Intimidating Letters from Television Licensing

[The Peepmaster]

Sounds fair enough to me. We all suffer in many minor ways for the actions of law-breakers. It's them you should be condemning, not people who are trying to do a tough job.

I agree, TT111. However, since notifying them that I no longer wish to avail myself of broadcast TV, I have been inundated with threatening letters. What do they constitute 'a reasonable period'? There is not a month goes by where I don't receive some sort of communication from them.  I was away in Canada for a month this summer, and on my return there were five letters waiting for me.

Yes, Vulture is right. It's not against the law to not have a TV, so you can't call people who don't have one, "law breakers". I watch TV and therefore have a TV licence, which is renewed automatically by direct debit.

If I got rid of the TV, and then got treated like a miscreant, even though I'd informed them of my decision, I'd be pretty annoyed, especially if it was persistent. Maybe the answer is that everyone should have a TV licence, regardless of whether they have a TV or not, because they have the ability to receive TV pictures should they choose.

[Fyodor]

I've been getting these letters on a regular basis for over 2 years now and I have a TV licence.
The problem arises from the way my address is shown - My licence shows my house number as 10d, but the threatening letters are addressed to 10 (1/2) which is the same flat.
In the early stages, I phoned, wrote and emailed to try to clear up the misunderstanding, all to no avail. They are a bunch of administrative tosspots.
My favourite bit is at the end of the letter when they say if you've recently bought a licence, to accept their apologies and ignore the letter.
I do. I will.

[Mince]

Real harassment is when you wake up in central Baghdad to find your neighbour's house is missing, along with half of your own.

I never have been happy with this argument. I agree that being harassed by Television Licensing is nothing compared to losing half your house. But redefining harassment as "not real" simply because someone elsewhere is suffering more harassment effectively renders everything as not harassment. For example, someone in Baghdad could turn to the guy who lost half his house and say "Real harassment is being made a Roman slave for your entire life, and then being crucified."

[Mince]

I've been getting these letters on a regular basis for over 2 years now and I have a TV licence.

Write to them to explain that the letters constitute harassment. That will stop them immediately.

[Mince]

Maybe the answer is that everyone should have a TV licence, regardless of whether they have a TV or not, because they have the ability to receive TV pictures should they choose.

The answer is to write a letter withdrawing from their employees and agents the usual implied access to your front door and to state that all visits and letters are harassment. That will stop everything for four years, after which you simply send the letter again. You do not need to explain whether you do or do not own a television, nor do you need to give them your name.

And it's not illegal to use a television for videos, dvds and games without a licence anyway. It's only illegal if you watch live broadcast television (whether the BBC or not). And the only way they can convict you of watching live television broadcasts without a licence is to get evidence against you; and since they cannot visit you, and you do not have to let them in anyway, and you have no intention of even communicating with them, gaining evidence is impossible. (They could use their mythic detector vans but no one has been convicted through evidence from such a van because - unlike speed cameras - the BBC refuse to give the courts details of how they work or how they are callibrated.)

[Mince]

The television licence costs ?135.50. You can rent 6 DVDs from Amazon for ?9.99. That means that the money used to pay for the licence could instead be used to rent 81 DVDs, all delivered to your door.

[Vulture]

Real harassment is when you wake up in central Baghdad to find your neighbour's house is missing, along with half of your own.

I never have been happy with this argument. I agree that being harassed by Television Licensing is nothing compared to losing half your house. But redefining harassment as "not real" simply because someone elsewhere is suffering more harassment effectively renders everything as not harassment. For example, someone in Baghdad could turn to the guy who lost half his house and say "Real harassment is being made a Roman slave for your entire life, and then being crucified."

I've been getting these letters on a regular basis for over 2 years now and I have a TV licence.

Write to them to explain that the letters constitute harassment. That will stop them immediately.

Maybe the answer is that everyone should have a TV licence, regardless of whether they have a TV or not, because they have the ability to receive TV pictures should they choose.

The answer is to write a letter withdrawing from their employees and agents the usual implied access to your front door and to state that all visits and letters are harassment. That will stop everything for four years, after which you simply send the letter again. You do not need to explain whether you do or do not own a television, nor do you need to give them your name.

And it's not illegal to use a television for videos, dvds and games without a licence anyway. It's only illegal if you watch live broadcast television (whether the BBC or not). And the only way they can convict you of watching live television broadcasts without a licence is to get evidence against you; and since they cannot visit you, and you do not have to let them in anyway, and you have no intention of even communicating with them, gaining evidence is impossible. (They could use their mythic detector vans but no one has been convicted through evidence from such a van because - unlike speed cameras - the BBC refuse to give the courts details of how they work or how they are callibrated.)

The television licence costs ?135.50. You can rent 6 DVDs from Amazon for ?9.99. That means that the money used to pay for the licence could instead be used to rent 81 DVDs, all delivered to your door.

Good grief, Mince. What's in that tea that you keep drinking? I've got a lot to do today: can I have some?

[Fyodor]

I always pay for my licence and will continue to do so as long as required. After all, it's my BBC, God bless her.

[Tarquin Thunderthighs lll]

I always pay for my licence and will continue to do so as long as required. After all, it's my BBC, God bless her.

That's the jolly spirit. Pip-pip! Carry on.

[The Peepmaster]

I like the BBC lots, and also pay my licence fee without hesitation. It's just that I think it's an archaic, serlish, tax.

[peter]

I like the BBC lots, and also pay my licence fee without hesitation. It's just that I think it's an archaic, serlish, tax.

Serlish please explain what it means.

[Roger Kettle]

It's not too late-ish.

[The Peepmaster]

Peter, you may over-antilise my posts, but you get the general drift.

[peter]

Tally O

[The Peepmaster]

Tally O

O?