TV Licence article Discussion

Cornucopia

One of the hardest things when discussing/explaining TV Licensing matters is to correctly position the true risks of dealing with them.

In the case of these emails, they are (like a lot of TVL activities) something of a fishing expedition. They are also based on the flimsiest of evidence - a matching email address between a non-statutory No-Licence-Needed entry and a BBC iPlayer account. That can never be evidence of an offence, and it probably isn't even worth their while prioritising a "visit".

Search Warrants would be a non-starter: the evidence is arguably insufficient, and there are only around 100 such warrants per year for the whole of England & Wales. Their priority for those few Warrants is likely to be people that are openly defiant regarding Licence evasion (face to face with a TVL staff member).

The risks from dealing with TVL increase as you get further in to their process. Dealing with the BBC and TVL HQ on administrative matters is largely risk-free. Dealing with them at your door or in your home is more risky, because they are incentivised to assert that a Licence is needed, and this process has led to false prosecutions in the past. There are also historic cases of fraud and perjury involving their employees. Their interview process is legally dubious in terms of PACE compliance, and also there are Human Rights issues.

However, I think the advice to ignore the email and delete the BBC account is optimal. There is no need to go overboard with other measures and it may even make matters worse. I'd be mindful that the risk of a TVL "visit" may increase following the email, and be prepared to ignore them or say "I decline to be interviewed in accordance with my rights under PACE". I would strongly recommend not speaking to them at the door/in your home, even if they appear to want just casual conversation.

cw18

mbmonty wrote: »

If you were on a laptop at your girlfriends house running on battery you would not need a licence

Wrong. It's the poster who doesn't have a licence, so viewing at partners house is done on partners licence and using a laptop on battery makes absolutely no difference to the scenario.

mbmonty

[Deleted User] wrote:

It's an email it's nothing, nothing like going to an extreme. They would have to come out and actually catch someone watching it at an unlicensed property.

As I said deleted email, job done, no come back from it

It is not going to an extreme, it is about shutting any potential risks.

You are wrong, the post was not about visiting property, it was about use of iPlayer after they had told TVL that they do not need a licence.

Even though it is not enough evidence in itself (at this time) it puts him on a list. We have seen how TVL target people who forbid them from entering garden etc.

We know they make up lies about one of their Goons having witnessed live TV and used that as a basis for a warrant.

Sticking your head in the sand as you propose is just stupidity. He had good reason to dismiss the so called evidence and should do so, it is what an innocent person does.

cw18

I'm quite used to delivering envelopes with a small window stating 'an enquiry has been started' or 'will you be in on' etc.


This week turned up one I've not seen before......


Not sure if it's only for business (this was addressed to a pub that's closed down).


White envelope, and in the narrow window it said "You risk criminal prosecution and a fine."

Cornucopia

cw18 wrote: »

White envelope, and in the narrow window it said "You risk criminal prosecution and a fine."

Not seen one of those.

It's a bit full-on even for TV Licensing, so maybe you're right and it won't be sent to private individuals in their own homes.

buglawton

silverwhistle wrote: »

I'm with 1005922 on this. Allocate as little effort as possible to the situation.
My letters to the occupier go straight into use as kindling and the most effort in the whole affair comes in posting on here! Mind you, in ~35 years of home ownership I've never had a colour tv, so my situation is different to many.

According to the BBC, you typed that post on one !

oldernonethewiser

Another letter today


Big red letters in their own window in the envelope (so it MUST be important)


Local investigation active in XXXXXX

Enforcement visit authorised by J Hales - it has his or her very signature on it, so by gosh this must be serious now.



Unless it is a relative this "signature" will have been that of John Hales who apparently is an "Enforcement Officer"



I wonder if that means he has been demoted as over twelve years ago he was "Head of TV Licensing Division"

oldernonethewiser

This month's update.


"Official Notice:Investigation opened"


Interesting they quote the law on the requirements for a licence but don't mention anywhere that I don't need to get in touch if I have no need for one.



Wonder if anyone will visit?


If I get another letter in a month I hope they make an effort and it has a Christmas theme of some sort.

Cornucopia

Here's a compendium of letters down the years...

http://www.bbctvlicence.com/

John Reith must be so proud.

oldernonethewiser

A useful site for seeing the various missives automatically churned out.


Thanks for linking to it.


They are ridiculously aggressively worded, presumably to scare people, with the attitude of "you are guilty and we know you are" even when you are not.




I was contemplating treating myself to a TV for Christmas but these letters and the limited use I would genuinely have for it means that I shall continue to be happily TV and licence free.