Tv License Visit

[Bedsit Bob]

And I thought he was meant to be an expert on this topic?

 

Clearly he isn't.

[porkyp1g]

He is, certainly one of them.

 

If you truly feel that I work within either the bbc or capita, why don't you report me to one or both of them? I've already posted my views on the matter, that it should be taken back in house and not run by capita for personal gain. If its a government decision to make everyone pay in this way, then it should be run the same as the DVLA is. If I do work for either of the companies, surely they will take exception to my comments and I would be in trouble.

 

This view on this is my own and I do not work with anything at all to do with tv licensing. Call my bluff on the matter and put your money where your mouth is. I assure you that you have this wrong, and are a very, very paranoid person. I worry for you in everyday life.

[Bedsit Bob]

but these are choosing their right to remain silent.

 

Strangely enough, that's very nearly the title of my video.

 

What do you reckon lads and lasses?

 

Have we kept porky in suspense long enough?

[postggj]

Section 363 of the Communications Act 2003 makes it an offence to install or use a television receiver to watch or record any television programmes as they’re being shown on television without a TV Licence.

 

 

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.

 

(5)Subsection (1) is not contravened by anything done in the course of the business of a dealer in television receivers solely for one or more of the following purposes—

 

(a)installing a television receiver on delivery;

(b)demonstrating, testing or repairing a television receiver.

 

(6)The Secretary of State may by regulations exempt from the requirement of a licence under subsection

 

(1) the installation or use of television receivers—

(a)of such descriptions,

(b)by such persons,

©in such circumstances, and

(d)for such purposes,

as may be provided for in the regulations.

 

(7)Regulations under subsection (6) may make any exemption for which such regulations provide subject to compliance with such conditions as may be specified in the regulations.

[Bedsit Bob]

Thanks for that squaddie, although I'm not sure what point you are making

[postggj]

People keep on quoting different legal obligations on having a TV licence

 

I thought a bit of clarity would be nice on what the Statutory Obligations are in law on needing a TV licence, without all the unsubstantiated hearsay and what people perceive is the Statutory requirement

[snowy101]

If you truly feel that I work within either the bbc or capita, why don't you report me to one or both of them? I've already posted my views on the matter, that it should be taken back in house and not run by capita for personal gain. If its a government decision to make everyone pay in this way, then it should be run the same as the DVLA is. If I do work for either of the companies, surely they will take exception to my comments and I would be in trouble.

 

OK, give me your full name & address, personal email addy. Telephone numbers [ home & mobile] . We will see who is bluffing, after all i can`t make the inquiries without it, if you have nothing to hide you won`t mind giving out this information , will you?.

 

 

This view on this is my own and I do not work with anything at all to do with tv licensing. Call my bluff on the matter and put your money where your mouth is. I assure you that you have this wrong, and are a very, very paranoid person. I worry for you in everyday life.

 

You don`t need to worry on my behalf, as i have already told you, i don`t suffer from paranoia

[Bedsit Bob]

People keep on quoting different legal obligations on having a TV licence

 

I thought a bit of clarity would be nice on what the Statutory Obligations are in law on needing a TV licence, without all the unsubstantiated hearsay and what people perceive is the Statutory requirement

 

Of course, it must be read in conjunction with the Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations 2004.

[postggj]

Of course, it must be read in conjunction with the Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations 2004.

 

Which are the Delegated or Secondary Legislation to the parent Act, that being the Communications Act 2003

[Bedsit Bob]

Of course, the Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations 2004 does help us, by clarifying the definitions of "television receiver" and "television programme service".

[porkyp1g]

You don`t need to worry on my behalf, as i have already told you, i don`t suffer from paranoia

 

You clearly do, as you think I am an insider when you are very wrong.

 

The site team can pass on details on my IP address if either organisation requests it should they feel that an investigation needs to take place. This will give them details of my location and ISP. This should be enough to satisfy the companies if they have an employee on their hands. I'm not going to send my personal details to you as I don't know what else you would use them for. I don't know you and I'm sure you wouldn't send me all the details you requested from me.

 

To be fair, I don't really care what you think. You can believe what you like for me. If you want to take it further, you can still make a complaint to any of the companies associated with tv licensing.

[Bedsit Bob]

I'm not going to send my personal details to you as I don't know what else you would use them for.

 

Exactly how I feel about giving information to BBC/TVL.

[porkyp1g]

Exactly how I feel about giving information to BBC/TVL.

 

That's fine if you genuinely don't need a tv license. Fair play. With all due respect though, they are at least an official company who must comply with the data protection act. Paranoid snowy isn't and if I gave him that information, he could do anything with it, so it's not really the same.

