Energy Price Cap announcement: Watch Martin Lewis explain what it means for your electricity and gas bills this winter
I wish to have a TV without a licence...
in TV MoneySaving
51 replies 7.6K views
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides
Energy Price Cap change
Martin Lewis on what it means for youMSE News
Best £1 you've ever spent?
Share your most impressive bargainsMSE Forum
New MSE Forum avatars available
Try 'em out nowMSE Forum
Was a bit of a joke about the son and friend . The link I added did nt make any difference who Netflix allowed to share the premium account ,They re not going to be coming round knocking hard on the door like Capita checking your DNA
The relationship between Netflix and a customer is contractual. If there were an issue with someone's account then in the first instance, the account would be closed, and if there was deemed to be a financial loss to Netflix, they would have the option to pursue this by a civil recovery claim in a County Court.
Capita, by comparison have no relationship with someone who is not a "customer" of the BBC i.e. someone who has no TV Licence. TVL has no particular power or authority for doorstepping (just as Netflix has no such power). A householder can simply instruct Capita to leave, or issue a banning instruction in advance of any visit - that is how little authority they have.
So, Capita are not going to be checking any "DNA", and if you don't want them to call at all, that is your prerogative.
This is the fundamental issue of law at the heart of the TVL debacle: whether a public authority (the BBC) is permitted in law to interfere with a person's privacy without specific legislation in place. I say that such a thing is a breach of Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, which uses almost exactly those words.
In the distant past, the BBC used to say that what TVL were doing was not a breach of HRA because of that "consent" option - the option to prevent TVL from "visiting". However, they seem to have moved away from that argument (presumably because it is flawed) and they now make no argument.
The BBC has recently introduced an Ombudman as the final escalation stage for TVL complaints. This is the first time there has ever been an independent arbitrator for such complaints. It's too soon to know how it'll work in practice, but I am keen to see these issues go through that process in due course.
Do you mean HM? I think he's actually just a wannabe Capita employee, he has to finish school first.
Capita are reported at having only around 360 officers who actually do the licence checks so to take or threaten to take 200,000 a year to the magistrates every year we can all see what a great job they do ,I think everyone would agree on that.
I would expect that genuine people who do not break their claim to not require a tV licence would feel incensed at the huge numbers obviously having no regard for payment of the £150 a year and would be happy to see them prosecuted like all good citizens would do.
Well done lads, keep up the good work
Also, you need to be careful using the BBC's term "assault", because as I've told you before, the BBC includes any physical contact within that term - so anything from a slightly patronising pat on the back, through taking a close look at an ID badge to lawful use of force to remove a trespasser and only then into what "we" might call assault.
I'm inclined to think that the BBC (and you, by extension) are presenting the data in that way to make it look worse than it actually is (and this conclusion is supported by the release of nonsense PR videos in a similar vein starring US comedian Rob Delaney (2 years ago). It's not like they collate the underlying severity of incidents (as you might expect), so I don't think they really take it as seriously as they should... if it is as bad as they say.
The underlying legal point is that when a TVL person approaches someone's front door, they do so under what is called "implied right of access". i.e. they are there with the presumed permission of the householder which can be withdrawn by the householder at any time (or in advance using a letter or a notice on the doorstep). Part of that implied right requires them to politely approach the door, make themselves known and state their business. If the door is then shut, or they are told to go away, that is entirely consistent with the law. If TVL play games on "making themselves known" or "stating their business", as they are sometimes known to do, then they, themselves have undermined their own legal basis to be there - with obvious consequences.
If an assault results in the context of that legally-dubious situation, then TVL management must surely be partly to blame.
I'm not sure everyone does agree. It all seems a little pointless and unfair to me - prosecuting largely quite poor women for the sake of (as you say) 40p per day. And of course, the prosecution process is eased along by their lack of legal knowledge/Legal Aid, making them rather passive recipients of justice, in my experience.
The other issue is that TVL staff are driven quite hard - 36 visits per day. At that level I can imagine that the pressure to take shortcuts,is probably quite severe, and their tolerance for people taking up their time with niceties like legal rights is probably quite limited.
I'm certainly opposed to wilful evasion, but in my experience, wilful evaders do not tend to be prosecuted. There are generally two types of people who are prosecuted, based on what I've seen: those who are unlicensed through poverty and lack of financial organisation, and those who are innocent. It's not justice, really, by any sensible measure.
Assault is not a BBC term its a standard term to be used and it includes verbal assault.
I once had a training day ( at Sheffield Wednesday Football ground actually ) being taught how deal with a situation of personal attack and how to defuse the potential of an attack .We were even given a special police coded name to use if we were imprisoned against our will.
Either way no officer employed by TVL should have to face this in their day to day legitimate employment. I ve been shouted, threatened and sworn at plenty of times just reading the gas and electric meters by the public. Not pleasant.But this is how some sections of the public degenerate to nowadays. Heres an example of a charming Scottish person having an amicable chat with one of my colleagues.This "Scotch " chappie is a member of TVLR by the way because he has put this Youtube clip on the TVLR website to get applauded by the membership .I think I can say his manner was "threatening " at the least and bordering on an assault
I don`t think anyone on this forum or many on TVLR website forum would be in this category TBH. They all mostly appear to be pretty civilised. You will not get the scrotes and barstewards joining any forums at all IMO
So do you propose that anyone who claims to be short of money or a female should nt have to pay for the TV licence ?
Then they can spend it on a £40 a month latest mobile phone contract instead because all these young housewives appear to be glued to them
Verbal assault? - again, when Capita staff are in my home, the scope of what it is legal for me to say to them is extremely broad. So it seems like another way in which the stats may not mean what they purport to be.
Right - so training for Meter Readers, who have a legal authority to enter people's homes.
If you're saying that because you think they have the same legal authority as a Meter Reader, then you're wrong, I'm afraid. When a TVL staff member enters onto private property they are there as a guest, and they need to behave accordingly.
Presumably you report such incidents to the Police?
If someone needs help, then that's good enough.
I propose that we don't have a TV Licence. If we have to have a TV Tax, it should be related to ability to pay.
I sometimes wonder, reading his posts, whether he gets more abuse than the average meter reader? There's a lot of pre-judgement going on, and one thing I learnt going on a few ROE during my electricity board training is that you shouldn't make assumptions about people.
ROE: Rights of Entry
Its very rare that I ever report incidents to the Police.No point because they will not do anything. I expect Capita officers think the same way
I ve been attacked pretty badly once and spent 2 hours in Rotherham Police Station making a statement. I requested a prosecution to go ahead against this drug dealer for assault ( thats what the neighbours said he was ) and his attack dog he set upon me but strangely enough I never heard a thing despite me having a badly bitten ankle which needed hospital treatment and stitches. Little chance of people like that ever paying for a TV licence. Rotherham Police do not have a good reputation !
Some of the rough estates around Yorkshire have an attack type dog every 4 th house in residence. You have never lived Cornucopia ! posh !!!!!!!!!!!! can t compete with our towns for degradation.
That was the worst case but have had plenty of threats over the years. These sorts of things tend to be when I m sent on what we call "must inspects " where we are obliged to do a 2 year meter inspection and politely have to gently insist or make an appointment for a suitable time to come in.
Times have changed..It was never like this when I started in 1997
What do you think the answer is, then?