TV Licence article Discussion
Comments
-
My 'no licence needed declaration' ran out earlier this year. I was annoyed that yet again they wrote to me asking to confirm I still didn't need well ahead of that date, so decided that this time I wasn't going to act on it until the 2 years were actually up (I've previously done it as soon as they emailed the request). But I forgot......For people like me and others who have gone LLF after years of paying, this is a moot point. They already have our names and they are assuming we still occupy the property.
I would guess that after a while of 'returning to sender' they might switch tactics to writing to "The Occupier", but it would be a relatively simple task for them to confirm the named former licence holder was still living at the address (without cooperation of that person being required).
I then got a follow-up email that I ignored. Then a letter addressed to me reminding me I'd not been in contact which I also ignored (but didn't return). The next letter came 'to the occupier', so it doesn't take them long to do the switch. I ignored that, then came home one day to a 'we called round' slip in my mailbox. Later got a 'will you be in on......' letter addresed to the occupier which was ignored (and apart from the absence of a 'we called' card I've no idea if they visited as I was on holday that day). I've since had another letter (to the occupier) which tells me they're opening an investigation. I've had that just over a week now, so am waiting to see what their next move will be.
I've nothing to hide, but have decided enough is enough. I've been telling them since the end of 2010 that I don't need a licence, so surely it's time they accepted that's not about to change. I've no working aerial (and the unplugged one is in the loft so not visible from outside), no Sky dish, my estate can't get cable, and iPlayer is blocked on my router. I do currently have a NowTV subscription for films and entertainment, but am very careful NOT to watch the new episode of a show on the evening it airs live (my fella has Sky and checks when they're being aired for me so that I can avoid those slots - we've discovered he can find that info much more easily via his box than I can the internet).
I'm not sure how they could confirm I still live here. The obvious legal ways would be the electoral register or phone directory, but I'm not on the open register (so they shouldn't be able to see who lives here) and my landline number is ex-directory (so looking up my name against the address will turn up nothing). Speaking to neighbours probably wouldn't help much either, as the occupants of both the 'obvious to ask' houses (the two I share the drive with) have changed in the last 6 weeks - and I don't think one of them even knows my first name, never mind my surname
Cheryl0 -
I think that looking at it from their POV, they (probably) have no viable way to know whether a previously unlicensed person/household has moved house, and a new household is now in place that may have different Licence requirements.
Of course, there is an element of corporate paranoia in that, because the vast, vast majority of households that need a TV Licence buy one without significant prompting and without any enforcement action, and it isn't necessary for TVL to know any more than that a Licence has now been bought.
BBC-TVL has previously stated that they have a "duty to enforce" that "originates in law" and which entails ensuring that "every UK address is correctly licensed". I'm not convinced of the truth of any of those statements. From my perspective, the law is narrowly drawn, and there is no overarching duty of enforcement upon the BBC, or anyone else. What there is is a narrow obligation to administer the Licences of those who have them. There's also an option to investigate Licence requirements using a Search Warrant (though BBC-TVL barely uses this).
Given that the BBC is a massive communications company it does seem to foul-up its own communications on a regular and persistent basis.0 -
I would argue that a household who have a licence when they don't need one are not correctly licensed. It's a shame that BBC-TVL's duty doesn't extend to these people.Cornucopia wrote: »BBC-TVL has previously stated that they have a "duty to enforce" that "originates in law" and which entails ensuring that "every UK address is correctly licensed".0 -
JimmyTheWig wrote: »I would argue that a household who have a licence when they don't need one are not correctly licensed. It's a shame that BBC-TVL's duty doesn't extend to these people.
I'd certainly like to see them apply that principle to the dissemination of information. Their present approach is ludicrously secretive considering that they are hiding information that is relevant to the very law that they are enforcing.0 -
If an address doesn't have a TV licence, then by default, they think you're watching broadcast TV.
And they freely admit it.TV_Licensing_Website wrote:TV Licensing works on the assumption that every UK household requires a Licence.0 -
Hi everyone . I am a student in Glasgow and I don't know if I have to pay for the TV licence fee. I don't own a TV and also I do not see any UK live programmes or BBC on my laptop. Sometimes I stream some live programmes from my home country(Greece). I would like to mention taht in Greece live streaming is permitted.
I would appreciate if somebody can help me !0 -
marielamile wrote: »Hi everyone . I am a student in Glasgow and I don't know if I have to pay for the TV licence fee. I don't own a TV and also I do not see any UK live programmes or BBC on my laptop. Sometimes I stream some live programmes from my home country(Greece). I would like to mention taht in Greece live streaming is permitted.
