|
|
Post by conbott on Jun 15, 2008 17:35:49 GMT
being exposed through the media, etc, is getting a bit close to the bone. all the law is doing is taking away another hiding place for them what's wrong with that?  |
|
|
|
Post by steveg on Feb 24, 2009 20:56:09 GMT
I have just updated my blog with an article showing specifically how the new law will affect the mediums, psychics, etc. Please be gentle this is my first post and i have just joined. I am actually carrying out some research on the Consumer protection Regulations specifically in the context of mediums as i am writing a legal piece (with two colleagues) tracing the historical regulation of mediums. I do not think it is clear cut for a number of reasons. 1. This is based on an EU Directive which is maximum harmonisation so protection cannot go higher than the EU level. So some legislation that has been repealed could have provided GREATER protection. So don't assume that this has to be a stronger piece of legislation that the Fraudulent Mediums Act. 2. The practice of providing 'contact with the dead' in return for money is not an automatically unfair commercial practice whereby falsely claiming that a product will cure illness is. 3. The initial Government assessment considered that the FMA was covered by Article 6 1(f) of the Directive which is in our Regs as 5(6) which is the nature attributes and rights of the trader. I think the real issue here is if the medium falsely claims to have the attribute to contact the dead. In short i don't think that the medium who honestly believes s/he has such power has anything to fear. I would like to see some opinion to the contrary but don't see it here. |
|
|
|
Post by bobdezon on Feb 25, 2009 3:59:20 GMT
I have replied to you via email steve.  |
|
|
|
Post by lucan on Feb 25, 2009 8:51:22 GMT
A medium picked me out of a audience and said she was in touch with a lady who had a strong personalty, who was ether my wife or my sister. My wife is alive and I am an only child.
Could I have taking her to court or reported her to TS under the new laws?
It happen the last week of the old laws. I was recording the event but it was to faint to use.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Feb 25, 2009 11:02:29 GMT
If you paid for the service, then yes you could i believe
|
|
|
|
Post by harry on Mar 13, 2009 23:24:47 GMT
But surely courts of law are there for disputes which have not been settled in the normal course of business. For example, a medium does a reading and charged £30. The customer is dissatisfied and takes the medium to court. The court wouldn't be very bloody happy with the customer not giving the medium a chance to refund the money in the first instance.
In other words, court is the last resort and if you asked for your money back, and got it. You wouldn't need to take it to court.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Mar 14, 2009 10:14:22 GMT
Yes thats right
Always ask the medium for a receipt, and get a VAT number.
If they refuse, then dont pay.
I have yet to hear of a single medium in the world who gives a receipt.
(Psychic sisters at selfridges? Do they give receipts?)
|
|
|
|
Post by jackofkent on Mar 21, 2009 22:57:04 GMT
I have just updated my blog with an article showing specifically how the new law will affect the mediums, psychics, etc. Please be gentle this is my first post and i have just joined. I am actually carrying out some research on the Consumer protection Regulations specifically in the context of mediums as i am writing a legal piece (with two colleagues) tracing the historical regulation of mediums. I do not think it is clear cut for a number of reasons. 1. This is based on an EU Directive which is maximum harmonisation so protection cannot go higher than the EU level. So some legislation that has been repealed could have provided GREATER protection. So don't assume that this has to be a stronger piece of legislation that the Fraudulent Mediums Act. 2. The practice of providing 'contact with the dead' in return for money is not an automatically unfair commercial practice whereby falsely claiming that a product will cure illness is. 3. The initial Government assessment considered that the FMA was covered by Article 6 1(f) of the Directive which is in our Regs as 5(6) which is the nature attributes and rights of the trader. I think the real issue here is if the medium falsely claims to have the attribute to contact the dead. In short i don't think that the medium who honestly believes s/he has such power has anything to fear. I would like to see some opinion to the contrary but don't see it here. There is a great deal of good and well informed sense to your brief analysis. The new regulations are in many ways an advance on the old Fraudulent Mediums Act. Under the FMA, the prosecution had to prove fraud (which is difficult to do at law, as the Serious Fraud Office often find out); and even if fraud was proved, then entertainment was a complete defence. There were few prosecutions under the FMAIndeed, the ineffectiveness of the FMA worked to the credit of Psychics; the argument was that, as there were no prosecutions, an unprosecuted psychic was legitimate. Under the new regulations, there is no need for the prosecution to show fraud - just that consumers could be misled regardless of the trader's intent - and entertainment is not now an automatic defence. Psychics charging for their "services" will be treated like a double-glazing salesperson.So, as long as Psychics are clear and accurate in their "commercial practices" then their exposure to legal risk is low under the new regulations. On the other hand, exploiting people who are vulnerable (which presumably includes those who are bereaved) is an "aggressive" unfair commercial practice under the regulations. It is not yet clear whether this is being enforced against Psychics by Trading Standards. However, by shifting the focus from the intention of the (fraudulent) medium to the effects (or likely effects) on the consumer, the new regulations have taken the legal context for dealing with dodgy Psychics into an entirely new direction. I think it is too soon to see if Trading Standards will allocate their (limited) resources to scrutiny of commercial psychics. It may well be that there is no general crack-down. But it is new and significant that they are now to be treated just as traders. |
|
|
|
Post by Me on Apr 26, 2009 19:40:13 GMT
umm excuse me but when I had the centre we were vat registerd and always gave reciepts for everything someone purchased whether it was for readings,shop goods or workshops. Everything had to be accounted for as we paid tax on all services/goods we provided, everything barring the sunday services had tax duty to pay on it.I could never quite understand that,the money for readings was indeed classed as a donation,but we still had to pay the 17.5% I think it was then to the VAT man. Because they said it was a service we were providing which was fair enough. The vast majority do not give reciepts nor are they VAT registerd etc. You know,thinking about it....If someone is not registerd can they be legally sued under the trades discription if they are not registerd as a trader/service provider?  Shouldnt it really be made a law that everyone/anyone who provides this type of service should be registerd as a business,that way they have to be insured like we were,pay vat/tax like we had to etc. And surely then the consumer has more power within the court room...Just a thought  |
|
|
|
Post by theminx on May 9, 2009 17:15:14 GMT
Yes thats right Always ask the medium for a receipt, and get a VAT number. If they refuse, then dont pay. I have yet to hear of a single medium in the world who gives a receipt. (Psychic sisters at selfridges? Do they give receipts?) Jon aren't theatre ticket stubs a form of receipt? or are you talking about Mediums in general who give one to one readings? The answer to your question about Selfridges giving you a receipt is yes they do www.skeptics.org.uk/graphics/PS_receipt.gif |
|
