TV License Inspectors

LegalOccupier

There must be a lot of people filming them now or do the BBC change their guidelines after a visit to one persons house.

// Photographing / Videoing of an EO during a Visit
7.2 There is no law prohibiting an individual from taking either photographs or video
footage of an EO conducting a visit on private property.
Accordingly, the EO should not, under any circumstances, confront or try to
prevent an occupant who wishes to do so.
If an EO finds themselves in a situation where they are being photographed or
videoed they must remain calm and continue to conduct themselves in a
professional manner and ensure that they walk away from the visit as soon as
they become aware that they are being filmed or photographed.
All instances of filming/photography must be notified to a manager as soon as
possible, and a full report provided. //


Wonder why they have to give a full report is it to check on what threats they are giving out to innocent people at their homes.

The_Safordian

And to prove that these "people" are nothing more than sales people with harsh targets to hit



This is why they have been known to lie on various occasions. They have to hit the targets and to make the commission

LegalOccupier

You should not have posted that these ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS want people to think they have great powers and we should all bow to them when they call at our properties.


:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

kaya

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Judges don't issue Search Warrants. JPs, sheriffs and lay magistrates issue them.

Oh, and the JP, sheriff or lay magistrate doesn't need to be convinced that a crime has been committed.

He/she merely needs to be satisfied, by information on oath, that there are reasonable grounds for believing that an offence is being committed.



And that is just plain wrong.

Hi Bob, see here for who has the royal charter to charge a fee http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6264461.stm

the charter was granted in 1927 to the BBC , it was only granted to the bbc, thats why no other channels can charge a fee and have to survive through advertising, there was a spokeswoman from the BBC on telly a few months back regarding fees due for people watching tv on delayed services, and i quote " so you still need a licence to watch the BBC then?" "Yes , and if you have one it will cover you to watch all the other channels" note how she didnt say you needed one to watch any other channels , the T&C's on the iplayer website used to clearly state this but as people got wise they removed the information, i can't argue about the warrant issues as it appears you know more than me about that subject but i can promise you the charter was only granted to the BBC so the fee only applies to BBC programming and NOT any other channels despite what they would have you believe, it really is just another stealth tax enforced by your own fears of getting prosecuted, like the non working detector vans , maybe you can explain to me your theory as to why nobody has ever been prosecuted using detector van evidence (this info is on their own website) ? surely if the technology existed they would use it? and also why they have been granted exemption from the FOI act as to how the alleged van works ? its supposed to be 40 year old technology but still they get exemption from the FOI act

LegalOccupier

Good job this old disabled man had a video camera some people may have said he was living on another planet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKRyNYChYjI



:T

LegalOccupier

Another person who some may think comes from another planet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrh5lPPipJs&feature=player_embedded



:T

The_Safordian

And the left wing bias continues. If they had to generate their own funding this would soon stop because they'd end up in debt like the Guardian.

How Europhile BBC turned triumph over Britain's veto into disaster

The BBC was accused of reporting Britain’s veto of the eurozone rescue plan as a national catastrophe rather than a tough decision David Cameron was forced to make.

Conservative MPs said the broadcaster’s ‘biased’ coverage began on Radio 4’s flagship Today programme and continued throughout the day on radio and television.

Presenters used solemn tones to inform listeners about Britain becoming isolated following David Cameron’s refusal to sign a new treaty.

http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/news/how-europhile-bbc-turned-triumph-over-britain's-veto-into-disaster/msg28302/#msg28302

LegalOccupier

// surely if the technology existed they would use it? //

If they had the technology you would hear about how good it is and how many cheats they have caught and prosecuted. The BBC luvvies would have posted reports on here. More people have seen the Loch Ness monster than a working TV detector van.

If they had this great equipment they would not need to send out millions of nasty letters and want to search innocent peoples houses.

The_Safordian

kaya wrote: »

surely if the technology existed they would use it? and also why they have been granted exemption from the FOI act as to how the alleged van works ? its supposed to be 40 year old technology but still they get exemption from the FOI act

Lets pretend it did exist, the BBC admitted in a FOI that its never been used in court but the question should be could it be used in court as Lie Detector evidence isn't

[Deleted User]

LegalOccupier wrote: »

Another person who some may think comes from another planet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrh5lPPipJs&feature=player_embedded

He says you aren't allowed to film, yet BBC/TVL say you are.

Who to believe?