Heavy handed TV Licensing!

frivolous_fay

My colleague has just receieved an 'official warning' about her unlicensed (rented) property.

She doesn't have a TV. She returned the form to say this, and they even have it on file, but for some reason they are still pursuing her. She rang the 0870 number on the threatening letter, and invited them to come and inspect the property by arrangement, but they refused, saying 'they want to catch people out, not give them a chance to prepare'.

They have an attempted visit on file. Apparently they were 'refused access'. Well, duh, she walks her dog in the evenings.

I'm going to draft a letter for her, to say:

- There is no TV
- She is at work all day and they can't expect her to answer the door when she's not home
- a reminder that they have her form on file stating that she doesn't have a TV

As they are threatening £1,000 fines and court appearances, does anyone have any legal info on what they can and can't do? Bottom line is... NO BLERDY TV in the house... but she can do without the aggravation and worry!

Any help appreciated

ianfao

If there is no TV then there is no problem. I may be wrong here , but they can't take her to court unless they can prove she has a TV in the house.

From my own experience we have a TV license is in my partners name. I stupidly gave my name and real address when I bought a TV from Argos 2 years ago. After that I was bombarded with letters as your colleague has had. I simply ripped them up and sent them back in their envelope(without a stamp of course) saying they should check their records for the address. After doing this about 5 times I stopped receiving their letters.

I would let them do the worrying and chasing rather than you and your colleague doing it for them.

whambamboo

frivolous_fay wrote:

My colleague has just receieved an 'official warning' about her unlicensed (rented) property.

She doesn't have a TV. She returned the form to say this, and they even have it on file, but for some reason they are still pursuing her. She rang the 0870 number on the threatening letter, and invited them to come and inspect the property by arrangement, but they refused, saying 'they want to catch people out, not give them a chance to prepare'.

They have an attempted visit on file. Apparently they were 'refused access'. Well, duh, she walks her dog in the evenings.

I'm going to draft a letter for her, to say:

- There is no TV
- She is at work all day and they can't expect her to answer the door when she's not home
- a reminder that they have her form on file stating that she doesn't have a TV

As they are threatening £1,000 fines and court appearances, does anyone have any legal info on what they can and can't do? Bottom line is... NO BLERDY TV in the house... but she can do without the aggravation and worry!

Any help appreciated

you're wasting your time. Do not respond to their letters. Throw them in the bin without reading them. Do not call them.

If you contact them saying you don't have a TV, they will put you first on their list for a visit. My parents did this, and that's what happened.

Don't worry about all their garbage about 'refused access'. You are right to refuse access. If they ever come to your door, just say 'go away, I do not speak to unsolicited callers', and close the door.

They have no right of entry whatsoever, and the visitors aren't police, they are just lowly paid staff on a commission. Their job is not to take you to court - the £1000 fine and court appearance is nonsense - it is to sell a licence.

THey cannot and will not prosecute without evidence. The way this works is that they knock on your door and get you to admit to having a TV but no licence. They then give you a letter saying you need to buy a licence. If you buy the licence straight away (assuming you have a TV), they *will not prosecute*. The people they prosecute are the idiots who get caught, get a second reminder, and have not bought a licence weeks later.

In any case as you don't have a TV, there's nothing they can do. It's wasted effort to correspond with them as they never stop hassling. Any letter from TV licensing should be ignored, as until they catch you watching TV they will just send the threatening letters with vague pseudo-legalistic warnings about the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, but will not do anything.

Just to repeat - DO NOT SEND THEM ANY LETTERS, they are incapable of not sending the letters without a disproportionate amount of effort on your part. It is much easier to throw the letters away (which should arrive about every 3 months), and to tell them to !!!! off if they come knocking.

Just remember:

* no right of entry to your house
* no need to talk to them
* no chance of prosecution unless they have proof you have a TV (i.e. an admission that you have a TV) - which they won't get if you don't talk to them

Just ignore them, as they have no more rights than you or I do.

irishjohn

Hi Fay

I suggest a letter further confirming their information on file and politely pointing out that "refused access" is quite different to "unable to obtain access" asking them to confirm who exactly "refused" .

