TV Licence debate - Statutes Vs Laws

[MrHat]

I have been reading about TV Licensing recently and whether they are lawfully required or not. I have no personal objective here other than enlightenment.

 

I DO have a linence and will contiunue to do so as I can afford it (thankfully I have a job) and I know that I would be harassed if I didn't have one. But that got me thinking....is the main reason that people buy licences because they feel that they would be committing a crime and be threatened/harassed for not having one? When I was at Uni (some time ago now!) I received all sorts of threatening letters (more and more red ink each time) despite not owning a TV or equipment capable of receiving a signal...and this was despite me notifying them of this. Reminds be of DCA threatogram tactics. Churn out 10,000 threatograms, a few will cough up = result for them.

 

I've heard about £1000 fines being threatened, sending enforcement officers round to visit, and even prison!

 

Some arlicles I have read (and youtube vids watched) talk about how, as the TV Licence requirement is based on the Communications Act, it is a 'Statute' and not a 'Law'(Common Law). Not having one does not cause harm or loss to another person so cannot be considered an unlawful act. The case studies suggest that one can 'remove their implied right of access' so that TVL peeps are not allowed to enter one's property and one can refuse to answer any questions to any enforcment agents (normally Capita)....and there is nothing that they can do.

 

The key (apparently) is to avoid engaging with them in any way as they have no right to demand info and enter your property...or even demand your name. People fall foul of this when they fall for the intimidation and sign statements agreeing that they do not have a TVL despite having a TV. As we are talking about an Act/Statute, there has to be an agreement on both sides so unless you agree, they cannot enforce. Correct? or BS?!!

 

So my question is - how does this work out in reality? If someone cancels their licence (or never has had one) will they be 'got' in the end by the TVL people and court system. Can the Police get involved? Will you go to prison?

 

Or is the BBC/TVL hoodwinking us all and with untruths, deliberate misinterpretation of the law, intimidation, threats, harassment and bullying?

 

And should the TVL be abolished?

 

I came here to ask as I very much value the CAG members' opinions and views....

[leonmassey]

You have raised some excellent points and i would be interested in a clarification from learned members also.

[Conniff]

The TV License is a tax levied by the Goverment so non payment is a criminal act of which you can be imprisoned.

 

The BBC who are the main recipients of the money collected have been given the task of collecting it on behalf of the Government, they in turn have farmed the collection to a civil contractor.

 

A license, as you point out, is only required to receive 'live' broadcasts by any means, television receiver, computer or mobile phone.

 

The collection companies do not have any legal powers and you don't have to respond to them either by letter or in person, but they can apply to a court for a warrant of entry if they have good reason to believe the above is taking place and they are entitled to be accompanied by the police if they fear for their safety or a breach of the piece may take place.

[MrHat]

Thanks Conniff.

 

SO I guess they would need to convince a court to give them a warrant to search the premises. I wonder how easily these are granted and how much 'evidence' is needed?

[transient]

Thanks Conniff.

 

SO I guess they would need to convince a court to give them a warrant to search the premises. I wonder how easily these are granted and how much 'evidence' is needed?

Think the numbers granted to my recollection is very minimal

[transient]

You maybe interested to know that FOI requests have been made before for this information and it should be made available but the Beeb are being obtrusive, see the PDF of their response for this. See here for previous requests.

 

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/tv_licensing_search_warrants

 

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/number_of_warrants_granted_in_re

[MrHat]

very interesting post transient and very relevant to my question about 'hoodwinking'. Not that it answers that one though of course!

[Centurian_OOOyabass]

Hello All... I became at the start of this year Legally Licence Free ... I did not renew my TV Licence due the dismal droos that was aired over the festive season .. so what happens when you do not renew your licence, they try to harass you by telephone and postal mail, infact one letter per month getting stronger in tone and threats and harassment.

 

Have a search for TV Licence resistance on the net .. very very informative, the best course of action is no communication with crapita/bbc what so ever, if they chap your door, do as I did .. close it .. and go and read a book.

[caledfwlch]

MrHat, have you by any chance been reading the websites and information of the self styled "Freemen of the Land" and "Lawful Rebellion" etc? If so, please be very careful, as a lot of what they claim is wrong, and some actions they advice could land you in serious trouble.

[jdes26]

Statues Mayb legal but are not law And never

Will b

Two very different subjects

[Annette1973]

A Statutory Act is only given the force of Law by the consent of the Governed - that means you, people!

[Consumer dude]

If a person has not converted over to digital, does this mean that no more letters from Tv license will happen as a signal is no longer possible..

[Bazooka Boo]

please be very careful, as a lot of what they claim is wrong, and some actions they advice could land you in serious trouble

 

Could you highlight which information you think is wrong? I can then investigate it further and either have it corrected or clarified.

 

Correct, lawful & legal are two completely different things.

 

The fact that the BBC uses them in the same sentence on their threat letters demanding you gift them money, is indicative of their lack of understanding of the to words.

 

I am also licence free, and the cycle of letters they spit out arrive on the same day every month, and they are now on their fourth cycle the purpose of these threats and imminent legal action is psychological rather than actual, once this is realised, just like DCA's letters, cease to have any credibility or effect.

