'We notice you've been using iPlayer?' email after watching iPlayer at parents house

km1500

they have data brokers who troll the internet looking for email addresses and corresponding Street addresses for example if you order something online 

the BBC buy this data and try and link email addresses used to log on to iPlayer with Street addresses that have declared no licence required 

I assume quite a lot of the time they are right but obviously sometimes they are not! 

in any case it makes no difference because we all ignore letters like that don't we?

kinger101

brewerdave said:

FlorayG said:

This is interesting, because i complete the 'no licence required' thing every two years and only this week had a letter addressed to 'The Legal Occupier' saying 'We understand there have been changes at this address. Please complete form etc..."
There haven't been ANY changes at this address for two years and they know my name. Scare tactics for sure. I won't bother responding in future

Had something similar when my mother died. Contacted TVL Bereavement dept. to declare no licence now needed and wouldn't be for at least a month as we were clearing out the apartment and TV had been removed. All fine.
HOWEVER, about 4 days after ,a letter dropped on the mat as mentioned above. Obviously keen to get the new occupier to purchase, even tho no-one had moved in !

My late father's monthly payment stopped when his account was rightly frozen.  I got a about his TV license so wrote back explaining he lived alone and had passed away.

I got one back asking for a death certificate. I could have written a letter saying they didn't need one, as my father would find it very difficult to watch the TV I had disposed of being both dead a cremated, but found it more satisfying to return their letter with a two word reply instead.

I like the BBC but they need to come up with a new model.  And stop using Capita as they are........

penners324

ShiroLon said:

I'd like to bump this thread, if I may.

Like a good boy, I've routinely sent my opt-out in every other year when it's due.

Today, I received a letter in the post addressed to me, personally, claiming that my opt-out is void because someone in my household used BBC's iPlayer.

I just want to let it be known that this marvellous extortion tactic is precisely that: an extortion tactic.

Nobody in my household watches iPlayer. Nobody in my house is even registered with any BBC service whatsoever. Nobody in my house watches TV, nor is our TV in any way, shape, or form connected to any live TV. We use it solely for gaming and shows/movies bought through Google/Amazon.

So know, without a shadow of a doubt, that they send these threats out to people as little more than phishing attempts to con people with guilty consciences or even just a slight twinge of fear of incrimination because they lack absolute certainty into paying.

We have absolute certainty. We have no guilty consciences.

This is the legal definition of extortion. It just lends further credence to the fact that they use mafia-esque gangster tactics to try and coerce money from people.

I was ambivalent about the whole TV licence thing, but I am now 100% opposed to this nonsense. Well done, them.

Aware this is months old but is there not a case of harassment that the police should be involved?
I'd also be thinking of reporting them to ICO for such communication 

Cornucopia

penners324 said:

ShiroLon said:

I'd like to bump this thread, if I may.

Like a good boy, I've routinely sent my opt-out in every other year when it's due.

Today, I received a letter in the post addressed to me, personally, claiming that my opt-out is void because someone in my household used BBC's iPlayer.

I just want to let it be known that this marvellous extortion tactic is precisely that: an extortion tactic.

Nobody in my household watches iPlayer. Nobody in my house is even registered with any BBC service whatsoever. Nobody in my house watches TV, nor is our TV in any way, shape, or form connected to any live TV. We use it solely for gaming and shows/movies bought through Google/Amazon.

So know, without a shadow of a doubt, that they send these threats out to people as little more than phishing attempts to con people with guilty consciences or even just a slight twinge of fear of incrimination because they lack absolute certainty into paying.

We have absolute certainty. We have no guilty consciences.

This is the legal definition of extortion. It just lends further credence to the fact that they use mafia-esque gangster tactics to try and coerce money from people.

I was ambivalent about the whole TV licence thing, but I am now 100% opposed to this nonsense. Well done, them.

Aware this is months old but is there not a case of harassment that the police should be involved?
I'd also be thinking of reporting them to ICO for such communication 

These letters have been reported to the Police several times (AFAIK) with no interest from them.   The issue is that there are some quite generous exemptions in the relevant legislation that provide for official-ish action in pursuit of a valid claim.  There's also the question that the TVL letters aren't addressed to a specific person.

Personally, I think the ICO might prove more productive, but AFAIK no one has reported TVL to them.   I think the first steps in that would be (a) to submit a Subject Access Request (especially after receiving any of the stronger letters), and (b) to instruct TVL to stop processing your data/data about your address.