Good Bye to my TV Licence

Halifax81

DUTR wrote: »

The TVL inspector can enter my premise anytime, I can easily sacrifice 4 beers or 30 cigs a month, If I chose not to purchase a TVL for legitmate reasons, then they could still visit to check.
Me personally I wouldn't need to seek attention on the internet, just get on with it, all I'm saying is I thought you had more to say about yourself in life and what you have achieved.

I don't need to talk about my life or what I'be achieved in life it has no relevance to this forum.

Its money saving which this forum is about hence the post to say I'm now saving £42 a month by ditching live TV.

Good for you if you would let the inspector in but its my choice not to

Cornucopia

Halifax81 wrote: »

Good for you if you would let the inspector in but its my choice not to

This is your absolute right. And the cases above serve to illustrate the reasons why TVL should be treated with caution. Their overall process and policies are flawed, and the behaviour of certain individual members of staff is highly questionable.

The internet is a valuable resource for sharing information about ill-behaved public servants, and long may it remain so. If just one person reads this thread and avoids being deceived by TVL or one of their rogue operatives it will have been worthwhile.

sja75

I am right in saying this...

If you do get doorstepped by TVL and they have a search warrant (Court issued). They still need your consent to enter?

Halifax81

sja75 wrote: »

I am right in saying this...

If you do get doorstepped by TVL and they have a search warrant (Court issued). They still need your consent to enter?

From what I've seen yes they still do need you to open the door, the police attend to ensure that the peace is kept but they aren't allowed to force an entry

Cornucopia

sja75 wrote: »

I am right in saying this...

If you do get doorstepped by TVL and they have a search warrant (Court issued). They still need your consent to enter?

Search Warrants for TVL are very rare. So the chances are that most people will never see one.

If you are served with one, it is an instruction from the Court to grant access to your home. It has limits and protections, but, no, they do not need your consent to enter, as such. The law permits them to use force, but it is BBC policy not to.

sja75

Who is correct here... Can they force entry or not?

Cornucopia

sja75 wrote: »

Who is correct here... Can they force entry or not?

They can force entry, but it is BBC policy not to.

See: Communications Act 2003, S.366(6).

A person authorised by the BBC [...] to exercise a power conferred by a warrant under this section may (if necessary) use such force as may be reasonable in the exercise of that power.

sja75

Interesting. I am sure I have watched a You Tube video somewhere on MSE.

In brief... Someone was doorstepped by TVL and Police. That person successfully 'saw off' the TVL by saying the Court Order did not allow forced entry as it was a civil matter (and therefore Police couldn't do anything but peace keep). Something about it being an Act of Parliament too

teajug

I expect BBC would allow it if they need more money to pay off more of their managers already 150 senior BBC managers received £25m in severance pay. Many of the payments exceeded what was stipulated in their contracts.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20793496

Cornucopia

sja75 wrote: »

Interesting. I am sure I have watched a You Tube video somewhere on MSE.

In brief... Someone was doorstepped by TVL and Police. That person successfully 'saw off' the TVL by saying the Court Order did not allow forced entry as it was a civil matter (and therefore Police couldn't do anything but peace keep). Something about it being an Act of Parliament too

The issue is this - the order does give authority to force entry. But if the warrant server chooses not to do that, does that make not opening the door obstruction? ie. if they haven't used all the powers available, how can they claim to have been obstructed?

As far as I know, the householder in the video has not been charged with obstruction of the warrant.