E-mails and letters from TV Licensing about iPlayer

LightFlare

Isn’t it as simple as:

If you use the service - pay for it
If you don’t - you don’t 

Any proposed “action” would have to be backed up by evidence which would be absent if you are genuinely not using the service.

mrochester

LightFlare said:

Isn’t it as simple as:

If you use the service - pay for it
If you don’t - you don’t 

Any proposed “action” would have to be backed up by evidence which would be absent if you are genuinely not using the service.

It is as simple as that. The problem is people using the service who aren’t paying for it.

The way our broadcast system works means there’s no real way of knowing whether someone is using the service or not. This is why you are assumed to be using the service unless you formally declare that you are not. 

Cornucopia

LightFlare said:

Isn’t it as simple as:

If you use the service - pay for it
If you don’t - you don’t 

Essentially, yes.   But there are a set of contradictions which are about the differences between the law and the technical/practical realities.   In short, this is an offence that generally takes place inside people's homes, but TV Licensing/BBC has no statutory access other than a small number of Search Warrants that require prior reasonable suspicion.  

Any proposed “action” would have to be backed up by evidence which would be absent if you are genuinely not using the service.

Except that TV Licensing generally don't use physical evidence of evasion - they use confession evidence based on an interview process that is probably unfair, and possibly incompatible with the basic requirements of PACE.   Just how do you ensure someone has access to legal counsel when you are interviewing them on their doorstep?

Marvel1

mrochester said:

Cornucopia said:

mrochester said:

Cornucopia said:

mrochester said:

Is this not simply a case of the email address used to declare no license needed is the same email address used to login to and watch iPlayer?  

Basically, yes.   The issue is that whilst the email address may be the same, the street address/physical location may not be.

Also, BBC-TVL are buying data from a commercial third party which ties email addresses and street addresses, but it's unclear how reliable that is.

I wouldn’t expect the email address of a no license declaration to be usable in any location, regardless of whether that location of use was covered by a tv license or not. 

No - it's the iPlayer (account) that can be used anywhere, and that leads to the email address.

Exactly. A person using email address A to declare they don’t need a license can’t then use email address A to watch iPlayer, anywhere. They’d need to use email address B (B being an email address of someone who is covered by a tv license). 

Mu email address is used for for me to declare I don't need a T V licence for myself, the same email address is used to to licence my patents.

onomatopoeia99

Brie said:

I might also be tempted to tell them to remove your email address from their records as they no longer require it to contact you under data protection regulations etc etc etc.  That way at least you will get a letter when they pop up again rather than depending on spotting something in your junk folder.

There is a legitimate interest in retaining the data, so a lawful basis for processing exists.  Consent may also have been given (I haven't read the form and T&Cs to confim), which would be another lawful basis.  GDPR is satisfied.

When quoting "data protection" it is crucial to explain exactly how you think the regulations apply, just waving your hands in the air and saying "data protection" as it if is some kind of magic woowoo that you can incant is all a bit Freemen on the land, and similarly ineffective.

Cornucopia

onomatopoeia99 said:

Brie said:

I might also be tempted to tell them to remove your email address from their records as they no longer require it to contact you under data protection regulations etc etc etc.  That way at least you will get a letter when they pop up again rather than depending on spotting something in your junk folder.

There is a legitimate interest in retaining the data, so a lawful basis for processing exists.  Consent may also have been given (I haven't read the form and T&Cs to confim), which would be another lawful basis.  GDPR is satisfied.

When quoting "data protection" it is crucial to explain exactly how you think the regulations apply, just waving your hands in the air and saying "data protection" as it if is some kind of magic woowoo that you can incant is all a bit Freemen on the land, and similarly ineffective.

I can imagine BBC/TV Licensing/Capita making that argument, but whether it is legally correct or not is another question.

I'm not aware of any such GDPR-related instructions to TVL, so I don't know how they might respond.   

Given that email matching for the purpose of sending warning letters about possible iPlayer usage is (a) not a statutory function, and (b) inherently unreliable, it would be interesting to see how the ICO might handle it.  

TVL already delete people's names (or at least cease using them) 6 months after they were last valid, when they have no TV Licence, so presumably that stems from some kind of notional GDPR compliance?

tasscat

I've just received the same email, I don't think it's a scam but my BBC I player account was set up years ago when I lived at an address with a different post code, which was covered by a licence. I'm not sure how they can link that post code with any others, or how they can find out when someone with no need for a licence is using I Player (unless they are hiding in the wardrobe). I may be being a bit dim here but I am not very tech savvy. so any replies need to be very simple!! I won't be replying to their email. 

Cornucopia

I can give you a very short answer, which is that where they have suggested that they can tell that you have definitely used iPlayer without a Licence, they are lying.  

They have at best a loose suspicion based on linking the email address associated with your iPlayer account to one associated with a postal address that doesn't have a Licence.