TV Licencing - Can I tell them to get stuffed?

[Barreti]

I've just opened a letter from TV Licencing, Bristol which goes along the lines of

_______

Dear Barreti,

We have been advised that you bought television receiving equipment in October 2007 from Dixons Stores Group. However, we have no record of a TV Licence in your name for the above address.

Using TV equipment to watch or record television programme services without a valid licence is against the law. Please read the following options and take the relevant action:

If you need a TV licence for this address you must buy one straight away. blah blah

If you have a licence for this address in someone else's name, please call our Licence Confirmation Line on 0844 800 5899 stating the licence number that covers this address, as well as the reference number at the top of this page. This convenient service automated service is open 24 hours a day, everyday.

____

We do have a TV licence for this address, valid until the end of Dec 2007 and paid by my partner by Direct Debit. So we fall into category 2.

So what happened to 'we have a database of everyone in the UK with a licence and will pay you a visit and take away everything you own if you don't have one' which is being shoved at us regularly in 'adverts' on the beeb.

Does anyone know if I have to comply by law with this veiled threat of a letter and call this Licence Confirmation Line or can I go with my instincts and write "shove your letter up your arse" and send it back in the prepaid envelope they kindly provided?

Anyone care to offer suggestions of something better I can write on the letter

ta
IanB

[Pesty]

I would just ignor it. its their up.

[Balmoral Green]

Whether you have a licence or not, and whether the info is up to date, is not really the point. It is the 'Big Brother' sharing of information between the retailer and the Licencing authority that I find so odious. Presumably they have an exemption from the Data protection act for this sort of thing.

[Hooli]

ignore it. the licence is a scam & theft, make them work for it. ive never owned a tv & never had a licence, never bothered to tell them though. why should i?

[stackmonkey]

I believe they have a legal obligation to provide the info to TV Licencing.

[Rach81]

When I left RAF Linton, they send me a huge amount of letters, in red ink!, for accomadation I'd never lived in, different barracks, I've got no idea how they got hold of these addresses, I had so many letters my boss rang them, they continued, so I had to get a law student mate to ring and threaten legal action, they stopped not long after.

[grumbledoak]

Having just renewed mine, I share your wish to tell them where to stick their fee. Paying £135 for our own version of TAS is galling. And the website didn't work. Prats.

But it'll be less hassle in the end to simply phone them.

[spidermanUK]

I got a similar letter last week, although it was addressed to someone I've never heard of, and was in relation to a TV bought from Tesco.

I rang their number and explained I'd never heard of the addressee,nor had I bought a TV from Tesco, I was told "just ignore it, it happens a lot that people give false addresses".

[TheLearner]

stackmonkey said:

I believe they have a legal obligation to provide the info to TV Licencing.

Kind of. Their is a legal obligation to provide the details of ever sale. However there is no legal requirement for it to be accurate or factual. Stores can and will send masses of "Customer Collected", "No Fixed Abode" and "Reverand Ben Dover" with any address you can make up attached.

Issues often arise when under trained sales spuds get in your face about needing it "for the computer". True they have the right to refuse a sale, but they have no legal grounds to demand addresses; especially for carry out.

[Barreti]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Perfect fesuvious, and exactly what these bleeding beaurocratic (sp?) idiots deserve.

I do have a licence, I just really, really, really object to the threatening tone of the letter and the fact I'm supposed to contact them so they can check something they already have access to or correct their own database so they can harrass me in the future.

But I don't just want to ignore it either, I think they deserve better than that.

[Johno]

Write them a letter inviting them to your property, which is very nice, for afternoon tea. Where upon they can check that the said TV is in use.

As he agrees that your property is very pelasant, and that the TV is in use, you can get Debs to present him with a copy of your license, and then he can go away and hassle someone else

[TheLearner]

Considering the average "inspector" is as technologically literate as my dear departed cat was, I do have to wonder if they came face to face with say... a MythTV network being fed by a DVB card... how the hell would they prove it was live TV and not a DVD/download playing?

Or indeed, a laptop with a USB stick tuner thing. You can buy them off ebay for £10... apparently.