I would appreciate if somebody can help me !
If you watch live streamed programs from Greece then TVL say that you need a TV Licence in the UK.
There's good reason to believe that they are wrong, but since they make the rules...0 -
Cornucopia wrote: »There's good reason to believe that they are wrong, but since they make the rules...
Point of order. The rules are laid down by government by way of Acts of Parliament. TVL merely interpret these laws to suit their needs and con people out of money.
They (TVL) will claim that they are conducting an investigation when sending out all those scary letters. The recipients may well (and quite rightly so) claim that these letters amount to harassment. Certainly, TVL are not conducting lawful investigations, else the letters would cease once they find no evidence of a crime being committed.Her courage will change the world.
Treasure the moments that you have. Savour them for as long as you can for they will never come back again.0 -
Point of order. The rules are laid down by government by way of Acts of Parliament.
Yes. However in this particular instance the drafting of the legislation resulted in something so ludicrously complicated as to defy definitive interpretation. I have tried to read it and interpreted it one way, and BBC-TVL have done so and interpreted it differently.
If it were just that question of one interpretation vs. another, I'd probably be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. However, up until a few years ago their interpretation and mine were the same, and then they changed for no apparent reason. I asked them for their reasoning and they came out with a load of nonsense - they do that sometimes.
My view is that there are multiple legal issues with what TV Licensing do (both their policies and in extreme cases the scope for their rogue employees to break the law.They (TVL) will claim that they are conducting an investigation when sending out all those scary letters. The recipients may well (and quite rightly so) claim that these letters amount to harassment. Certainly, TVL are not conducting lawful investigations, else the letters would cease once they find no evidence of a crime being committed.
The letters are a classic case in point: around 40 million enforcement letters per year - being sent on a monthly basis to most unlicensed households, which is a completely irrational and counter-productive frequency, not to mention being a massive waste of resources and money. Are they actually harassment, though? Possibly not (once you consider the various massive loopholes in the legislation), or possibly they are considering that it is TVL policy to stop the letters if someone complains of being harassed.0 -
Some important points if you get a visit.
1. The attending person (somehow referred to as an officer) doesn't have a right to enter your property unless there is a court order authorising the person, which would not likely be given.
2. If you do openly allow the person to check and you are asked to sign the document he carries it will be a form to state that you accept liability. You can use choice a or b.
a) Do not sign and ask him to leave. If he insists you sign before he leaves by threatening prosecution, You can either insist that leaving is the only option open to him and state that you will be seeing him in court in due course, for which you will be asking for an award for costs. Alternatively option b.
b) Sign the form, and as the person turns to leave tell him to stop and that he is now under arrest for fraud, by deception. Under the Fraud Act 2006.
Fraud by false representation (Section 2)
The defendant:- made a false representation
- dishonestly
- knowing that the representation was or might be untrue or misleading
- with intent to make a gain for himself or another, to cause loss to another or to expose another to risk of loss.
ARREST
You have the right to use reasonable force, i.e. blocking the exit, if the person lays a hand on you you can further claim an act of assault, plus there could be implications of attempting to illegally leave the scene of a crime. You MUST notify the police immediately stating that the person has been arrested by yourself as permitted under the above.
The law surrounding a Citizen’s Arrest in the UK is set out in Section 24A of the Police and Criminal Evidence (PACE) Act 1984. It states that a person can legally arrest anyone:
“Who is in the act of committing an indictable offence; or whom the person has reasonable grounds to suspect is committing an indictable offence.”
At the most basic level, anyone can perform an arrest if they either know, or reasonably believe, that an individual is in the process of committing a crime. You can also perform a Citizen’s Arrest if you reasonably believe that a crime has already been committed by said individual.
However, the law is not that simple, and there are several aspects of the law that you need to know before carrying out an arrest to ensure that it is lawful.
I'm looking forward to when the "officer" appears where the address doesn't exist and I have a TV licence for the property address, I get letters for an alternative postal address which is used to differentiate between the residential part and a leased out shop, however I own both.
I have just completed the online form to advise, interestingly there isn't an option to state that the address doesn't exist, strange that. They do state that they may check by calling at the address.
Not wishing to disclose my details I used the name L Occupier, L meaning Legal as on their letter so that they will no who I am! The email was given as addressdoesntexist@tvlicencing.co.uk. They hadn't thought of that being a non-valid email lol. Of course the address was shown as the erroneous address, which they will assume is the correct address.
DO NOT PUT YOURSELF AT RISK OF INJURY HOWEVER TEMPTING THAT MIGHT BE.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.6K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards