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 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.