TV licensing threats

Dreamnine

I paid for a TV and licence for 1 year.

Biggest waste of money ever - months and months would go by without my turning the TV on.

Television is for idiots, OP.

Cornucopia

Some info has been removed from this thread. Not sure why. Can we not name specific responsible directors in organisations? If the mods are taking an interest in the thread, perhaps someone from TVL can be asked to contribute?

Anyway, here's the official TVL page on making complaints.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/making-a-complaint-AB7

Obviously, for a wide-ranging, policy level complaint, you could go straight in at Director level, or direct to Head of Revenue Management at the BBC.

Buzby

They do not have to prove you were watching TV. It exactly the same way a successful conviction is achieved when a supposed burglar has a crowbar in his jacket, a crime of 'going equipped' is created - giving the judge latitude to find guilty even when there is no evidence of an actual break in.

A person who has the capability to receive terrestrial broadcasts with a TV capable of receiving same, is in the same boat. If the judge believes the defendant probably would view broadcasted on the TV, it's a guilty verdict. The tools and motivation were in place. Without the tools (and capability) then no conviction is possible.

Cornucopia

We were doing so well, then, in keeping it accurate.

TVL themselves say this: You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. No mention of needing a licence to own or install a TV.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one

Or on in other words, there is an offence of "Going Equipped" for burglary (an offence under the Theft Act). There is no offence of "Going Equipped" to watch Newsnight.

It's not rocket science, Buzby - have we had this discussion before?

adindas

Buzby wrote: »

They do not have to prove you were watching TV. It exactly the same way a successful conviction is achieved when a supposed burglar has a crowbar in his jacket, a crime of 'going equipped' is created - giving the judge latitude to find guilty even when there is no evidence of an actual break in.

A person who has the capability to receive terrestrial broadcasts with a TV capable of receiving same, is in the same boat. If the judge believes the defendant probably would view broadcasted on the TV, it's a guilty verdict. The tools and motivation were in place. Without the tools (and capability) then no conviction is possible.

Sorry my bad, yes of course they do not need to prove it but they will need to provide credible evidence.

Cornucopia

They do need to prove the offence (of watching/recording broadcast TV). This is usually done by means of a confession.

Kayak10

Cornucopia wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that the BBC doesn't see itself as above the Law.

I think what's happened is a perfect storm of a bad attitude, opportunistic legal advice, lack of proper Governance (ultimately the responsibility of the Government), poor attention to detail in creation of the legal framework, handover of powers from a Government agency (the Post Office) to a non-Government one without any questions being asked about whether it would still work, and fear/boredom amongst certain elements in the Mainstream Media and politics in not taking the issue on.

Afraid they DO consider themselves above the law from what some of the folk above have said OR they just hope no one notices and doesn't take them to task
I don't care how big the company We pay their wages so we have the right to take them to task
The worse part having used https://www.ceoemail.co.uk for some time it has proved what I thought The cowboys don't know what the Indians are doing lol

Kayak10

adindas wrote: »

If you get a letter from TV licensing Agency, just bin it. Do not even need to open it. By doing this you will never be threatened or feel embraced as you do not read it. Sorted .....

The onus is on them to provide credible evidence that you are suspected of watching TV illegally .e.g watching TV while they are aired. Owning TV is not enough to take someone to the court. Many people use TV to watch video, to be used as PC monitor or to play video game.

Never allow them to enter your property, never answer the door if they are coming. Do not get involved in correspondence with them, just a waste of time. If you do not cooperate they are toothless.

Adindas
One thing I take issue with your post if you read the whole thread I am certainly NOT toothless
I don't know if your aware but the TVL have the right of entry as I believe it is the only company that can do this as somewhere along the line the government made it a legal matter that allow the police to be called
Unless the law has changed it is an offence to have a piece of equipment in your property that could be used to watch live or recorded programmes
One of the reasons I'm kicking up a fuss is because a few years ago I was actually taken to court over not having a TV licence at that time I was in very severe financial hardship
So your advise just chuck in bin is rather short sited

Kayak10

Cornucopia wrote: »

They do need to prove the offence (of watching/recording broadcast TV). This is usually done by means of a confession.

The foot soldiers actually have a hand held machine to " prove your watching tv "

Kayak10

Cornucopia wrote: »

Some info has been removed from this thread. Not sure why. Can we not name specific responsible directors in organisations? If the mods are taking an interest in the thread, perhaps someone from TVL can be asked to contribute?

Anyway, here's the official TVL page on making complaints.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/making-a-complaint-AB7

Obviously, for a wide-ranging, policy level complaint, you could go straight in at Director level, or direct to Head of Revenue Management at the BBC.

I am gob smacked I didn't notice some of it has been removed Do you know exactly what please ? Head of revenue management is the lady I put on here AND in communication with over this subject Awaiting reply