premises. Send this by recorded delivery. And then invoice them for every letter, call or visit. This is entirely legal, and will quickly add up to more than anything they think you need to pay.
If they carry on sending letters, write back to them telling them that, with immediate effect, there will be a £25 administration fee for all subsequent letters that they send you, phone calls they make to you, and visits they make to your premises. Send this by recorded delivery. And then invoice them for every letter, call or visit. This is entirely legal, and will quickly add up to more than anything they think you need to pay.
[quote=shakotan]Hang on, are you supposed to pay PRS AND PPL? I thought it was a one or the other thing, like being WEEE registered through one of a number of different agencies.
I have recently found out that Yes if you listen to licensed music in a public/work place you are required to have a license from both the PPL who represent the record companies and performers and the PRS who represent composers and music publishers. I don't require a PRS license as I am a lone worker and don't play music that is audible to anyone visiting me at my place of work. Why this doesn't apply to the PPL as well I am unable to figure out.
I have recently found out that Yes if you listen to licensed music in a public/work place you are required to have a license from both the PPL who represent the record companies and performers and the PRS who represent composers and music publishers. I don't require a PRS license as I am a lone worker and don't play music that is audible to anyone visiting me at my place of work. Why this doesn't apply to the PPL as well I am unable to figure out.
davepoth said:
Ignore them, they will go away eventually.
If they carry on sending letters, write back to them telling them that, with immediate effect, there will be a £25 administration fee for all subsequent letters that they send you, phone calls they make to you, and visits they make to your premises. Send this by recorded delivery. And then invoice them for every letter, call or visit. This is entirely legal, and will quickly add up to more than anything they think you need to pay.
Thanks, Good advice I will do that.If they carry on sending letters, write back to them telling them that, with immediate effect, there will be a £25 administration fee for all subsequent letters that they send you, phone calls they make to you, and visits they make to your premises. Send this by recorded delivery. And then invoice them for every letter, call or visit. This is entirely legal, and will quickly add up to more than anything they think you need to pay.
tuchen11 said:
davepoth said:
Ignore them, they will go away eventually.
If they carry on sending letters, write back to them telling them that, with immediate effect, there will be a £25 administration fee for all subsequent letters that they send you, phone calls they make to you, and visits they make to your premises. Send this by recorded delivery. And then invoice them for every letter, call or visit. This is entirely legal, and will quickly add up to more than anything they think you need to pay.
Thanks, Good advice I will do that.If they carry on sending letters, write back to them telling them that, with immediate effect, there will be a £25 administration fee for all subsequent letters that they send you, phone calls they make to you, and visits they make to your premises. Send this by recorded delivery. And then invoice them for every letter, call or visit. This is entirely legal, and will quickly add up to more than anything they think you need to pay.
You are much, much better off declaring your position entirely accurately and honestly.
So, if you only listen to music yourself as a proprietor, and this is genuinely inaudible to any staff or customers then you don't need a licence - and they know that.
You don't need to be awkward or obstructive - and that only looks like you are hiding something.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff