Would Mike Martin care to comment about the letter

[Heckler]

in this months YM and ST from a J A Holt MBE about a "final notice" about his ships radio licence?
He says that his "attention was repeatedly drawn to a somewhat intimidating message that in accordance with the criminal procedure and investigations act 1996, all calls will be recorded" he also said that the agency failed in four out of five of its code of practice commitments.
any comments mike?
s

<hr width=100% size=1>http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk

 

[Peppermint]

Re: I got the same stuff

full of threats to take away my call sign etc. It all started more than month before the year end. I got four reminders in all the final one dropped on the mat in the same post as the renewed license. If you wondered where your fee goes it goes on postage.

Little hitlers comes to mind.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Heckler]

Re: I got the same stuff

notice its all got very quiet here, no "dogs been unleashed" yet, how ever someone got their knickers in a twist on the jon brook post, veiled threats imho
stu

<hr width=100% size=1>http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk

 

[Peppermint]

Re: I didn\'t see that one

Where is it now?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[robp]

Sent back a "final" reminder last year, with a note attached asking where the first ones were? Needless to say, got no reply.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[philip_stevens]

Of course you got no reply!

They'd run out of paper, envelopes and stamps sending out final reminders /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>regards,
Philip

 

[JamesS]

Now be fair - they were probably all too busy having their photographs taken for the Summer edition of Air Waves!

Cheers

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Mike_Martin]

The recording of all calls in accordance with CPI Act, was a Post Office requirement at the beginning of the contract. To be perfectly honest, probably around 20 people have felt "intimidated" enough by it to actually consider it a reason for complaint. Have been considering whether it is actually necessary but at the same time it doesn't actually do any actual harm. In fact of those who needed to talk to me it was grounded in the fact of a gruff, male voice making the announcementrather than the content.

Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>Manager,
Aeronautical & Maritime Services Section,
Radiocommunications Agency

 

[Mike_Martin]

Probably processed as a licence cancellation, unless you had attached a cheque in which case the note may have been missed!!

Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>Manager,
Aeronautical & Maritime Services Section,
Radiocommunications Agency

 

[Mike_Martin]

lol

MM

<hr width=100% size=1>Manager,
Aeronautical & Maritime Services Section,
Radiocommunications Agency

 

[Mike_Martin]

Ooh that's a bit harsh,

I had to force my team out onto the dock to get that done lasted about 10 mins in all.

Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>Manager,
Aeronautical & Maritime Services Section,
Radiocommunications Agency

 

[Mike_Martin]

Re: I got the same stuff

Err was working at the Boatshow, then had to attend meetings to ensure that we doing everything required of us by HMCG SAR.

It's not all coffee and biscuits you know

Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>Manager,
Aeronautical & Maritime Services Section,
Radiocommunications Agency

 

[Heckler]

but there is quite obviously a problem

with the renewal system as is evidenced by the letters to the mags and the posts on this page, what is going on?
lol doesnt answer it
stu

<hr width=100% size=1>http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk

 

[Mike_Martin]

Re: but there is quite obviously a problem

Quite right lol doesn't answer it.

We receive in the region of 15 - 20 complaints a year about the renewal process and/or its attendant letters etc. As a percentage of circa 65,000 licences I'm sure you will appreciate that this is a very small amount of customer dissatisfaction.

However, that is not to say we ignore the feedback. Generally when it is explained that the renewal system is nigh-on fully automated in order to avoid passing any further costs on to customers (ie higher licence fees) which I strenuously try to avoid at any turn, they tend to decide that the odd letter crossing in the post and a terse but hardly threatening telephone message isn't that much of a price to pay.

Of course we could go the way that my future management in Ofcom might probably like, which is emulation of the TV licensing people. Quadruple (at least) the cost of the licence and employ people with that money to specifically find evaders, enlist all radio dealers in our tireless efforts to track down the law breakers and make it illegal for them to sell one without sending me your name and address. Of course, as cost to customers would no longer be an issue AND with the proceeds of the prosecutions I could fund a whole new, all singing, all dancing mailing and issue system.

I know which I prefer and as a customer myself I don't think I'd like the TVL option.

What say you? Do you really think that these are real problems? The data supplied is given on time to the ITU and HMCG for their respective SAR applications, these are the MOST important function of the Ship Radio Licence.

Real issues are addressed on receipt from customers, information is not only supplied when requested but also when people need to hear about something. Theoretically the Voluntary-fit marine radio user has had more information that he/she should know about the Service, supplied, than ever before.

Maybe the top management are right and I am wrong and these licenses should cost £100 per year!

I'm going to have a lie down now.

M

<hr width=100% size=1>Manager,
Aeronautical & Maritime Services Section,
Radiocommunications Agency

 

[Heckler]

ta for reply

quite obviously the man was teed off about it.

bought my first ships licence over 20 yrs ago MLFR5 if i remember right, for CAROLINE, was not dear then and was i think ran by BT, but then went on to privatisation? i think personally that its just another tax and as you quite rightly say, them upstairs would probably love to up it, especially with this lot in power, yachting, rich, pips squeak springs to mind.
keep up the good fight.
stu

<hr width=100% size=1>http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk

 

[Peppermint]

Re: Keep cost down. Yes

But do you think that excuses poor wording, poor timing, un-necessary multiplication of demands and a kind of tone that I understood HMG was trying to avoid.

We're all grown ups with a smattering of experience at being mailed. Is it your intention that your communications remain at the low end of the quality spectrum?

I can't see how tightening up on your output increases cost. It should do the opposite. If you make the first communication effective, and pleasant wouldn't hurt, then monitor your returns some waste of resources could be made.

Or are we wrapped up in our "Authority" rather than getting a bit more service orientated?

This is meant in a positive spirit. If you want to avoid becoming like those B*****d's at the TVL nows the time for change.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Mike_Martin]

Re: ta for reply

Sorry, never wanted to be a pedant but it was the Ministry of Posts and Telecomms, through the GPO, which, believe it or not, exists today as the RA.

When I joined this Agency in 1994 a VHF only Ship Radio Licence cost £15 and a separate licence was required for each piece of equipment, requiring a further fee. I was involved in the process to consolidate this process into the Ship Radio Licence that we have today in 1995, at that time the cost was £22 for a pleasure craft and £40 for a commercial vessel. The next step was to abolish the commercial tier, done and then 2 and a half years ago we dropped the price to £20 which reflected the savings gained by the new contractor. I don't know about anyone else but I'm not aware of any licence reductions from other Government Departments lately, in fact my Fishing Rod licence went up to £22 this year.

At the end of the day a "Tax" is a device by which HM Treasury earns itself revenue, radio licensing fees fund the facilitation, notification, interference and enforcement work of this Agency, worth remembering that the Sectors I work with bring in less money than any other (CB and HAM excepted) and are generally supported by the Industry because they are safety of life.

M

<hr width=100% size=1>Manager,
Aeronautical & Maritime Services Section,
Radiocommunications Agency

 

[Mike_Martin]

Re: ta for reply

I suppose it's also worth mentioning that I wanted to reply direct to MR Holt of London but am unable to find him on the database, which is slightly worrying.

M

<hr width=100% size=1>Manager,
Aeronautical & Maritime Services Section,
Radiocommunications Agency