Cymru Marketing Journal - (CMJUK) - Online Business Journal & Digital Marketing Agency. Business News, Directory, SEO, Social Media Management, Advertising, Reviews, Forum, Market Research, Content Writing & Website Design. Thinking Local, Acting Global.
There are some important areas where it is not against the law to discriminate against disabled people, for example, in access to public transport services.
Disability discrimination can either be direct or indirect.
Direct discrimination is where you are treated less favourably because of your disability than someone without a disability would be treated in the same circumstances.
But what it fails to address is people with disabilities in their homes where they are subjected to have certain things done because the landlords are obliged by the councils to have certain things done which may hinder a persons life.
So where the law says that all public places and landlords have to abide certain rules not to discriminate disabled people, it in fact contradicts itself by forcing the landord to do certain things that may be in fact obstacles for disabled people.
Here is an expample a mental health patient cannot touch door handles and locks due to their OCD but the law states you have to have these locks in case of a fire. The scenario being that a front door normally just has a yale lock but now it has to have a handle and a lock that you can open from the inside but you need a key from the outside. So instead of a normal yale lock you have to a key and door handle that you push down to open the door plus your yale lock. This in turn causes distress with the mental health patients. Another scenario someone who is claustophobic may not want doors yet the law states you have to have fire doors. So the law is not well thought through as the person who has mental health issues has to do as the law says which is a contradiction in terms. Furthermore back to the person who has OCD or Social Anxiety why should they be subjected to workmen disturbing their way of living. I refer to a website where one person actually mentions these scenario’s on their website: www.ocd.cymru
You won’t find anything like this what I write on the internet as the powers that be will never mention it and will try to supress anyone that does.
Something flipped in my brain to say hold on but you and any member in your household do not watch terrestrial tv and its time to do something about it…….So I decided to contact the “TV Licensing” by their online contact form. I filled in all the necessary questions and then posted the following message and I will tell you what happened when I pressed the send button at the end of my post.
The message was:
I am a web designer and want to know how using Amazon Prime Video which Amazon use their own servers for has anything to do with you?
I underatand watching terrestrial television on any device is payable but where websites use their own servers why do you charge when these services do not belong to you?
I will be making a blog post about this on www.cymrumarketing.co.uk as I think it is a questionable charge for something that has nothing to do with you and is against my consumer rights to be forced to pay for something that I do not directly use, which is terrestrial tv or live streaming.
If anything for people such as myself you should offer “a pay as you go service” for the occasional viewing.
But anything that is not part of itv hub should not be passed off as belonging to you and that is illegal to claim that it does.
I have thousands of followers and I will cause an uproar as I feel I am being mislead.
I would like an answer and an explanation why you are charging me £154.40 a year for something I do not use.
Your terms and conditions state the following Amazon Prime Video, Now TV, Sky Go, etc. What does the (etc) mean?, you are not being transparent which is also illegal.
I think trading standards should get involved. However when I pressed the (send) button I ended up with the following error:
A bit of a coincidence that an error occurred. Obviously the TV Licensing people do not want confrontations so they make it difficult to complain. What use will it be to me to phone up to be told they cannot give me an answer over the phone.
Youtube do not charge you to watch programmes and websites such as Netflix charge subscription fees. Sky TV you pay a service charge to them directly and they use their own servers just like Amazon and this has nothing to do with the TV Licensing people. I can understand if a signal from their masts were being used to broadcast channels to your device, so yes I would understand that one would have to pay for the service but for the occasional use it should be a pay as you go service which you could cancel any time.
What gets me is they send intimidationg people to your door if you do not pay.
Streaming TV
According to the TV Licensing people, broadcasts coming directly from their hub or live viewing such as sport events are deemed as payable to the TV Licensing Organization, However other websites hosted on other servers and services offered by other websites such as Netflix or Amazon should not be also charged to the consumer by TV Licensing UK. If anything they should charge the website owners and make them have a license but not charge the consumer as well……. that is just plain greedy.
Since when do the TV Licensing bodies own the internet or the movie websites?
I do not know too much about streaming websites but I assume one needs a license in order to offer a service. The TV Licensing people are burning the candle at both ends.
The basic rule of thumb is that you must have a TV licence if you watch, record or otherwise consume live television or watch ITV, BBC, S4C. Which I do not!!!! It doesn’t matter which television stations you watch, or how you watch them. You still have to buy a license even if you only watch live streams from Mongolia’s Eagle TV channel.
The definition of “live stream” means it is in real time although there can be delays in transmission such as buffering due to weak wifi/broadband signal strength, and many set-top boxes and PVRs let you pause or save TV programmes to watch later. Therefore recording, capturing and storing live TV shows also counts as watching live television. You can’t get out of paying for a licence by recording programmes and watching them later.
So if you are considering streaming a TV programme just before it ends, you need to have a licence. If you start streaming it just after it has ended, you don’t need a licence.
Regardless what device you use to view live television, or how you collect and process the media, you are still viewing real time TV. No matter how you get the feed whether it is an aerial, a cable network, a satellite dish, a wifi hotspot or any other internet server it all still counts as streaming. This includes watching live fights on Sky Sports Box Office, NHL ice hockey games from Canada, ATP tennis on Amazon Prime and so on, even though you will be paying separately to watch them. Logically, it must also include any live television feeds on Facebook or Twitter. Which I reiterate I do not!!!!
Live Streaming is viewing a Live Feed in Real Time.
It does not matter if your watching live TV via a feed on a TV set, a computer monitor, on a smartphone, tablet or laptop, on a VR headset or projected on to a wall, you still have to pay, which is underatandable providing what you are watching is in real time or on the ITV Hub or BBC iplayer.
Anyone who thinks they can get out of paying without a legitimate reason is very much mistaken as they will hound you until you pay and will even fine you and take you to court. So regardless what device you use if you watch terrestial tv such as ITV, BBC, S4C or live stream TV programmes in real time on your devices whether it is a TV, Laptop, Computer, Smartphone or via a Roku stick in the back of a monitor you still have to pay.
I would therefore like to know what I have got for my money considering they have just charged me £154.40 – the answer I will tell you, absolutely nothing not one iota.
I have basically handed over £154.40 for nothing, imagine this money could go towards my grocery shopping and not the TV Bosses who live in luxury accomodation, with fancy cars and fat pay cheques (checks) from misleading consumers.
I happily pay both Netflix and Amazon Prime Video (For Movies) but I do not live stream and do not watch terrestrial TV such as ITV, BBC or S4C. Half the rubbish they broadcast only destroys my valuable brain cells which are better spent blogging. I do not see why I have to pay the TV Licensing people if I do not use their service.
If their argument is that all broadcasts over the internet belong to them then they should make the website owners pay for a license and not the consumer.
But if they can get money from the consumer as well as the website owner thats more chi-ching for them and the consumer who thinks he has to pay regardless if they live stream or not because they are brain washed into thinking they must then, they will pay because they would not know what else to do and the TV Licensing people then laugh all the way to the bank.
Why should I pay Amazon for Prime Video to be charged more than double amount by the TV Licensing people also even though I do not live stream? Amazon is an American Company so what has that got to do with the British TV?
Surely there are jurisdictions on counrty to country viewing tv laws and Britain does not govern the whole wide world. So my question is how can Britain dictate for example Amazon Prime Video which is an american streaming channel, where I presume in order to stream Amazon would have already acquired a license to offer the service and with a paid subscription. So how does Britain have a say in the broadcasting of a foreign country, when it is over the internet and via satellites which do not belong to Britain. I would understand if the live stream was being broadcasted in Britain but if is from abroad how can Britain charge a license fee and if it is for a one time even, for £152.40 and one only viewed as a one off you could go literally watch the event live and get yourself front row tickets for that amount of money. Just asking?
I am angry to say the least and like an idiot I have been paying them for the last 10 years even though I might have only watched a handul times worth of viewing at the most 7 days viewing (not live streaming may I add) only on ITV hub, so for say 10 years at a cost of £1,524.00 they have made over £1,524.00 and I have had nothing for that amount of money which I think they should refund me for.
I remember once whilst I was abroad in the EU back in the day when we were in the EU, I wanted to access a documetary whilst I was in my hotel and it basically said I could not watch the program on my iphone, so the following day I rang theTV Licensing people and they said my license did not cover me to watch British TV on my device whilst I was abroad. So if that is the case they should not charge for live streaming from TV networks from abroad.
But have I the energy or time to complain and just like the rest of the british people (programmed sheep} who end up paying because they are scare mongered into a corner, end up paying for the sake of not having any problems with the TV Licensing people, I may actually break free and stand my ground.
