They would find me in the pub at delivery time, having a pint of real ale :-)
I love that line and if the wife goes before me, the television will be for DVD's and the vast number of videos that we have built up, only.
Dave
It might be fun to send them a letter pointing out that is illegal and they could get fined if caught... Mention you might be turning up to inspect their premiss etc.
concoctions of threats issuing from that firm.
My pride and joy must be a _pink_ bit of paper entitled 'Summary of communications sent to this address', telling me that I have been warned... , that I have been encouraged... , that I have been made aware... , that I have been advised... and that I have also received...
I was told months ago that if I didn't buy a licence immediately, legal action would be taken - I'm still awaiting a summons to the local magistrates' court. I'm looking forward to it, in fact :-)
Why don't they actually do what they occasionally threaten and bring round their powerful detection apparatus? Actually they've visited a couple of times, both when I've been out (I wonder if they wait around the corner until their culprit drives away...)
I don't see why I should have to write to them, paying for a postage stamp, or phoning them on an 0844 number, when I have no connection with them.
Actually they do have delegated legal powers, but it all has to be be done by specific legislation (exactly as it does in the case of a government body), but people tend to jump to attention if a government body's person knocks on the door...
It's a total waste of time complaining to my MP unless it's a matter of foreign 'rights'...
Warms the cockles of me heart to know there's still real people out there. Nice one!
I saved 12 months worth of letters from the TVLA and wrote on them using a big marker pen "UNWANTED JUNK MAIL RETURN TO SENDER" I then posted all 12 into a postbox. Every letter was sent back unopened and I wrote sarcasic comments against the "Notice of impending action", "Action Required Immediately" I also included in this postbox frenzy a reply form from a TVLA investigator that actually had the cheek to call at my house when I was at work. This was my first step to free contact with the TVLA bastards as they gave me a prepaid envelope. I drew a knob on it and told them to suck it.
I did receive a letter asking me not to return the unopened letters and I now have been removed from their mail list. As they (TVLA) do not know my name they claim that they can still send someone round. I did write back and ask them to "bring it on" but no one has called back.
The Legal Occupier AKA Adam
ARWadsworth coughed up some electrons that declared:
Most of those look vaguely familiar...
Nice move :)
Yes, they've sent me a few, also.
I virtually copied their letter and replied with -
ACTION REQUIRED IMMEDIATELY
IMPORTANT: Please respond to this letter by January 2009 to avoid your details being passed on to the BBC, any form(s) of Watchdog or anyone else I can think of who might be interested.
Your database lists these addresses as unlicensed. It is important you realise that both premises are currently vacant. It is also important you realise that I have already attended to the TV licensing for BOTH properties around 6 weeks ago. Perhaps you might check your records before 'banging-off' standard nasty letters?
We still own the properties and they are both empty.
I repeat
WE STILL OWN THE PROPERTIES AND THEY ARE BOTH EMPTY.
It is even more important that you realise that the tone of your communication is extremely rude, condescending and downright unacceptable. Please feel free to send your 'Enforcement Division' to the properties, maybe you might find us sitting in the dark, on orange boxes watching illegal TV.
The tone of your letters might cause one of two effects, either -
A fraudulent, non-paying viewer will be frightened for their life (don't make me laugh)
or
A fully-paid-up legitimate viewer (such as myself) will become EXTREMELY annoyed.
It would appear that your organization couldn't organise a ****-up in a brewery.
I should add, i've yet to receive a reply.
Hah. They did the same to me when I bought a TV for my mum.
the bloody shop sent *my* address to the TV people. As it happened, I was in rented accom. pending the reconstruction of the house, so it was highly amusing.
I figured the next tenant would get the men with detector vans.
i guess they dropped the bit on the old licences that if you watched on a portable tv running on internal batteries then no licence was required?
they now mention computers and mobile phones, so it's no longer a licence to watch something that actually recieves the signals i guess??
i my self never watch any bbc channels, utter s**te on them, i dont listen to any radio at all, but i have to have a licence to watch the proggies on sattelite i do watch (mostly the discovery type chanels) which i pay for in my sky subscription, and are paid for them selves by adverts and twatty sponserships of the proggies etc.
Just go to nominet.
The only downside is that they may still keep records active seen if the domain is delegated elsewhere.
Ah, but you MIGHT just watch a video clip online..
I have to say that they should just get a government grant and put the thing on general taxes.
The days when only a minority had a radio or a TV are long gone.
Do you mean that pay TV still has adverts?
-------------------8><
Because the effectiveness of said apparatus has more to do with it being seen than what it detects?
-------------------8><
I notice that these letters seem to suggest that you need a TV licence if you use a computer at home...