She should state that she will happily show them round when they call at an appropriate time but that she will not open the door after dark as a single person to unsolicited or unplanned callers.

Further to that, if she has no television and a copy of the letter, with proof of posting, she can relax and ignore any letters they send her. If she is in the right then she need not concern herself with these letters. They are probably being sent as there has been a television registered at t hat address previously.

whambamboo

ianfao wrote:

If there is no TV then there is no problem. I may be wrong here , but they can't take her to court unless they can prove she has a TV in the house.

From my own experience we have a TV license is in my partners name. I stupidly gave my name and real address when I bought a TV from Argos 2 years ago.

This is a legal requirement for all retailers to get your name & address. I bought a TV from Dixons online, but cancelled the order before receiving the TV - I was still pestered by them and received an officious letter saying they had been informed by Dixons Store Group Ltd that I had bought a TV. I just chucked the letter in the bin.

whambamboo

irishjohn wrote:

Hi Fay

I suggest a letter further confirming their information on file and politely pointing out that "refused access" is quite different to "unable to obtain access" asking them to confirm who exactly "refused" .

This is just their usual mock-legal tactics to make you think they have more rights than they do, and to imply that refusing access is somehow notable.

The ONLY way these people operate is to get you to admit to having a TV, and then to sell you one. The threatening letters, 'we are planning a visit' stuff is just a smokescreen.

They are aggressive and threatening, but the thing to do is ignore them entirely.

frivolous_fay

Thanks for the suggestions so far...

So... hypothetically... if the detector van was in your road and you had an unlicensed TV... are they powerless unless you let them in?

Surely they have some kind of legal process for real 'offenders'?

whambamboo

frivolous_fay wrote:

Thanks for the suggestions so far...

So... hypothetically... if the detector van was in your road and you had an unlicensed TV... are they powerless unless you let them in?

Surely they have some kind of legal process for real 'offenders'?

The detector van is just propaganda. If they do exist, they are not actually used on the street. Certainly I have never seen one. In reality, a lowly paid local agent has a list of homes without a licence, knocks on the door, and has a carefully written script (which basically asserts that you *do* have a TV) to get you to admit to having a TV. This, combined with general ignorance about their non-existent powers, is very effective in getting people to pay up.

The legal process is when they spot you watching the TV through the window or you admit to having one, and tell you to buy a licence, if you don't, they prosecute you. They can get a warrant to go with a police officer to enter your home, but they will only be given a warrant if they can present some evidence to the magistrates court that you have a TV. Realistically this is very expensive compared to the agent on £15k/year knocking on doors, and they will only follow this process extremely rarely.

The TV ads about getting a £1000 fine if you forget to buy a licence are unreal - in reality, if you don't buy a licence, if they catch you at a later date, you can just buy one then.

The detector vans are nonsense: enforcement comes from houses without licences, and from retailers passing on your address when you buy a TV.

In a word, to answer your question, yes, they are powerless, and will just go and hassle someone else if you tell them to p1ss off. Enforcement works on percentages - if they have 98% enforcement, then they are happy - 100% is impossible, and they will just go to the next address on their list, where, in all likelihood, their script will work, or they will spy you through the window watching TV.

Agutka

Listen to Whambamboo, there was a thread in these forums somewhere, where this was all confirmed.
There is nothing they can do but threaten you. There was one guy who received letters like this (three different levels of threat, incrementing with each letter, then after five letters they would start at the beginning and send the first of the bunch again!) for months and there was nothing they ever did about it.
Just think of them as annoying salesmen. Let them in with a policeman and warrant only. Which is totally unlikely.
I'm sorry your colleague has been targeted.

taxi97w

whambamboo wrote:

This is a legal requirement for all retailers to get your name & address. I bought a TV from Dixons online, but cancelled the order before receiving the TV - I was still pestered by them and received an officious letter saying they had been informed by Dixons Store Group Ltd that I had bought a TV. I just chucked the letter in the bin.

Is it legal for stores like this to send your information on without your consent? Is there a data protection issue here?

Tyler_Du

whambamboo wrote:

This is a legal requirement for all retailers to get your name & address.

I brought a new TV from Woolworths last week, I wasn't asked for my name & address.