 

Non communication is the best way to deal with them.

[Bazooka Boo]

If a person has not converted over to digital, does this mean that no more letters from Tv license will happen as a signal is no longer possible..

 

No, they assume that every address in the country needs a Licence, regardless if you do or don't.

[Consumer dude]

No, they assume that every address in the country needs a Licence, regardless if you do or don't.

 

Even without a signal ?

[MrHat]

MrHat, have you by any chance been reading the websites and information of the self styled "Freemen of the Land" and "Lawful Rebellion" etc? If so, please be very careful, as a lot of what they claim is wrong, and some actions they advice could land you in serious trouble.

 

Caledwich - I read a lot of stuff and am familliar with the above. However, as I said, I posted this to stimulate debate on CAG as thought it was a good place to do so. I take anything I read online with a pinch of salt. On CAG, we see how things play out in reality so a good forum to raise this.

 

At this moment in time, I would keep paying the licence fee even if it was very clear that I could get away without doing so. I really cannot be doing with the hassle and don't have time to fight them if it got nasty. Besides, one of the people in my household works for the BBC and it is in his contract that not having a TV license is grounds for dismissal (this was stated upon joining 3 years ago, long before I became more enlightened into TVL practices).

[Old Cogger]

BBC was suppose to originally been a no profit organisation, they are not, as anybody who views abroad will note adverts on their site, so where is the no profit area?

 

It has been said that no vans around anymore, I have not seen any for decades?

 

Law & legislation 2 different areas???

[caledfwlch]

Caledwich - I read a lot of stuff and am familliar with the above. However, as I said, I posted this to stimulate debate on CAG as thought it was a good place to do so. I take anything I read online with a pinch of salt. On CAG, we see how things play out in reality so a good forum to raise this.

 

At this moment in time, I would keep paying the licence fee even if it was very clear that I could get away without doing so. I really cannot be doing with the hassle and don't have time to fight them if it got nasty. Besides, one of the people in my household works for the BBC and it is in his contract that not having a TV license is grounds for dismissal (this was stated upon joining 3 years ago, long before I became more enlightened into TVL practices).

 

Bloody hell - do they mean if you have a television, or is he actually contractually obliged to OWN a television?, ie if he doesnt have a television, he does not need the licence, but the BBC could sack him anyway?

[Bazooka Boo]

Bloody hell - do they mean if you have a television, or is he actually contractually obliged to OWN a television?, ie if he doesnt have a television, he does not need the licence, but the BBC could sack him anyway?

 

Now that would be interesting!!

 

On acceptance of your employment, you a contractually obliged to purchase a full colour TV licence every year.............surely even the BBC is not that daft? Then again!

 

Yes even if you don't own a TV and don't have a signal, your address is marked as 'unlicensed' don't forget they have that fantastic database.

 

As for their so called TVdetector vans, it's a load of psychological mumbo jumbo, at the most TVL, which is a trading name of the BBC, possibly own 24 'detector' vans. However under a FOI request they decline to answer the actual figure, and don't deny or confirm if they actually exist.

 

But they do have a contract for 24 'Vans' which are liveried up with TVL and detector van all over them, this then gives the impression, if you were ever to see one driving around your area, that they do exist..

 

The BBC is a corporation, all corporations are run for profit, just like the Government is run for profit, Police Forces, Councils, Courts, are a;; run for profit, even United Kingdom PLC.

 

That is a very good point you made Caledflwch, they seriously couldn't expect employees to do that??

[Ganymede]

Statues Mayb legal but are not law And never

Will b

 

 

 

 

What?

[jimmyley]

The TV License is a tax levied by the Goverment so non payment is a criminal act of which you can be imprisoned.

 

Could you please enounce the legal codes where you base what you're saying?

[Ganymede]

Could you please enounce the legal codes where you base what you're saying?

 

 

Communications Act 2003

 

Part 4 Licensing of TV reception

 

363 Licence required for use of TV receiver

 

(1)A television receiver must not be installed or used unless the installation and use of the receiver is authorised by a licence under this Part.

 

(2)A person who installs or uses a television receiver in contravention of subsection (1) is guilty of an offence.

 

(3)A person with a television receiver in his possession or under his control who—

(a)intends to install or use it in contravention of subsection (1), or

(b)knows, or has reasonable grounds for believing, that another person intends to install or use it in contravention of that subsection,

is guilty of an offence.

 

(4)A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

[Ganymede]

Could you please enounce the legal codes where you base what you're saying?

 

 

Non payment of the fine could have the same result so indirectly Conniff was right.

[Bazooka Boo]

Law = no harm or loss to an individual. common law.

 

Legal = legislation, or statutory law which has been made, or 'enacted' by a government, these are NOT laws, they are ONLY given the force of law with your consent (the governed) We are policed and governed by consent.

 

If that helps??

[Ganymede]

Law = no harm or loss to an individual. common law.

 

Legal = legislation, or statutory law which has been made, or 'enacted' by a government, these are NOT laws, they are ONLY given the force of law with your consent (the governed) We are policed and governed by consent.

 

If that helps??

 

 

Where did you get that from??!