Oh for that to be a universal truth...
Vispa Internet are holding two of my domains to ransom. Nominet (rightly) want paying for them to intervene, so being the stubborn git I am, the domains are stuck until expiry.
I was terribly amuseed to receive a letter from the AA asking me to give them a call on an 0870 number becauase they really wanted me to renew my car insurance with them and they didn't have my number on file so couldn't call me. And they were asking for 50% more on my car insurance than last year even though I now have a year no-claims discount.
I'm intrigued by the fact that most of you guys still get sent threatening letters from TV licensing, even after complaining to them.
When we moved into this house in November 2007 (over a year ago), we decided to get right of our TV - there's no reception here so the only answer would be to use a dish (which in fact the previous occupants installed). We decided not to waste our lives watching TV and spend our time better occupied.
My saga therefore started with a request to a refund on our existing license (from the old address). My wife (as the license was in her name) sent a letter (written by me) to receive get the refund. Attached:
The Refund Centre P.O. Box 410 Bristol BS99 5HP
30 November 2007Dear Sir or Madam,
I have recently moved house and have already notified you of you change of address via the internet.
I am unable to receive TV broadcasts at this new address. I therefore require a refund of any payments I have made towards the TV licence for any period after 30 December 2007 (which is three months after the date my TV licence became valid, in accordance with your policy of refunding any unused three months portions of a TV licence).
I also require that you cancel my existing direct debit with which I have been paying my TV licence. If you continue to debit money from this direct debit I will seek an immediate refund from my bank under the direct debit guarantee.
I have enclosed my existing TV licence with this letter. It is licence number XYZ and expires on 30 Sep 2008.
I declare that I do not require a TV licence. I further declare that I will not require a TV licence before the date of expiry of my existing TV licence. Finally, I declare that the information contained within this letter is correct to the best of my knowledge.
Yours faithfully,
We then later a standard threatening letter, so I called up TV licensing and had a bit of a shout. The guy on the phone sounded quite nice and I felt a bit mean, but I was quite cross. I followed the telephone call up with this letter:
TV Licensing Bristol BS98 1TL
21 December 2007Dear Sir or Madam,
I spoke to one of your customer service agents today, named Keith. He was extremely helpful and polite. However, I wanted to confirm in writing what I discussed with him.
As my wife¡¦s letter to you of 20 November 2007 states, we do not require a TV license.
I ask that you do not send your agents to our property to check whether we need a license without a warrant, as entry will be refused.
I would also appreciate an acknowledgement to this letter, and a confirmation that you understand my wishes. After this acknowledgement, I ask that you send no more letters to this address ¡V I do not wish to continue to receive threatening letters from you.
Yours faithfully,
Much to my surprise I did receive a personalized response. I've typed it up here, so forgive typos:
9 January 2008Dear Mr Finlayson,
Thank you for your letter of 21 December, which has been passed to the Customer Relations Department for my attention.
I was sorry to learn that you are unhappy with our enquiry process.
When we're advised that a TV isn't used at an address, we will update our records to show this. We'll then visit to verify the situation there and provided no TV is in use we'll not make further contact for up to four years.
It is a regrettable fact that there are a surprisingly high number of people who advise us that they do not use television equipment, but are subsequently found to be doing so. May I assure you that we have no wish to cause offence or to question your integrity, but as I'm sure you will appreciate, we must act fairly and equitably in all cases and regret the effect this has on honest people like you.
I should explain that Under the Common Law, a person has an implied right of consent to enter upon a person's property as far as the front door and to make their presence known while going about their lawful business. We will continue our enquiries in accordance with this. Our officers have no special powers of entry, but if we are not able to verify the situation at an address we are not able to stop our enquiries.
I hope you will find this information helpful.
Yours sincerely,
XXX Customer Relations
I was minded to send a follow-up letter specifically revoking the implied right of consent to come onto my property for all agents of TV licensing. However, given that I have no further correspondance from TV licensing in the last year I have not (yet) done so. However, I do expect to start receiving correspondance again at some point in the future.
Piers
Why does OE want me to install Chinese characters to properly display your message?
Anyway, yes they are correct that in the absence of a sign at the boundary of the premises saying "no entry to anyone without an appointment or permission to enter" that an open gate is implied consent to enter. That person must of course leave when asked to although trespass is not a criminal offense unless damage is caused during it. Even stepping on a flower or blade of grass can be considered damage as far as the courts are concerned.
A letter revoking that right of entry should suffice but again as trespass is not a criminal offense it has little impact. All you can really do is call the police to make the person leave but you could do that anyway. You can't actually sue for anything.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.