TV Licence article Discussion

[Deleted User]

Zapito wrote: »

I don't see anything wrong with "deception"

I do.

A decent society protects people from their own ignorance and naivity, hence why we have the caution (perhaps you would like to abolish that?), to remiind people of their right to remain silent, and their right to legal advice and representation.

if some fool is stupid enough to swallow a line and let someone search their home without a warrant the onus is on them.

You forget that many people (eg. the elderly and vulnerable) are in awe/fear of "authority", even when it is only percieved and not real.

Naivity of the vulnerable (and lack of transparency, by people in a position of "authority"), has been implicated in some of the worst miscarriages of justice.

[Deleted User]

cw18 wrote: »

I believe that if your equipment is set up as you describe you'd have a job to prove you don't.

You don't have to prove you don't.

It's for them to prove you do.

Zapito

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

I certainly don't live in student accomodation, and monthly letters are pretty much tthe norm, for unlicensed addressess, to the point where they send in the region of 80 million letters per year.

I, personally, have received in excess of 60 such letters.

Well, what I personally would do is write back to them in one of their Freepost envelopes explaining my situation in detail, as to why I do not need a licence (note that I might well not fill in their form if there was one). Next time I would use their Freepost envelope to say "Please refer to my letter dated (whenever it was dated). If you persist with contacting to me repeatedly then I shall regard it as harassment and take appropriate action."

If it continued then I might simply return each letter in its Freepost envelope or, if identifiable from the outside, possibly return the unopened envelope marked "RETURN TO SENDER". I would also investigate the law regarding harassment in preparation for taking whatever action I could.

If no Freepost envelopes, then I would reply to the initial letter as stated above. If I received a further letter I would reply referring to that first reply and advising that I would not be responding to any future correspondence, and that if such correspondence continued unabated, or other action ensued, then I would regard it as harassment and take appropriate action.

Another possibility might be to start invoicing them for your postage, time (at an hourly rate of £50 or so) and trouble. I have heard that can prove quite fruitful.

But all that would be on the basis that I had no need of a licence. If I did, then it would be very foolish as the end result, if I got caught, would probably be to attract the worst penalty (quite apart from the feeling of self-loathing that I would have to endure as a crummy cheat).

Zapito

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

A decent society protects people from ....miscarriages of justice.

When it came to the crunch I'd probably concede your point, but right now I'm in "hard nutter" mode!

Zapito

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

You don't have to prove you don't.

It's for them to prove you do.

Beyond reasonable doubt.

[Deleted User]

They don't enclose freepost envelopes.

Also, it's not a good idea to supply your personal details to them.

Such details have been known find their way onto forged confession forms.

[Deleted User]

Zapito wrote: »

Beyond reasonable doubt.

Quite right.

Zapito

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Such details have been known find their way onto forged confession forms.

Your Zapito credibility rating just took a nose dive!

[Deleted User]

Zapito wrote: »

Your Zapito credibility rating just took a nose dive!

I can assure you it has happened.

Zapito

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

I can assure you it has happened.

Credibility rating downward plunge continues,

Some chapter & verse & evidence may slow or even halt the descent.