Pubcos have embraced codes of practice

To make any sense of these hearings MPs have to read between the lines when hearing the pubco side. No one standing in the pro pubco paddock is going to come out and openly slate them for their dreadful business practices so: Where MPs hear Neil Robertson 'criticising' the “overly muscular” approach of some pubcos citing examples of “premature” use of debt collection and an “overly rigorous” monitoring of tie compliance, what they can take this to mean about the business practices of the clean shaven pubco men in suits is something like this:

"overly muscular" and “premature” use of debt collection means they send in bailiffs at the drop of a hat to intimidate and threaten tenants so they never step out of line. When my pubco has sent bailiffs in to me it's when THEY'VE effed up at their end and failed to claim a rent payment. The bailiffs come storming in, take an inventory, say they will seize everything on the premises and take it to auction later in the day unless I give them £six grand plus their £800 'costs' blah blah blah, I tell them they've been sent in error. They tell me I'm wrong. I tell them my rights. They tell me I'm wrong. I call S&N and they say it was a mistake. They tell the bailiffs it was a mistake. The bailiffs tell me they aren't leaving until they get paid. I tell them they aren't getting a penny. I tell them my rights. They tell me I'm wrong. They hang around for a couple of hours then they leave. With nothing. I ask S&N for an apology. They say 'we always send bailiffs in to protect the company's assets'.

“overly rigorous” monitoring of tie compliance, meaning they fine people without evidence that will stand up in court and take the fines by direct debit without telling them.

Unfortunately RT tomorrow's Hearing is not a court. No oaths are sworn (except in the audience when they hear the pubco porkies coming out) so no one is bound to tell the truth. So why should they? It's only the nation's heritage and tradition at stake.