[MonkeyHanger]

BBC Tax gathering site said:

One licence covers everyone living in the household as part of your family; only one name can be on the licence.

As long as there's a licence covering your house and taken out by a family member then, to be blunt, they can go and feck right off. Why should you spend time doing their Admin for them and paying well over the odds for the privelege?

Let them send an "Enforcement Officer" (aka Someone who wasn't intelligent enough to be a wheel-clamper) then you can take great delight in shoving your very expensive piece of paper in his face and telling him to go away in short jerking movements.

[Piglet]

I had a similar letter a while ago, licence in hubby's name which is different to mine. I sent them back a "stick it up your arse" letter telling them to try looking at their own system before asking me to dig our papers out to give them a licence number that they have issued.

Haven't heard anything else since

[Gafferjim]

Just tear it in two, then stick it back together (that's makes it so that a person has to check it, not a computer) and write across it in felt pen "check you data again!"
send it back to them, *postage paid on receipt* worked for me!

[BJG1]

stackmonkey said:

I believe they have a legal obligation to provide the info to TV Licencing.

There'd better not be, I'm at uni and don't have a TV, I've had several warning letters sent to me (as have those with licenses in my house) that I'm unlicensed, I've ignored them. One person here did phone to say she didn't have a TV (she doesn't) they said they didn't believe her and were going to check!

Utter arseholes, I have a TV tuner on my PC, which is untuned (never could get the bloody thing to work) bet the barstewards will try to fine me!

Apparently they come round to the uni and demand to come into your room and inspect, they have no legal right to do this.

[DWP]

TVR moneypit said:

1; Pay in cash. When the TV is sat on the counter and they ask you for your personal details, either point blank refuse, or give them someone elses.

2; Sorry, but I dont believe that there is any way out of paying.

I seem to recall a few years back, a bloke went to court over this, saying that he only ever watched Sky, ITV, C4, etc, and not the BBC, (which is what your TV licence pays for). This bloke won his case, and since then the small print on the TV licence changed, so that even if you never watch, or listen to any BBC products, then you still have to pay.

Sorry.


HTH.

I'm afraid no court case has resulted in such a victory and there has been no need to change any of the legislation small print. It has always been the case, you have receiver you pay. No one has won such a case. But that could all be about to fall into the melting pot. Online downloads, of television programmers to computers and transmissions to mobile phones do not, as yet, require TV license. it is very unlikely anyone will try and change that. Not least because the BBC deal with you tube would go up in smoke. As computer screen quality improves and full interactivity between your TV and home PC grows, the license will be in trouble.

[trooperiziz]

DWP said:

It has always been the case, you have receiver you pay.

That has never been the case.

If you use a receiver, you pay. There is a subtle but very important difference.

[caiss4]

As you've got a licence I'd just ring them and confirm it otherwise you'll contimue to get letters that get ever more threatening and, eventually, an enforcement officer will turn up.

I bought a property a couple of years ago. It needed quite a bit of renovation so was basically uninhabitable for 6 months but within days of owning the place I received letters stating that there was no record of a licence at the property. Naturally I ignored them. The letters continued on a mnothly basis with the wording getting stronger - 'an enforcement officer will come to your property and you will be interviewed under caution' etc etc.

This really got me going. The letters were incredibly intimidatory and whilst I was quite happy to ignore or rebut them I thought how some people would be seriously distressed by such correspondence.

Eventually I decided to call TV Licensing. I explained the property was not inhabited and there was no TV and until there was I would not be buying a licence so stop sending threatening letters. The lady explained the only way the leters would stop was if an enforcement officer visited the property to confirm that no TV existed. I invited her to send someone round at the weekend (I was never there during the week). She declined saying they only did inspections on week days! Catch-22

To be fair the letters did stop after that call but it did get me thinking how much of the licence fee is actually used pursuing what TVL believe are TV licence avoiders. I wouldn't mind betting it's a significant proportion.

[missdiane]

Not the first post of this nature on PH, no need to write a snotty letter, they are just doing their job, however it's hard to resist the temptation of writing a sarky letter confirming that your household is actually complying with th elaw
So they don't have access to the electoral roll then? This is obviously their way of the all seeing, it's all crap about the vans.