TV Licence article Discussion

Options
1317318320322323407

Comments

  • Cornucopia
    Cornucopia Posts: 16,156 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    Options
    dan958 wrote: »
    Besides, when you have a hobby such as making tin foil hats, who needs a TV?

    In some ways, I'd prefer it if some of the reported issues with TV Licensing were down to tin-foil-hattery - it would certainly be reassuring.

    However, the evidence of their skullduggery is pretty solid, and there is even some evidence of malice behind some of it, too.
  • Ego_Shredder
    Options
    Rather than use the lazy "tin foil hat" slur on people, I prefer to see if there is any truth to what some people have uncovered or proposed. Some of it can appear far fetched, but not always.
    What goes around - comes around
    give lots and you will always receive lots
  • Cornucopia
    Cornucopia Posts: 16,156 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    edited 30 May 2019 at 9:22PM
    Options
    Totally agree.

    I think people would be amazed at the kind of things that TV Licensing get up to - either as a matter of policy, or by way of a roguish contingent in their field enforcement staff.

    One of the main issues is that the TV Licensing regime is not specified in legislation. (It goes as far as to specify that the BBC should administer Licences, and it sets out powers for Search Warrants that TVL barely uses).

    Everything else, the BBC/TV Licensing/Capita have implemented of their own volition. That makes it legally weak, but also means that what would otherwise be the protections of joined-up legislation are absent.

    From there, we start to enter a weird netherworld in which a Public Authority seeks to engage the Public in a non-statutory enforcement process, that the Public have every right to ignore and then the Public Authority gets cantankerous if they do.

    That's objectively wrong.

    It also likes to use an approach and language that implies some kind of authority behind its actions where none exists.

    That's objectively wrong.

    Then it seeks to use a form of coercion over the cessation of its enforcement letters being contingent on co-operation with its No Licence Needed process.

    Understandable, but objectively wrong.

    Then it escalates things by sending salespeople round (but it calls them "Enforcement Officers"). Those people are improperly supervised, and some of them take liberties with the truth and with the process. (A process that isn't well designed to start with). PACE applies to TVL interviews under caution, but key principles are being overlooked.

    That's objectively wrong.

    Furthermore, the entry of TV Licensing to people's homes is covered by the Human Rights Act. However, whilst the BBC accepts its coverage it doesn't accept its key principles. In particular, there is a requirement for the activity to be authorised by Legislation (or "other rules" of a similar status) and that such authorisation should be Explicit, Specific, Accessible (to the Public), Understandable by the Public and Proof against Arbitrariness.

    TVL's approach does not meet these requirements (doesn't even try). It is therefore questionable, and probably wrong.
  • FreeBear
    FreeBear Posts: 14,631 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper Photogenic
    Options
    Cornucopia wrote: »
    It also likes to use an approach and language that implies some kind of authority behind its actions where none exists.

    They assume that because you do not have a licence, you are engaged in illegal activities (watching live broadcasts & iPlayer). This goes against one of the core tenants of English law that one is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
    Then there is the ongoing and continuous "investigations" when there isn't a shred of evidence to justify their activities - The police will investigate a crime and will cease when it becomes apparent that there is no evidence, not so the TVL.

    Legally questionable on their part and morally repugnant.
    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.
  • Cornucopia
    Cornucopia Posts: 16,156 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    edited 30 May 2019 at 1:32PM
    Options
    FreeBear wrote: »
    They assume that because you do not have a licence, you are engaged in illegal activities (watching live broadcasts & iPlayer). This goes against one of the core tenants of English law that one is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
    Morally wrong, but technically "innocent until proven guilty" applies only in matters before a Court. I agree that TVL should not be implying or assuming guilt in the way that they do, and of course no one in the UK (outset of Terrorism offences) is required to prove their own innocence in an investigation.

    They still need to treat innocent people with respect, which they arguably fail to do - in fact it seems that they are pathologically incapable of doing so.
    Then there is the ongoing and continuous "investigations" when there isn't a shred of evidence to justify their activities - The police will investigate a crime and will cease when it becomes apparent that there is no evidence, not so the TVL.

    Legally questionable on their part and morally repugnant.
    Those, I think, are simply a fiction. The reality is that there is no "investigation" in any meaningful sense.

    Their use of fictitious and theatrical devices in their enforcement activities goes way too far and I think it originates from their inability to distinguish between marketing and enforcement (which runs all through their process).
  • Jackmydad
    Jackmydad Posts: 9,186 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    Options
    Exaggerated idea of their own importance I reckon.
    BBC and TVL.
  • [Deleted User]
    Options
    Cornucopia wrote: »
    and some of them take liberties with the truth

    AKA Telling a pack of lies.
  • Section106
    Section106 Posts: 88 Forumite
    Options
    The end (from June 2020) of automatic free TV licences for all over-75s.....

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48583487

    Perhaps this will hasten the scrapping of the licence completely?

    (Or expose more vulnerable people to TVL's unpleasant tactics)
  • Cornucopia
    Cornucopia Posts: 16,156 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    Options
    There is already an MSE official thread for this news here:-

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6011961
  • akira181
    akira181 Posts: 505 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    There’s an option to sign up to say you don’t need a TV license and some generic options why. I only use my TV for Netflix, DVDs and gaming. Nothing on BBC is worth watching that doesn’t get streamed elsewhere or purchasable on DVD (thinking mainly Planet Earth and the like).

    I got fed up of all the wasted paper coming through my door and I’ve seen on many occasions the bin lorry emptying the recycling and household waste bins into the same lorry so it was greener to just tell them.

    You don’t see the DVLA spamming every address about road tax because they may or may not own a car that’s registered elsewhere. Their scaremongering to get people to pay for something they don’t watch is disgraceful and it’s only allowed because they continue to push whatever political agendas Westminster deems appropriate. Plus, taxing the masses to make up for their tax dodging uber rich buddies seems to be their preferred option.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.1K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards