TV licence letter (uhoh)

Schwade

My responses in bold.

bella2121 wrote: »

of course i have seen the letters like i said i worked there, the letters to become more strongly worded if there is no response to previous letters,

That is false. The letters treat you like a criminal (with words like PACE, Caution, Enforcement, etc) right from the outset. I have seen countless people with such letters ON THE OUTSET.

there is know way of knowing the individual circumstances of every property within the UK,

TVL has NO right to know every single person circumstances.

if a person was to ring and say a property is unoccupied the letters would be stopped for a set period of time approx 3 months

No person is obliged under law to ring TVL to tell them their circumstances. My experience also suggests that the letters DO NOT stop.

at which point a letter would be sent to ask if the circumstances are the same, same with if people do not have TV set if you ring and tell them the letters will stop.

TVL wants people to ring them every 3 months?? Do you ring every 3 months to tell something you are NOT doing something in any other circumstances?

The letters do take into account if you have the new occupant of the property etc but people dont seem to read past the first sentance of the letter.

TVL SHOULD NOT be sending threatening letters in the first place.

At the end of the day the letters have to be sent because if someone was taken to court for not havin a licence they have to show that the evader was given countless opportunities to buy a licence and made aware they are breaking the law.

So from your logic, TVL send these letters so that EVERYONE goes to court. I.e. TVL treats EVERYONE like a criminal by sending those letters.

I think they are right to send the letters i dont personally agree the TV licence should have to be paid at all but why should I have to pay when other people are gettin away with not payin?

That's the problem with TVL. They think people not paying are all criminals even though there is no obligation to pay if you don't watch broadcast TV.

Optimist

bella2121 wrote: »

of course i have seen the letters like i said i worked there, the letters to become more strongly worded if there is no response to previous letters, there is know way of knowing the individual circumstances of every property within the UK, if a person was to ring and say a property is unoccupied the letters would be stopped for a set period of time approx 3 months at which point a letter would be sent to ask if the circumstances are the same, same with if people do not have TV set if you ring and tell them the letters will stop. The letters do take into account if you have the new occupant of the property etc but people dont seem to read past the first sentance of the letter.

At the end of the day the letters have to be sent because if someone was taken to court for not havin a licence they have to show that the evader was given countless opportunities to buy a licence and made aware they are breaking the law.

I think they are right to send the letters i dont personally agree the TV licence should have to be paid at all but why should I have to pay when other people are gettin away with not payin?

Mmmm People should ring every 3 months to a premium rate number sounds like a good business plan for Capita !

bella2121

no they dont HAVE to ring every 3 months but if they want the letters to stop they can do, the other option is to simply ignore the letters because as i stated the letters are addressed to the present occupier and if the property is not occupied then the letters dont really apply to anyone, the other option is to write on the envelope property unoccupied return to sender, that will cost you no money at all.

Maybe they should send no letters and let everyone choose if they want to purchase i licence cause i'm sure everyone in the country will rush out and by one without being told ha ha! yeah OK cause thats gonna happen! :rolleyes:

bella2121

in response to schwade, i am only offering a point of view from the other side, like i said why should all the honest people in the country pay a TV licence whilst some people get away with it.

I can asure you there have been many tests with nicer wording letters and believe me people do not respond to them and buy a licence.

why should i have to pay one when other people dont. I can understand people getting upset if the letters are personally addressed to them saying "you are watching a tv without a licence we will take you to court etc" but what the letters actually say is that the property doesnt currently hold a licence and if, if being the key word, you are using a tv without a licence then you are breaking the law.

i also think people who get so upset about a letter need to toughen up a bit cause i'm sure more destressing things happen to people than gettin a letter, grow up people!!!

superscaper

bella2121 wrote: »

in response to schwade, i am only offering a point of view from the other side, like i said why should all the honest people in the country pay a TV licence whilst some people get away with it.

I can asure you there have been many tests with nicer wording letters and believe me people do not respond to them and buy a licence.

why should i have to pay one when other people dont. I can understand people getting upset if the letters are personally addressed to them saying "you are watching a tv without a licence we will take you to court etc" but what the letters actually say is that the property doesnt currently hold a licence and if, if being the key word, you are using a tv without a licence then you are breaking the law.

i also think people who get so upset about a letter need to toughen up a bit cause i'm sure more destressing things happen to people than gettin a letter, grow up people!!!

What gets me is this catchall assumption that everyone is presumed to need a TV license. If you think that it's a logical procedure to send letters to everyone on an assumption of them needing a license and then to prove they don't need one (guilty until proven innocent in other words) then how does the DVLA cope? They seem to manage getting car tax paid from most law abiding citizens that need car tax without them having to send out letters to every single household that doesn't already have car tax to request they pay car tax unless they phone up to prove they don't need it. Even people who own cars and declare SORN only have to do it every 12 months, not every 3 and then you'd say there's even less you can do with a car without driving on the road than there is you can do with a TV without watching broadcasts.

bella2121

i have to say i do not know 1 person who does not own a TV, in this day and age it is the minority who do not have a TV, those who do not have have a TV can write on the letter they receive no TV in use at this address and return to sender, at which point the letters will be stopped and an aknowlegement letter sent out there will then be a visit which will take place where the person will sign to confirm they are not using a TV the letters will then be stopped for upto 3 years.

I know what the response to this is going to be, why not trust what the person is saying but like i said if this was the case every single person would say they didnt have a TV and if no checks where made then no one would buy a licence.

I think the bottom line is if you live in this country then this is the law, if you dont like it either move abroad or dont use your TV.

heatherw_01

I don't agree with the TV licence, I think it is a total waste of money, but if everyone is supposed to pay it I don't see why you shouldn't pay it too

bella2121

heatherw_01 i agree with you i dont think TV licences should have to be paid but thats exactly what i am trying to get across why should we pay if other people dont the only reason letters are sent is the enforce the law.

Schwade

My responses in bold

bella2121 wrote: »

i have to say i do not know 1 person who does not own a TV,

Owning a TV does not mean you need a licence. A licence is only required if you watch broadcast channels from your TV (i.e. you hook your TV to the aerial).

in this day and age it is the minority who do not have a TV, those who do not have have a TV can write on the letter they receive no TV in use at this address and return to sender, at which point the letters will be stopped and an aknowlegement letter sent out there will then be a visit which will take place where the person will sign to confirm they are not using a TV the letters will then be stopped for upto 3 years.

There is NO legal obligation for TVL to confirm what people has said. TVL has no legal right to enter anyone's property without a search warrant.

I know what the response to this is going to be, why not trust what the person is saying but like i said if this was the case every single person would say they didnt have a TV and if no checks where made then no one would buy a licence.

TVL has detection equipment. Use them (unless they are fakes and the advertisements were just to scare people again).

I think the bottom line is if you live in this country then this is the law, if you dont like it either move abroad or dont use your TV.

The law states:
1. you only need a license if you watch broadcast TV.
2. you can own a TV without a licence.
3. TVL has no right to come to your house.
4. you have no obligation to tell TVL anything.

That is the law. EVEN FOI states that. Maybe TVL should know the law.

stugib

helliecopter wrote:

I've noticed you don't deny that you're young and still at home - I reckon I've hit the nail on the head.

KILL_BILL wrote: »

your off to see your phyciatrist ? ok - but you should ask for your money back coz your never gonna get over your condition

Case proven m'lud!