TV licensing
Nov. 23rd, 2004 08:57 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sobriqueI'm thinking of sending the following to the TV licensing authority. Following ongoing nastygrams from them. Does this look unreasonable?
Dear Ms. Smith.,
Thank you for your recent letter regarding a visit from your TV Licensing officer. I regret to inform you that I still do not have a TV licence, and have no intention of purchasing one in the near future. I accept the need for such a licence, and at the point at which I acquire a television, I will not hesitate to acquire an appropriate licence.
I fully support the current way the BBC is financed, and fully respect the services that they provide to the country. I do not appreciate the way the TVLA operates, especially frequently sending me threatening form letters.
I would be more than happy to see your agent, and indeed offer a guided tour of my house, however I am afraid that I will have to charge you for my time, at a rate of £175 per half day payable in advance.
I will also need for you to make an appointment two weeks in advance. Whilst I may be able to arrange something at shorter notice, I’m afraid that I cannot guarantee being able to do so, especially at this time of year.
Should you find that I do not have a need for a TV licence, I would also expect a written apology for the series of rather offensive letters that you have sent me so far. As I understand, there is no specific exemption to the malicious communications act 1988 for officers and agents of the TV licensing authority. Nor is there any obligation on me to inform you about the status of my television or television licence.
I recognise that you have a job to do, and so I make every effort to co-operate, however I would ask that offer the same courtesy.
Edit: And there's more interesting stuff here
Edit:New text in line with feedback.
Dear Ms. Smith.,
Thank you for your recent letter regarding a visit from your TV Licensing officer. I regret to inform you that I still do not have a TV licence, and have no intention of purchasing one in the near future. I accept the need for such a licence, and at the point at which I acquire a television, I will not hesitate to acquire an appropriate licence.
I fully support the current way the BBC is financed, and fully respect the services that they provide to the country. I do not appreciate the way the TVLA operates, especially frequently sending me threatening form letters.
I would be more than happy to see your agent, and indeed offer a guided tour of my house, however I am afraid that I will have to charge you for my time, at a rate of £175 per half day payable in advance.
I will also need for you to make an appointment two weeks in advance. Whilst I may be able to arrange something at shorter notice, I’m afraid that I cannot guarantee being able to do so, especially at this time of year.
Should you find that I do not have a need for a TV licence, I would also expect a written apology for the series of rather offensive letters that you have sent me so far. As I understand, there is no specific exemption to the malicious communications act 1988 for officers and agents of the TV licensing authority. Nor is there any obligation on me to inform you about the status of my television or television licence.
I recognise that you have a job to do, and so I make every effort to co-operate, however I would ask that offer the same courtesy.
Edit: And there's more interesting stuff here
Edit:New text in line with feedback.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 01:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 02:10 am (UTC)I would also require - whatever tense this is it doesn't sound right. It'd be better to say 'I expect'.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 03:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 03:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 05:06 am (UTC)...a written apology for the series of rather offensive letters that you have sent me might dissuade me from suing the carbuncular hide off your arse!
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 07:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 03:51 am (UTC)" 1.—(1) Any person who sends to another person—
(a) a letter or other article which conveys—
(i) a message which is indecent or grossly offensive;
(ii) a threat; or
(iii) information which is false and known or believed to be false by the sender; or
(b) any other article which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature,
is guilty of an offence if his purpose, or one of his purposes, in sending it is that it should, so far as falling within paragraph (a) or (b) above, cause distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person to whom he intends that it or its contents or nature should be communicated.
(2) A person is not guilty of an offence by virtue of subsection (1)(a)(ii) above if he shows—
(a) that the threat was used to reinforce a demand which he believed he had reasonable grounds for making; and
(b) that he believed that the use of the threat was a proper means of reinforcing the demand.
(3) In this section references to sending include references to delivering and to causing to be sent or delivered and "sender" shall be construed accordingly.
(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale."
Which, at first glance, suggests that nastygrams for not having a TV license, when I don't have a TV, would count.
I'll look to the phrasing on the 'also require' :)
Thanks.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 04:14 am (UTC)I've got dictionary.com telling me that they're equivalent, where one is a British spelling, but it's a US based dictionary..
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 05:16 am (UTC)Look at your the spelling of licence on your driving licence. That's the correct UK noun.
License as a noun is an Americanism.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 05:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 02:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 03:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 08:54 am (UTC)I suspect an ASBO would be good here, and very funny.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 03:35 am (UTC)we also had the nasty letters through the door from the tv liscencing people.. despite us buying a license:/...
draconian nazi swines..
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 03:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 05:54 am (UTC)The idea of invoicing them seems quite appealing too.... must work out how much half of my day is worth.
would you be willing to share the name to whom send such a letter?
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 06:17 am (UTC)The person signing this letter was Valerie Smith, although on investigation it seems that that's almost certainly 'on behalf of'.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 09:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 09:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 09:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 01:57 pm (UTC)In the house with Andrew, Huw, etc. We had a TV, but it wasn't attached to any arieal, just used for consols, DVD's, etc. TV guy came around, had a look at it, and declaired that it could be tuned in well enough to count without an aireal, so we'd still need a licence.
The "Tuned in well enough" was an immensley fuzzy picture without sound. I think the threshold is "Can make out a discernable picture".
Bastards. Go for it....
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 02:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 08:45 am (UTC)Bastards.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 12:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 01:17 pm (UTC)Sheesh, I won't make comment in future.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 01:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 07:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 09:42 am (UTC)However, my dad has brought up an interesting thought. Be careful as you may need to buy a licence for your radio (which would be covered by a TV licence). They might try to pull you in for this. I'm just checking if this is true.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 02:19 pm (UTC)interesting link
Date: 2004-11-23 09:49 am (UTC)another interesting link
Date: 2004-11-23 09:55 am (UTC)nothing on the radio thing, although the comments in the act about wireless telegraphy could refer to radio I guess. been ammended lots though...
Re: another interesting link
Date: 2004-11-23 02:22 pm (UTC)ACT NOW - Get your view heard/on the record!!
Date: 2006-04-23 07:03 pm (UTC)- to have your views considered at a national level and
- published on the official internet sites handling the consultation.
You can put your view/complaint on the record for consideration by the panels
conducting the review. There are two main streams into which you can provide
input
- Licence Fee Seminar - closing date for inputs 24 Apr 2006
send email to bbcseminar@culture.gsi.gov.uk
for more information refer to http://www.bbccharterreview.org.uk/seminars/seminars_licfee06.html
- White Paper - closing date for inputs 28 Apr 2006
send email to bbcseminar@culture.gsi.gov.uk
for more information refer to http://www.bbccharterreview.org.uk/have_your_say/white_paper/wp_home.html
===
People who do not want a TV are a very small minority of the population.
The internet has made it possible for each of these individuals to see that they are not alone in feeling intimidated by the methods of the TVLA (CAPITA acting for the BBC).
It applies in common to all people who do not want a TV.
I consider that methods used by TVLA (CAPITA acting for the BBC) represent a systematic abuse of the Human Rights of that minority group.