Had a Visit from TV Licence Man

Cornucopia

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Why would women be "easy" targets? More sexism, I'm afraid.

Whatever the reasons, it is a fact (supported by data from the BBC) that more women than men are caught and prosecuted for TV licence evasion. This makes it quite unlike any other crime in terms of gender balance.

We can guess at the reasons, these are my thoughts...

In no particular order:-

1. There are determined evaders and casual evaders. I think that women are probably more likely to be casual evaders, and men more likely to be determined evaders.

2. Casual evaders are less likely to be aware of their position within the law.

3. Men (irrespective of their level of legal knowledge) are more likely to see off TVL, and TVL are less likely to want to return to a male household having been seen off.

4. Seeing a list of names and addresses on their portable computers, a TVL rep is more likely to go to females' addresses for a potentially easier time, and easier commission.

5. Women are more likely to be at home during the day, and more likely to have kids sitting watching TV.

6. Keeping an eye on the kids makes it more likely that TVL misinformation will go unchallenged. It also makes an angry confrontation/seeing-off less likely.

Nothing in the above is intended to condone or support Licence Fee evasion.

dannny_2

I was under the impression that the majority of cases taken to court by crapita was a result of the users incriminating themselves by signing a form handed over by crapitas staff.

I have not needed a tv licence, legally, for over 10 years. In that time I have had one visit from crapita, and told them to go away, and lots of letters addressed to "the occupier". I told crapita to remove my name from mailings. Makes it easier to bin the mail.

brewerdave

sniggings wrote: »

If that's what they want lets hope they get it, as mobiles would be also included, it would be easier to keep a record of all those that do not have a TV, sky, freeview, ipad, laptop, mobile LOL I hope they have plenty of filing space for all this new info :eek:

...wouldn't work that way -would have to be done via some sort of levy raised against internet connection thru the ISPs ..I suspect that should it ever happen (unlikely in my view) it would have to be applied in a blanket fashion ie everyone would pay the levy whether they watched live TV,recorded catch up TV or not!:)

Cornucopia

dannny wrote: »

I was under the impression that the majority of cases taken to court by crapita was a result of the users incriminating themselves by signing a form handed over by crapitas staff.

Yes, that's correct.

Buzby

dannny wrote: »

I told crapita to remove my name from mailings. Makes it easier to bin the mail.

As Mr Occupier? They only use the name based on a previously purchased licence for up to 6 months. After that all subsequent mailings are to the Occupier.

As to Crapita targeting women for licence evasion, I thought 'occupier' was pretty gender neutral, and would limit agents targeting females on purpose.

Cornucopia

Buzby wrote: »

As to Crapita targeting women for licence evasion, I thought 'occupier' was pretty gender neutral, and would limit agents targeting females on purpose.

I'm not sure that anyone is saying that women are expressly targeted.

However, the system overall does have an anti-female bias (unless, of course, we believe that more women than man are licence evaders in the first place - which seems implausible).

ljonski

Has anyone ever received a letter from The TVL addressed to the Occupier.................... and Returned it to Sender - stating "Not known at this address" ?

Cornucopia

I would say that all of these harassing letters should be returned to the BBC.

Heinz

arizonawolf wrote: »

Look, it's pretty simple people

Whenever you open the door, don't say a word, let them speak first, when they identify as TV license, say "Sorry, very busy" and close the door. If they knock again call the police.

You'll get very short shrift if you do. And rightly so.

sniggings

Heinz wrote: »

You'll get very short shrift if you do. And rightly so.

that maybe the case but it is good advice, with support from the law.

If the police choose not to take steps to stop unwanted people from harassing people when told to stop, that's a different matter.

If you close the door on them, it would take a daft goon to knock again, they want their bonus, very unlikely to get one from a household that closed the door on them, they will move on to the next one.

If you don't want the visits, it's easy, ring TV licencing tell them you are withdrawing their implied rights to call at your property, they will then mark you down for no visits.