These are all from tvlicensing.biz, and are great fun to read.
Dear Mr. Bolton,
I write further to your recent email of 28th March 2007.
Before going any further, I would like to take this opportunity to correct a couple of errors in your letter. First of all, I have not written in response to, nor have I received, any letter from one of your colleagues. I wrote to you because I am well versed in the manner in which TV Licensing conduct themselves, especially in terms of your usual campaign of intimidation and threats, and wished to avoid such an exchange. I do not, as I suspect you are unfortunately about to discover, take such matters lying down.
Furthermore, I have not stated that I do not use television equipment, as you claim. I stated that I did not require a license - an important distinction. I have two devices which, were they installed, would be capable of receiving a television signal. The first device is a "plug in" DVB Digital Tuner, which is designed to be used with my laptop computer. As I do not have a TV License, this device is not used. The second device is a 28 inch colour television, situated in my living room. This television is used solely as a display device for a DVD player, on which I view a number of pre-recorded films I have bought over the years. Again, having no license, I do not use this equipment to receive television signals. Neither piece of equipment is connected to an aerial, for obvious reasons... I trust you are now totally clear about the setup in my home.
I note your comments about the letter you intend sending in the next few weeks to confirm if I still do not require a television license. I am at a loss to understand the purpose of this - if my situation changes I will happily inform you, and would certainly obtain the appropriate license rather than break the law. It's really quite simple - I don't wish to purchase a license, and I'm not breaking the law, so I really don't see that we have any further business. Quite why, when I have gone to the trouble of my own volition to inform you of the situation, you feel the need to check if the situation remains the same after only "a few weeks" is beyond me.
Given my having gone out of my way to help you out, I'm offended that you feel the need to despatch a "Visiting Officer" to my home to confirm I am telling you the truth! If you aren't prepared to take what I say at face value, what purpose is served by my having anything to do with you at all? Had I given you a reason to suspect me of some form of dishonesty then I would be able to understand your position, but this is not the case. As it would seem therefore that your default position is to mistrust everybody, you will doubtless not find my own suspicion of yourselves to be all that unreasonable. Any organisation that thinks it is going to make an entirely unfounded assumption that I am dishonest and then go on to enjoy my cooperation is severely mistaken...
Doubtless to your continued annoyance, in this particular country we have the presumption of innocence. This means that, where I am accused of wrongdoing, it is not for me to prove my case, but rather for my accuser to prove their own. I note that your press releases are jammed full of accounts of your wonderous, fantasitic technology with which you can pursue license evaders. Great – USE IT. I have no objection at all to being investigated so long as such an investigation doesn't not intrude upon my privacy – if you really must waste your time it is truly of little consequence to me.
The only methods by which your staff will gain entry to my home are if they arrive in possession of a search warrant from The Magistrate's Court, or if they compensate me for my time and inconvenience – my tariff being available upon request. In order to obtain a warrant, as I am sure you are aware, you would have to produce evidence. As I happen to be in the privileged position of not breaking the law, I would have reasonable grounds to suspect the grounds on which such a warrant had been sought, so I would ask you to bear in mind both that I would enthusiastically contest such an application, and that perjury is a very serious offence.
As for your "protection of my address from mailing", your procedures are irrelevant. I view your usual mailing campaign to be an attempt to intimidate people into buying a license that many do not require. Accordingly, should you proceed with such a campaign, I would look on your actions as harassment. Your organisation are merely a private company, with no more authority than any other, and every bit as accountable.
I am aware of your responsibility to investigate license evasion, but do not feel that your wish to ascertain the licensing requirements for every address in the land gives you carte-blanc authority to intrude on the privacy of innocent members of the public at will.
I trust my own position is now abundantly clear.
Yours sincerely,
____________
Ps. Please note this email has been sent from <email address>. I would be grateful if you would use this address in any future correspondence.
