cant pay we'll take away compo
Discussion
Good
I dont know why they think they can just walk into someones home filming them.
.
Also those Police shows are the same, why can they film you in a custody suite, you could be innocent, its not a public place. On the beat most of the time the person only kicks off when they see the camera crew and dont want to be filmed in a public place, it then gets out of hand and they are arrested for it, if there was no camera there would mostly be no trouble, common sence really.
I dont know why they think they can just walk into someones home filming them.
.
Also those Police shows are the same, why can they film you in a custody suite, you could be innocent, its not a public place. On the beat most of the time the person only kicks off when they see the camera crew and dont want to be filmed in a public place, it then gets out of hand and they are arrested for it, if there was no camera there would mostly be no trouble, common sence really.
surveyor_101 said:
kingswood said:
this was pretty much my take on it.
whereas you can have empathy for someone falling on hard time through illness etc you cant have something for nothing. they wld have been several letters and notices before the ballifs came.
someome else was poaying for their house, and whereas alot of landlords are scum themselves - see nightmare tennents and landlords, another quaility channel 5 show - in alot of cases its just your normal joe renting out 1 house, accidental landlords.
It's unfortunate that he fell into rent arrears because of illness, but we don't know the 'ins and 'outs'. I would be surprised if Mr Ali didn't get some sort of housing benefit to help pay the rent. Did he make any token payments at this time? Did he attempt to negotiate with the landlord? We don't know as often if it got to this point they would have stopped communicating and paying! whereas you can have empathy for someone falling on hard time through illness etc you cant have something for nothing. they wld have been several letters and notices before the ballifs came.
someome else was poaying for their house, and whereas alot of landlords are scum themselves - see nightmare tennents and landlords, another quaility channel 5 show - in alot of cases its just your normal joe renting out 1 house, accidental landlords.
jith said:
Oh really? I suggest you rethink that remark.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=11...
A classic example of how appallingly abused the English legal system is by those working outside the court's jurisdiction. I detest these voyeuristic TV shows that appeal to the weak minded.
J
There is 2%!https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=11...
A classic example of how appallingly abused the English legal system is by those working outside the court's jurisdiction. I detest these voyeuristic TV shows that appeal to the weak minded.
J
Baliffs now have send you letters to you offering a defined period to make contact prior to enforcement action and resulting costs around £235 for a visit under 50k (or a limit) I believe.
I have dealt with Ross and Roberts a known problem bailiff and even they give you 14 day chance to make contact and discuss and agree/challenge the account. I had no visit from them as I was proactive and always called them resolve.
At what point does the premises stop being 'their home'?
In normal circumstances nobody should have the right to film within somebodies home without consent. This family had been evicted by the court and the bailiffs are there to carry-out that court order. In this situation, is it still their home?
In normal circumstances nobody should have the right to film within somebodies home without consent. This family had been evicted by the court and the bailiffs are there to carry-out that court order. In this situation, is it still their home?
The Surveyor said:
At what point does the premises stop being 'their home'?
In normal circumstances nobody should have the right to film within somebodies home without consent. This family had been evicted by the court and the bailiffs are there to carry-out that court order. In this situation, is it still their home?
Could you not argue that once you have a notice possession because people have failed to maintain their obligations under the tenancy are they still after a 14-day notice to vacate is it still their home? In normal circumstances nobody should have the right to film within somebodies home without consent. This family had been evicted by the court and the bailiffs are there to carry-out that court order. In this situation, is it still their home?
Are they really entitled to complain when the bailiff has a legal right to enter with a camera if "They didn't pay so that's taken away"
surveyor_101 said:
The Surveyor said:
At what point does the premises stop being 'their home'?
In normal circumstances nobody should have the right to film within somebodies home without consent. This family had been evicted by the court and the bailiffs are there to carry-out that court order. In this situation, is it still their home?
Could you not argue that once you have a notice possession because people have failed to maintain their obligations under the tenancy are they still after a 14-day notice to vacate is it still their home? In normal circumstances nobody should have the right to film within somebodies home without consent. This family had been evicted by the court and the bailiffs are there to carry-out that court order. In this situation, is it still their home?
Are they really entitled to complain when the bailiff has a legal right to enter with a camera if "They didn't pay so that's taken away"
Unpleasant voyeuristic TV at it's worse and I'm struggling to see how any of it could fall within 'public interest', but equally I'm struggling to see how anybody can claim compensation for being filmed being lawfully evicted from a property that no longer is theirs.
The Surveyor said:
I can't work out if you are agreeing that they still have rights to their privacy whilst on the premises even though they have been lawfully evicted, Or that the court order and the attendance by the bailiffs confirms that any such rights have been removed.
Unpleasant voyeuristic TV at it's worse and I'm struggling to see how any of it could fall within 'public interest', but equally I'm struggling to see how anybody can claim compensation for being filmed being lawfully evicted from a property that no longer is theirs.
Once your 6 months in rent arrears and have failed to exit after 14 days I think you have given up the right to any privacy and moan about being filmed!Unpleasant voyeuristic TV at it's worse and I'm struggling to see how any of it could fall within 'public interest', but equally I'm struggling to see how anybody can claim compensation for being filmed being lawfully evicted from a property that no longer is theirs.
YOU call it voyeuristic I don't watch it that often, it shows people the consequences of your actions? I am a private landlord so after thousands of unpaid rent and plenty of chances to give my property back I would say I can film in my home with a possession order after 14 days if like a bad smell you hung around.
Its a sign how this country pander to those who don't play by the rules, if all tenants did this it would be bedlam.
99dndd said:
Repeated 35 times?
Wow, are Channel 5 that short of content?
First shown on C5, then probably repeated a couple of times on the same channel. All the others will be the countless times it will have been on series loop on during the day on 5Star, Spike & My5, along with all the other old Police Interceptors, gypsy / traveller shows, Dance Moms, animals / babies / children do the funniest things, etc, etc, that are all equally cheap pointless daytime TV filler.Wow, are Channel 5 that short of content?
AlexRS2782 said:
First shown on C5, then probably repeated a couple of times on the same channel. All the others will be the countless times it will have been on series loop on during the day on 5Star, Spike & My5, along with all the other old Police Interceptors, gypsy / traveller shows, Dance Moms, animals / babies / children do the funniest things, etc, etc, that are all equally cheap pointless daytime TV filler.
Don't forget that's always x2 for the +1 channel as well, which soon mounts up. It was also unpleasant the way the landlord’s son was behaving. Regardless of how they got there he was certainly acting up to the camera.
That was the bit that annoyed the hell out of me. Never watched it since. Aired 35 times plus is also beyond the pail. That cannot be good for anyone’s mental state.
That was the bit that annoyed the hell out of me. Never watched it since. Aired 35 times plus is also beyond the pail. That cannot be good for anyone’s mental state.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff