Really Worried - The TV Licence - Unnecessary Trial

Not_Another_Username

Thank you very much for your detailed and informative reply Cornucopia. Very much appreciated.

I think you are quite right to describe this as a scandal. The law is the law, but the methods used in forcing people to buy the licence are indeed scandalous.

Years ago I remember a friend showing me a threatening letter he had received from TV Licencing, demanding in no uncertain terms that the 'occupier' of the address buy a TV licence. He works abroad and rarely stays at home for long and so didn't have a single television in his house. He had no interest in TV anyway, but the threatening letters kept coming and the content was alarming. I will never forget his comments about the heavy-handed approach and how such letters would put the fear of God into some people, mentioning OAPs in particular. It was horrifying to think about.

That aside, we will be taking this matter further, at least with the CAB. My wife is also insistent on taking this to our MP. It looks like she needs a little extra weight behind her to take this to court. I don't think she would get legal aid since there is already another case ongoing in which legal aid has been granted and for a different matter.

As for other organisations not being quite so out of control as TV Licencing, well yes, that is undoubtedly true, but I fear things are getting out of hand in many areas in similar ways, not least with utility companies. I won't go there as this is off-topic, but were are currently battling EDF and First Utility. The Ombudsman's services have already sorted out N Power. I would find it hard to believe somebody could have such bad luck with so many organisations as us, but we know other's in exactly the same boat. I just hope all these things will improve over time., otherwise we are in big trouble.

The trial is just over a month away. I will post a few lines about the outcome in due course. In the meantime we have decided to buy the licence somewhat reluctantly this time for another year, but we will review the On Demand technology again thereafter. It's not an ideal technology at the moment but, if we do go down that route again, we will be very careful how we go about it.

Thank you.

anotheruser

This kinda makes me think:

Why doesn't she say that's not her signature?
I never use my real signature when signing for anything, except with passport, banks, driving licence...

If that won't work, why do the TV Licence people not sign all the forms with some random signature?

wiogs

Not_Another_Username wrote: »

Thank you very much for your detailed and informative reply Cornucopia. Very much appreciated.

I think you are quite right to describe this as a scandal. The law is the law, but the methods used in forcing people to buy the licence are indeed scandalous.

Years ago I remember a friend showing me a threatening letter he had received from TV Licencing, demanding in no uncertain terms that the 'occupier' of the address buy a TV licence. He works abroad and rarely stays at home for long and so didn't have a single television in his house. He had no interest in TV anyway, but the threatening letters kept coming and the content was alarming. I will never forget his comments about the heavy-handed approach and how such letters would put the fear of God into some people, mentioning OAPs in particular. It was horrifying to think about.

That aside, we will be taking this matter further, at least with the CAB. My wife is also insistent on taking this to our MP. It looks like she needs a little extra weight behind her to take this to court. I don't think she would get legal aid since there is already another case ongoing in which legal aid has been granted and for a different matter.

As for other organisations not being quite so out of control as TV Licencing, well yes, that is undoubtedly true, but I fear things are getting out of hand in many areas in similar ways, not least with utility companies. I won't go there as this is off-topic, but were are currently battling EDF and First Utility. The Ombudsman's services have already sorted out N Power. I would find it hard to believe somebody could have such bad luck with so many organisations as us, but we know other's in exactly the same boat. I just hope all these things will improve over time., otherwise we are in big trouble.

The trial is just over a month away. I will post a few lines about the outcome in due course. In the meantime we have decided to buy the licence somewhat reluctantly this time for another year, but we will review the On Demand technology again thereafter. It's not an ideal technology at the moment but, if we do go down that route again, we will be very careful how we go about it.

Thank you.

I genuinely doubt they will be interested or indeed much help.

I hope you get this sorted soon.

Cornucopia

Hear, hear.

Just to comment on a couple more points...

Yes, the letters are sickening. They are (probably) permitted to send them because of loopholes in the Law. I don't think those loopholes should exist in their present form, and I don't think that any reputable organisation should be using loopholes to send threats and misinformation to members of the Public, especially when many of the recipients haven't actually done anything wrong.

They also use the offer of stopping the letters as coercion to draw people into the next stage: the home "visit". Again, this is completely unacceptable.

If you already have a successful claim for Legal Aid in another matter, I would have thought that this would make it more, not less likely you would get it for this. It costs nothing to ask, and it could well give you the necessary clout to win the case.

Please do raise it with your MP. I want MPs across the country to be completely and utterly sick of TVL by the time the BBC Charter comes up for renewal. TBH, I think that's the only way there will be change.

There's more than one kind of On Demand technology, and if you ask about it in the Techie section of this site, people will give you lots of advice about what's best.

Marktheshark

anotheruser wrote: »

This kinda makes me think:

Why doesn't she say that's not her signature?
I never use my real signature when signing for anything, except with passport, banks, driving licence...

If that won't work, why do the TV Licence people not sign all the forms with some random signature?

On tv day at court people are asked to sign in at court.

Thats not my signature gove, ....funny it looks like the one you just signed at court security point to me.
At the end of the day, they are dealing with the less intelligent end of society, anyone with even a moderate amount of brains knows not to sign bits of paper thrust under your nose, or to answer questions to strangers at your front door.

Cornucopia

anotheruser wrote: »

This kinda makes me think:

Why doesn't she say that's not her signature?
I never use my real signature when signing for anything, except with passport, banks, driving licence...

If that won't work, why do the TV Licence people not sign all the forms with some random signature?

You need to be careful in doing anything that could be construed as perjury.

You could certainly tell TVL that it wasn't her signature - there are documented cases where TVL staff have signed forms pretending to be the defendant, and have been prosecuted for it.

However, if they don't believe you, or don't act upon it, you'd need a different gambit for Court.

Cornucopia

Marktheshark wrote: »

At the end of the day, they are dealing with the less intelligent end of society, anyone with even a moderate amount of brains knows not to sign bits of paper thrust under your nose, or to answer questions to strangers at your front door.

Clearly not, since they "catch" 400,000 people a year - most of whom could make it difficult or impossible for TVL to prosecute by not letting them in, not talking to them, and not signing anything.

People are conditioned to be helpful. Who'd have thought that the BBC of all of our institutions would want to so ruthlessly exploit that vulnerability?

Marktheshark

Cornucopia wrote: »

Clearly not, since they "catch" 400,000 people a year - most of whom could make it difficult or impossible for TVL to prosecute by not letting them in, not talking to them, and not signing anything.

People are conditioned to be helpful. Who'd have thought that the BBC of all of our institutions would want to so ruthlessly exploit that vulnerability?

The number of fools does not make them any less foolish.
Who answers questions on a door step and signs confessions unless they are to put it politely a bit dim.

Cornucopia

TVL use deception, NLP, bribery, and intimidation, just to get the £20 commission. It's possibly harder to resist than you might think (and bear in mind that the majority of their victims are women, who may find it more difficult to resist the intimidatory aspects).

I'm fortunate in that I've been legally licence free for several years, and never met one of their doorsteppers, If one ever turns up here, I will find it fascinating to see the lengths they will go to to get their way.

Not_Another_Username

I know what you are saying Mark, and thank you for the insinuation that we are fools, but the TV licence is generally thought of as being THE LAW and hardly your run of the mill door to door scam. Capita are clearly exploiting this.