Slashdot Mirror

"The spot fine is a direct and immediate result of the presumption of guilt you will have been warned and notified in advance that entry in required"

Entry is _never_ required in the UK without warrant, and in such cases, there must be a police officer in attendance. Somebody sending you a letter claiming otherwise doesn't change this one whit or iota.

"you have refused an appointed officer the chance to inspect your equipment to prove licensed within the law"

TV licensing people are not appointed officers of anything. The BBC sub-contracts license collection and enforcement to Capita Services Ltd., "easy payment" schemes to Revenue Services Ltd., and licence-related PR and publicity to the AMV Consortium, private corporations which, together with the BBC, operate under the "TV Licensing" trademark. The guys who come round in the uniforms with bullet proof vests and a nasty attitude work for Capita Services Ltd., and have exactly the same right of entry into your home as security guards, who also wear uniforms with bullet proof vests and work for private corporations, i.e. none.

"Therefore you are guilty and are responsible for the fine. "

You are not guilty of anything without proof, which they can't get if you don't let them in (unless of course you are silly enough to use an unlicensed TV where it can be seen or heard from the street). They also need proof to obtain a search warrant, which magistrates don't grant just because some employee of Capita Services Ltd., asks for it, and "our database says this premises hasn't got a TV license" isn't proof of receiving TV broadcasts.

"You can later challenge this in court, but it is however most certainly A CRIMINAL OFFENSE."

Which means that the rules of evidence are precisely the same as those of all other criminal cases, i.e. there needs to be some for a prosecution to take place, and refusing to admit an employee of a private corporation and ignoring threatening letters from said private corporation isn't evidence of committing any sort of crime.

"As the person refusing access YOU are responsible for YOUR part in the law being broken and are therefore equally culpable under the law."

Refusing access to an employee of Capita Group Ltd. isn't a crime, so no laws have been broken to be culpable under. Here are some links with plenty of evidence from both correspondence with the BBC itself and large numbers of personal experiences that make it quite clear how far you've been taken in the FUD:

http://www.bbctvlicence.com/Questions%20and%20answ ers.htm (make sure you read through the other section, because there's some good info in there)
http://www.marmalade.net/lime/ (nice collection of personal anecdotes and links to media resources)
http://www.savethepound.fsnet.co.uk/tvl.htm

There are plenty of others, but these should get you started.

I wonder how they would deal with a computer that had a TV tuner card installed? You could definitely 'watch TV' without owning a TV these days ... a HTPC with a tuner card, and then just use a suitably big monitor, or a DLP projector. No TV, just a computer, but you'd have all the capabilities.

A friend of mine from Australia lived in Cambridge for five years. She never once had a TV nor a TV licence. However, every six months she got a letter from the TV Licencing buffoons telling her that she was on a list and that it was a criminal offence to watch TV without having a TV licence. The letters finished with a suggestion that this was probably due to moving house recently and if she just paid up then there would be no prison for her. Suffice it to say that at no point did anyone knock on the door even though the house was a Victorian terrace and there were at least three TVs in neighbouring houses.
It is all a load of rubbish that they have vans roaming the streets trying to find the licence-less houses. They just have a mailmerge routine set to print letter to The Occupier, $HOUSE_NO, $ROAD_NAME trying to imply that the Police will be round if you don't pay now.
Sadly it isn't restricted to picking on foreigners as there are a number of sites with similar stories to tell. I could go on but I won't.

How do you deal with the Telly Thugs? Here's some information.

In the old days it was CRTs they detected, now all sorts of EMF/RF are under scrutiny. There is a pretty active resister community. Me? I watch only ITV! ;-)

More information:

One guy who doesn't own a TV, but gets harassed by the TV Licensing Agency (which is actually a private company contracted by the BBC, to the tune of a quarter billion pounds a year): http://www.marmalade.net/lime/

Information about BBC revenue and expenditures, TVLA, etc: http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/international/bbc.htm l

What if I only use a TV to watch videos/DVDs/as a monitor for my games console? Do I still need a licence?
You need to notify us in writing that this is the case and one our Enforcement Officers may need to visit you to confirm that you do not need a licence.

A (slightly hysterical) page on TV licensing: here. Half way down the page is a list of press articles including some on TVL excesses, like 800,000 people accidentally threatened by prosecution , or this guy whose house was broken into by TVL, or this one, which refers to TVL as 'menacing the public with heavy-handed advertising' and using 'inappropriate tactics'.

etc, etc.

As a non-watcher of television, and someone who legally does not require a TV licence I hate and despise TV licensing and their campaign of constant harrassment.

A few inaccuracies in your post however - firstly by law one does not require a TV licence for merely owning a TV set, however the letters TV licensing send out are crafted to make it sound like this.

The letters I constantly receive (some ARE delivered by hand during 'visits' (however I've yet to be home when they come) states that "it is illegal to use or install any television receiving equipment, to receive or record television programme services, without a valid TV Licence. Such equipment includes TV receivers, video recorders, set-top boxes, computers with broadcast cards and other television receiving equipment".

Note the use of the word 'use' and the part about 'receive or record' - so far so good right?

Now the next part of the letter you get:

"If you do not have a TV receiver, please write to us at the above address so that we can update our records. If you do this, we will contact you in due course."

Wait a minute - didn't they previously say it's only illegal to USE equipment but now if I don't HAVE one I'm require to tell them in writing?

Er.. hello?

I've checked it out and by law you only NEED a license if you USE receiving equipment to receive or record broadcasts - and the bit they don't tell you - that originate from the UK. Perfectly legal for example for me to hook up a satellite dish to a VCR and TV and point it at a German sat so long as none of it's broadcasts originate in the UK.

If you don't buy a TV license in the UK, then you are subject to (what I honestly believe is illegal) constant harassment including monthly letters and house visits. When I tell this tale for some reason at this point I get strange people telling me 'if you don't like TV don't buy it' - let me get something crystal clear - I don't like it so I don't buy it. My issue is very much with the fact that I am harassed for not owning a license. I don't want TV - I don't need a licence.

Some useful links:

Marmalade.net

One of many actual letters I receive periodically.

Notice in the letter they say they have written to me without reply - this is correct - I don't reply to them. I tried at my last address doing things their way which involves calling them on their national rate 0870 number (~20c / minute) or taking the time and trouble to write a letter, print it out and post it to them (all at my expense). Why should I spend a single penny telling them I'm not breaking the law? Especially since they simply continue to harass me regardless?

Better to ignore them and avoid the visitors.

Yet more proof that the BBC license fee is an unmitigated Good Thing(TM).

Just a pity they can't leave people the fuck alone if they don't want it.

This is very very good news - lets hope that DRM is used to only allow TV License owners to experience the content thus causing we few people who do not need a TV License constantly receiving threatening letters.

And some of you accused the BBC of making an unfounded claim when they said this:

Look at this website to see how the BBC operates. They have their own private force which they use to collect money from people by force, sending threatening letters and ransacking homes. I think they would fall under the RICO act in the US.

Doesn't the UK have better TV than the US though?

Having spent some time in the US I'd say "probably" but I don't know right now as I don't watch TV and have not done for around 5 years now.

I have no problem with paying for services if they are worthwhile. My personal issue with them is that they simply don't believe you when you say you don't watch TV. I legally do not need a TV License however I get constantly bombarded with threatening sounding letters and people coming to the house "for a look around".

Check out the website of this guy for examples of how the TV-L-Nazis treat we non-conformists.