**Note: Anyone reading this please share it far and wide and bring a stop to this once and for all. If Microsoft get their money from every laptop, computer, tablet that is sold that has Windows installed on it, then the TV Licensing people should do the same with all newTV’s and have a subscription service for people who want to view online.
I may take this further, we will just have to see……
Did you know that regardless of GDPR rules these blue chip corporate companies have rules of their own and if you are not happy they simply will not provide you the service.
I have just got off the phone with a customer service rep who basically said if I am not happy with their data sharing they will not provide me Gas regardless of GDPR rules.
So looking further into their privacy policy I was shocked to find not only do they share information with credit reference agencies they also share your personal data with the following companies. My question is what has my data got to do with Google, Facebook, Twitter and the like?
Their answer was that because they offer credit they must share your personal data. I am obviously not a corporate giant and I do offer monthly payment plans for my clients, yet the difference is I safeguard my clients personal data and do not share it with any third party.
This is totally wrong on so many levels and the cheek of it is if you are not happy then “Adios” you will have to burn candles instead to keep you warm.
For a quick review here are the companies they share your personal data with:
Centrica Plc (Their Parent Company). Google Mediacom Awin Rakuten Facebook Indicia Brandwatch Twitter Lithium Communisis VST Equifax Experian TDX Callcredit/TransUnion National Grid CSP GHE Solar ECO Greendeals Infinity Energy Infinity Energy Sustain Trade Engine Deloitte
They claim they do not sell your information to third parties, but sharing is ok in their eyes. So in theory anyone of these companies I have listed to you above can contact you with their marketing spiel. Have you ever wondered how these marketing companies get your information?, now you know, as each one of these companies have their own set of T&Cs and they can then sell your information on.
I think that credit agencies need to be accessed to see if you can pay your bills or not and if you fall into arrears then debt collecting agencies. But to share with social media platforms and affiliate sites is absolutely a NO WAY for me and should not be allowed. But GDPR only covers the UK & the EU so sharing your data to countires out of the jurisdiction is possible and you will have to get an army of lawyers to back you up.
I’m not happy and thought I should share this with my readers.
GDPR on my mind. I have for the last couple of months started GDPR with Google and Change.org. The reason was that change.org published my name without my permission but later stated they had removed my name from their website. Two months on, my name is still showing for this particular petition I had signed and Google have said they will remove the listing from the UK only.
Well what about the rest of the world?
It infuriates me that my name is still showing even though I have asked many times to have the listing removed. It is causing me no end of distress and GDPR only applies to the EU countries and the UK.
I won’t go into specific detail as I do not want the publicity but I thought GDPR was a Global Regulation but apparantly it is not, so the rest of the world is an open can of worms, that can use your information anyway they want and there is nothing that you can do to stop them.
I just have to wait and see what happens but I am not happy that my name is still associated to a petition I supposedly had signed whereby the listing is still live.
I sign off with a heavy heart as no one should go through what I am going through. It is making my work much harder to do and people who I have spoken to have said I need to remove the listing ASAP.
My hands are tied for the minute. Will update this post when I get some more news.
They lack business management and training and need to be consulted how to run a business smoothly. One of customer representative staff said the reason why I had to wait more that 30 minutes to be connected was because of the high volumn of calls, well no I would never had known that had she not have told me (my sacarasm is coming through) and no cigar for her…….. Just Eat should employ more staff or use virtual assistants not come up with lame excuses.
Their lame excuses continued with another representative saying the third party driver systems were down and when I asked who their third party driver company was they said ‘Steward’ so whilst I am talking with them I type in and low and behold they gave false information as there are no results for my search terms. Why lie to me??? and that was the icing on the cake because I then cancelled the order after two and a half hours and told them what my mission was to make it know to the world what a useless company they are.
For the time being I will recommend Deliveroo and Uber Eats as Just Eat is a joke in my opinion.
Mess with me and I will mess you back ten times harder.
The reason I write this is because I was forced to do an update of ‘Windows 10’ which I ignored for about a week but then started noticing problems so I started the update begrudgingly. Three hours into the update I had only reached 5% so I decided to do some research and found this update can take as long as 24 hours. No one from Microsoft had notified me of this prior to the update. So I powered my computer off. This was last night.
Today I come into work and power my computer on and low and behold a message comes up ” undoing changes to your computer”. OMG I was infuriated as I needed to access my computer there and then and not wait for Microsoft to mess me around. At this stage I wanted for heads to roll as I am trying to run a business and is Microsoft going to compensate me for every minute I am not working.
So I phone a number which is apparantely it was Office 365, I explain I needed Windows Tech Support and no one can give me a number but they put me through to the Tech Support internally. I then asked the Tech Support for their direct number and again they went round the houses and avoided giving it to me. So after the telephone call I then did some research and found the number for the UK : 0344 800 2400 ,so why was it so difficult to give it to me? For the USA it is +1 800 642 7676
Anyway moving on the telephone consisted of the tech support person telling me to wait for the changes to be undone which meant me waiting several hours for the changes to happen.
So in my opinion Microsoft are bullies and all they care is about the promotion of their product and seek to maintain market competition. A Monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity. This contrasts with a monopsony which relates to a single entity’s control of a market to purchase a good or service, and with oligoply which consists of a few sellers dominating a market.
Hence all computers are prinstalled with Microsoft Operating Systems which in other words is The Bundling of Microsoft Windows is the installation of Microsoft Windows in computers before their purchase. Microsoft happen to encourage original equiptment manufacturers (OEMs) of personal computers to include Windows licenses with their products, and agreements between Microsoft and OEMs have undergone antitrust scrutiny. Users opposed to the bundling of Microsoft Windows have sought refunds for Windows licenses, arguing that the Windows end user license entitles them to return unused Windows licenses for a cash refund. Although some customers have successfully obtained payments (in some cases after litigation or lengthy negotiations), others have been less successful. This is so unfair as not everyone wants Microsoft as their operating system and the amount of time and resources wasted configuring updates they should just give the money back without argument.
I believe that an equipment manufacturer should make the market fair and purchase equal percentages of end user licenses of various operating systems not just Microsoft and offer the consumer a choice. Just like you have a choice of colour, ram and storage space etc, you should have a choice which operating system to use.
The best part is the tech support person just rang me back and said I need to do the update and I said I was not going to if it is going to take me 24 hours so he suggested I get a pen drive on a minimum of 16GB and he would help to install the update on Friday. He never said Microsoft would supply one for me, he just said I should acquire one. What if I was someone who could not afford to get one, why should I pay extra to get something fixed that was not my fault to begin with?
Imagine the rest of the population that are tearing their hair out right now because of Microsoft.
Microsoft as a gesture of goodwill should at least give office 365 to anyone that has had issues with my complaint, that would be the most decent thing to do.
So if you are stuck try rebooting your computer to safe mode.
How do I boot Windows 10 in Safe Mode?
To access the Boot Manager of your system, please press the key combination Ctrl + F8 during the boot process. Select the desired Safe Mode to start your PC.
Note Due to the current fast computers with fast boot or SSD, it is troublesome to catch the exact time frame with the Ctrl + F8 key combination during the boot process. Therefore it might take several attempts to access the Boot Manager this way. Alternatively, the Safe Mode can also be launched directly from Windows.
Start Safe Mode directly out of Windows
Click Windows-button → On/Off.
Hold down the Shift key and click Restart.
Click the option Troubleshoot and then Advanced options.
*****Finally if you are still having trouble with the update you can visit https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/contactus/windows/setup/ or phone the numbers which I mentioned earlier.
So Friday came and the Tech Person phoned and rather than to perform a quick fix like he had promised he told me to sit the update out. So what was the point of me waiting 2 days only to be told the quick fix he thought of using was not stable and that I should just be patient? Why waste my time? I told him I needed my computer on and he said do I not sleep? The update took 20 hours I usually have about 6-7 hours sleep before im back on the computer and I even had to justify my hours to him. I tried looking for him on the internet and he does not exist no social media or digital footprint, absolutely nothing which tells me his name was made up. Why go to these lengths to hide your identity why bother giving a surname when you know its not going to be real and won’t help me.
This has now made me so angry that Microsoft who need not worry about putting food on the table can waste other peoples time and not give a monkeys about other businesses that have to work for a living.
This site has affiliate links and the publisher (us) may get a commission on clicks per action when purchases and registrations are made by the user. (CPA). This site is owned by UK Website Designers part of a group of sites and domains in an SEO Link Wheel, which can be viewed here!
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
