TV licence scam?

[Dave A]

I got a phone call yesterday - some crowd claiming to be authorised TV licence fee collectors for the SABC. Thinking about it now, I suspect it might be a scam.

The lass claimed I owed R2500 odd in licence fees. Now I know full well we're paid up. Not only did I buy a TV recently where the fact that we had a valid TV licence was confirmed by the store, but my wife chewed my ear off about leaving paying it up to the last moment. To the point where she rushed off and paid it (maybe subliminally that was my strategy anyway ).

Anyhow, bottom line, I know we're paid up. So I told the lass to send me a notice as to how this money due was made up. "Certainly" she says, promising to send a fax straight away.

Well, it's 24 hours later and still no fax. And that got me thinking - why were they phoning me anyway? The TV licence has always been in my wife's name with all her details.

Sounds like the makings of a sweet scam. Just call people at random, please pay into account blah blah with reference such and such. Has anyone else had an experience like this?

[Dave A]

Oh this is getting better.

I've received my statement - licence fees and penalties owed since 2004. Goodness only knows how they decided I need a TV licence in the first place as the TV licence has always been in my wife's name.

But from 2004! And this is their first attempt to collect!

I've never received a renewal notice, a statement, a phonecall until now...

No wonder the SABC can't pay its bills.

[Dave A]

This is really turning interesting.

Naturally I've responded to the SABC's claim. I have pointed out the facts of the matter to the attorneys attending to this, including providing a copy of the current licence and suggesting that their claim is without foundation.

Blow me down with a feather, a lass phones me now advising me that I am in the process of being blacklisted and if I don't pay up, I won't be able to get access to credit etc. So I ask her if she has received my letter. She checks and confirms it has indeed been received - logged as received on 7th July.

Obviously no-one has read the damn thing yet; they certainly haven't responded or otherwise "paused" their process.

So anyway, I then told her that if I was blacklisted they could expect a substantial damages claim and suggested she escalated the matter for a response before things turned ugly.

So now I'm thinking just what that damages claim might amount to if it ever came to that. And my line of thinking went down this little road...

I reckon I won't bother demanding that they remove me from the blacklist - just claim for the lost credit consequences over the next 5 years, plus the effects on my directorships...

Hmm. Could be quite a nice plan. Pity the SABC is so broke at the moment, though.

Anyway, what do you think are my chances?

[Alan]

Anyway, what do you think are my chances?

Of being blacklisted? by the sound of the phone call, very good.

[IanF]

Blow me down with a feather, a lass phones me now advising me that I am in the process of being blacklisted and if I don't pay up, I won't be able to get access to credit etc. So I ask her if she has received my letter. She checks and confirms it has indeed been received - logged as received on 7th July.

Obviously no-one has read the damn thing yet; they certainly haven't responded or otherwise "paused" their process.

Dave
I would email or fax the credit bureau mentioned with the documents etc. plus a copy to SABC CEO if we know who he is. When this happens to me I do this, wasn't the SABC, and tell everyone it is a dispute. I have had the credit bureaus phone me and say they are not allowed to list if there is a dispute. This won't work if you do owe the money. I just got my daughter's university account sorted out this way when they offered to report me and her.

[Marq]

Are the attorneys involved from a -J M Meiring Attorneys of Randburg, also goes by the name of Mayibuya and a number of other names?

These guys and I would imagine they are not the only ones, buy up the old debts of big institutions and the like and then send out these types of letters like you have just received.

They appear to send out letters of theats and demand without checking any details. The majority of recipients shit themselves and just pay up without ever taking any action. I would imagine they drop most of the stories if the recipient threatens them with legal action as most of the amounts are not worth the effort. There were questions when they took on the Health and Racket debts as the majority had apparently prescribed. Letters of demand were still sent out. Similar scenarios exist with Telkom debts.

Go here for one such story.

[garthu]

Similar scenarios exist with Telkom debts.

Yup been down that road. An old account ( about 6years old keeps re-appearing with different attorneys. Same threats, same cuck. Have a standard response for them on file now - get lost

[tec0]

Health and Racket BS... I actually paid them and still they wanted more. So my last phone call I just told them “I will see you in court for blackmail and that I will press charges today.� See all my stuff was paid and I had prove of payment.

Still I was young and stupid back then. Anyway the man told me that they made a mistake and that my name will be lifted from the database. Come to think of it I was scammed because I had no access to their facilities!

[Graeme]

Dave, dust off the law of prescription - years ago Beachway Motors tried it on with me and an accountant collegue of mine 'phoned them and told them that the debt had become prescribed (used to be two years back then) and told them to get lost. Never heard another word.

[Dave A]

Of being blacklisted? by the sound of the phone call, very good.

Possibly mixed blessings - We'll see

This won't work if you do owe the money.

Not unless TV's need a licence for each person who happens to watch it. As far as I know it's per household

Are the attorneys involved from a -J M Meiring Attorneys of Randburg, also goes by the name of Mayibuya and a number of other names?

No, but that's an interesting possibility. I found it odd that the lady making the calls didn't seem to be aware that she was working for a law firm. Got quite flustered when I asked to be put through to the legal partner in charge of the matter

Dave, dust off the law of prescription

Normally three years for general claims, Graeme. Although possibly not applicable to licence fees.