[Bedsit Bob]

they are at least an official company who must comply with the data protection act.

 

In theory.

 

As for other areas of the law.

[snowy101]

You clearly do, as you think I am an insider when you are very wrong.

 

I'm not going to send my personal details to you as I don't know what else you would use them for.

 

Its taken a while, but we have got there. This is exactly what TVL / BBC / Capita want from anyone who won`t correspond with them & if they don`t they are accused of being guilty, so, you defend these companies & their methods , then by that default position, it makes you a TVL troll. You must be guilty because you won`t give me your personal infomation. you can`t have it both ways.

Either furnish me with your personal information so i can invade your privacy or you are guilty of being a troll. Its not nice is it, i don`t expect you to see or understand this very important point but it is where i & the vast majority of people who dispise the BBC & its lackys come from.

[postggj]

they will use the exemption in the DPA for the purpose of detection of fraud or to stop a crime

 

(Section 29

–

 

Crime and Taxation

 

Is the person asking for this information doing so to prevent

or detect a crime or catch or prosecute an offender?

 

 

no doubt they will state the exemption under taxation as it is a form of TAX to receive live broadcasts

[Bedsit Bob]

In other words snowy101, as BBC/TVL expect us to surrender our privacy, to prove our innocence, porkyp1g should surrender his privacy, to prove his innocence?

[postggj]

A simple statutory declaration to capita would be all that's needed to stop any unannounced visits by capita, any further snooping can then be viewed as harassment under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights

 

The right to respect home and family life

[snowy101]

In other words snowy101, as BBC/TVL expect us to surrender our privacy, to prove our innocence, porkyp1g should surrender his privacy, to prove his innocence?

 

Correct.

 

The idea that i really want his personal information is ridiculous & i pushed it , to make a point. He keeps saying if you don`t need a licence then thats fine. I don`t need a licence but i am still assumed guilty & still being harrased, that is my point. I am fecked if i am going to let anyone into my property just to prove i don`t need a licence, asking Porky for his details is exactly the same hypothathis. He either gives me all of his personal details or he is a TVL troll.

[Bedsit Bob]

A simple statutory declaration to capita would be all that's needed to stop any unannounced visits by capita

 

Or you could get the same result by (although I wouldn't advise it) issuing WOIRA.

[postggj]

Or you could get the same result by (although I wouldn't advise it) issuing WOIRA.

 

The key is getting Capita to acknowledge your request in writing

[porkyp1g]

In other words snowy101, as BBC/TVL expect us to surrender our privacy, to prove our innocence, porkyp1g should surrender his privacy, to prove his innocence?

 

It's not the same at all. What organisation is snowy a part of that will keep the information safe and ensures it won't be used for any other purpose?

 

If you read my posts properly, you will see I don't agree with capita being involved in the process and how they go about trying to catch tv licence evaders (targets and commission etc). I also don't agree with how the bbc acted in light of the jimmy saville scandal. But because I believe people who need a tv license should pay for one, that makes me a bbc troll.

 

Believe what you want. It really doesn't bother me now. We've already uncovered that there is at least one on here who should be paying for a license but doesn't, yet someone who agrees with you said they don't agree with license evasion? Which is it? I wonder how many of you guys who claim not to need a license tuned in when the World Cup/Euros or Olympics were on? Hmmmmm....

 

Snowy, you've proved to me to be a paranoid poster, so your credibility has gone for me. Do you care if I feel that way, I'm sure you don't. Do I care if you think that I am employed by either the bbc or capita, no I don't. Cest la vie.

[Bedsit Bob]

The key is getting Capita to acknowledge your request in writing

 

You could phone it in, or email it in, or simply give it verbally to the bod who knocks at your door.

 

TVL state they WILL send a written acknowledgement.

 

They also state WOIRA MUSTl be respected by their staff.

[Bedsit Bob]

It's not the same at all. What organisation is snowy a part of that will keep the information safe and ensures it won't be used for any other purpose?

 

You are missing snowy101's point.

 

BBC/TVL assume that people who won't prove they aren't evading, must be evading.

 

Based on that principle, if you won't prove you aren't a BBC Troll, then you must be one.

 

Note that I'm not saying you are. I'm just explaining snowy101's point.

[postggj]

You could phone it in, or email it in, or simply give it verbally to the bod who knocks at your door.

 

TVL state they WILL send a written acknowledgement.

 

 

We have the interpretations Act, so use it

 

written confirmation is always better than hearsay evidence