TV Licence article Discussion

[Deleted User]

Trouble is Paul, the BBC would almost certainly cite the "preventing or detecting crime" exemption.

Paul_Varjak

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Trouble is Paul, the BBC would almost certainly cite the "preventing or detecting crime" exemption.

You are correct that the Protection from Harassment Act does include such a clause but the courts have upheld that rationality must still apply.

It is insufficient to say the conduct complained of was pursued for the prevention or detection of crime, without some logic behind the harassment. There must be some evidence that a crime is or would be committed that warranted the use of harassment to prevent or detect it.

The only logic that TVL applies in sending out harassing letters is whether the property has a TV licence or not. The assumption being that if there is no TV licence holder at the premises then a crime is or would be committed.

I very much doubt that would be sufficient argument to justify harassment, in the eyes of the Court.

Cornucopia

And in practical terms, what would one need to do to take such legal action?

Is it the case that a private individual would be at risk of paying the BBC's costs, for example?

Paul_Varjak

Cornucopia wrote: »

And in practical terms, what would one need to do to take such legal action?

Is it the case that a private individual would be at risk of paying the BBC's costs, for example?

The Protection from Harassment Act creates both civil and criminal offences for the same conduct. The only difference, I believe, being the burden of proof required required: 'Beyond all reasonable doubt' in a criminal court or 'balance of probabilities' in a civil case.

You can pursue a civil claim for harassment in the County Court. It may qualify under the small claims procedure. If you lose then, no doubt, you could be liable for the other party's costs.

For the criminal offence you would have to convice the Police to take action. If you can do that, it should cost you nothing.

[Deleted User]

I quite look forward to the letters and visits.

Indeed, I'm rather chuffed that they're wasting time and money, in a futile attempt at harassing me.

anotherbaldrick

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

What's an "OF's license" :huh:

If you were 74 years old you would know.

[Deleted User]

An Old Farts Licence?

Andy_L

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

An Old Farts Licence?

You need a licence to have an old fart? Its bureaucracy gone made I tell you.

[Deleted User]

Andy_L wrote: »

You need a licence to have an old fart?

Life's a gas.

System

Marches wrote: »

The TV license is ridiculously high. Why do they need £145 of close to every household in the country? As good as the BBC is, I could live with a much reduced service if they at least halved the fee.

Its high because the BBC keep on growing and growing. Remember when Skynews started, the BBC had to create a news channel then too.

They then went on to create BBC3 (another BBC1) and BBC4 (another BBC2)

You then have all those national and local radio stations, it's a HUGE gravy train