TV License Inspectors

LegalOccupier

This one is on the BBC news site, just another odd case ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-14768033

LegalOccupier

This one was on the front page of the Evening News, another odd case

He was threatening people with a £1000 fine in court and he kept the money , it was HE who ended up in court.

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

http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/crime/s/1239576_crooked_tv__detector_man_pocketed_licence_cash_

LegalOccupier

continue to spew complete rubbish and confuse issues.

If you take the time to look at the links you will see one is even from the BBC news web site do you think this is complete rubbish

:rotfl:

The_Safordian

giraffe69 wrote: »

Yes, I think you are on a different planet,

Another BBC "person" insulting someone because they object to subsidising EastEnders for you, tut tut.

I wish we could have an equal playing field and someone would knock on your front door demanding you give them money to subsidise those who prefer cable or satellite......................the Socialist I'm aright Jack view would change over night

The_Safordian

cajef wrote: »

Get your facts right before posting.

How the 2010/11 UK licence fee compared with rates across Europe

The countries you've mentioned don't have a large language base so they use a TV Licence to get around it. You'll find for instance Australia & America don't have one and I for one prefer American entertainment.

The TV Licence here for instance is subsidising Scottish and Welsh speaking channels, the welsh assembly don't seem to want to fund S4C, a channel that has been known to get zero viewers

giraffe69

He was threatening people with a £1000 fine in court and he kept the money , it was HE who ended up in court.

And so he should. He was committing a criminal act. That, however, doesn't affect the fact that you are spouting complete tosh. If employees behave badly they are subject to disciplinary action. Go on a crusade to find a few more of these. If there are enough of them sack Capita for not doing their job properly but it still does not address the issue about how the licence fee is collected or the revenue otherwise collected or the BBC otherwise run. All you wish to do is rant about something that maybe reprehensible but does not affect the majority rather than focusing the part of your brain, not otherwise occupied by mastering the idea of quoting, on resolving the issue.

Another BBC "person" insulting someone because they object to subsidising EastEnders for you, tut tut.

I would, personally, not find it a loss if Eastenders were to end tomorrow but there are many who disagree. I also don't think they should rebate me £2.70 because I never watch it. I would happily go for another model of subscription and don't always approve of what I also perceive as "bias" in their reporting but
a. I think the BBC do some good in a number of areas
b. some of their output is of very high quality indeed
c. If a change is to be made it won't happen because someone posts videos of Capita staff exceeding their authority possibly in a criminal way(if they are genuine) or because others accuse everyone who disagrees with them of being in the pocket of the BBC

Do try and be a bit more rational.

LegalOccupier

c. If a change is to be made it won't happen because someone posts videos of Capita staff exceeding their authority possibly in a criminal way(if they are genuine) or because others accuse everyone who disagrees with them of being in the pocket of the BBC

I think you will find that they are genuine, let us take the old disabled man getting smacked that ended up in a court case. If he had not filmed it you being such a big BBC fan would never have believed that a person collecting money for the BBC would do such a thing.

The guidelines/ rules that these thugs follow are written by the BBC.
If you had read my earlier post you would see that i posted the amendment that the BBC issued early on this year telling their sales
people to leave the property if they know they are being filmed.

This was your BBC that issued this change and some follow the rules.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWjAFykk1MQ&feature=player_embedded#!

LegalOccupier

but does not affect the majority rather than focusing the part of your brain, not otherwise occupied by mastering the idea of quoting, on resolving the issue.

Typical BBC luvvies like to insult anyone that dares criticise their beloved BBC. Notice how the word majority is now being used.

They think it is ok if the majority do not complain, Without the threats of a £1000 fine the minority would be the majority. They target the old and single mums because they scare the easiest and they can get their commission.

What a great way to run a company target the weakest in our society.

LegalOccupier

giraffe69

c. It is NOT the BBC who goes collecting however many times you say it. They have no say in the mechanism of collection whether good or bad.

A clever person like yourself can find the rules the crapita sales people should follow on the web, The BBC have given them out under the FOI act

.
So if the BBC make the rules they do have a say, Who is telling porkies now.

[Deleted User]

cajef wrote: »

All licences run for a calendar year except the UK which runs from 1 April to 31 March.

That's wrong for a start.