Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Bullying TV licence inspector

306 replies

LapdanceShoeshine · 30/12/2017 19:07

DD2 moved into a new address with her BF on 1st December. They had no live TV until shortly before Christmas & didn’t even think about getting a licence (it’s an old TV from when her BF lived alone elsewhere)

Today a woman knocked on the door just as DD2 was about to go out & asked “are you Mrs X?” (previous resident). DD2 said no. Woman asked if they have a TV, more or less pushed her way in to see (small terraced house, front door opens straight into living room), started demanding information like DD2’s NI number, & wanted DD2 to hand over her bank details immediately. (Despite the haranguing DD2 managed to resist this & instead signed up for TV licence on her phone in front of the woman.)

Surely this isn’t how they’re supposed to behave? Having come to see a specific person, who moved out in October, she should just have requested to see some ID & then left with a warning to get a new TV licence asap?

Any advice? I’ve suggested she make a formal complaint. The woman even read her a caution!

OP posts:
LloydSpinjago · 31/12/2017 10:14

AN ACT IS NOT A LAW, however, and therefore can only be acted upon if a citizen agrees to be subjected to its original intention. There is no law, which is why they rely on threatening letters to collect their money

Yessssssssss! Freeman on the land bullshit.

What about the offences against the person's act?
What about the sexual offences act?

People can opt out of this can they?

DeepanKrispanEven · 31/12/2017 10:15

AN ACT IS NOT A LAW

Would you care to explain that one, Vitalogy? What do you say laws are?

paniconthestreetsofdreams · 31/12/2017 10:16

Is the licence fee really so terrible?

Yes.

It's fantastic value for money no doubt. It should not, however, be imposed without real choice.

Not having a connected television and being unable to watch live tv is not really a choice.

Make it a subscription.

paniconthestreetsofdreams · 31/12/2017 10:20

They will only do something different when a channel like the BBC has demonstrated that actually there is a substantial audience for it. And the reality is that they will fill up the space with an awful lot of cheap dross: witness the staggering amount of reality shows, game shows, repeats etc on free TV and the fact that you can regularly trawl through 50 channels without finding anything remotely watchable.

BBC are as capable as anyone of producing cheap dross.

In lots of ways Channel 4 are much more pioneering, inventive and mindful of the broad social and cultural spectrum in the uk.

LloydSpinjago · 31/12/2017 10:22

There is no law, which is why they rely on threatening letters to collect their money

Yeah I mean all those court listings must just be propaganda right?

I'm really looking forward to the explanation on this one Smile

MaisyPops · 31/12/2017 10:27

LloydSpinjago
A few more we can opt out of.
What about the Equality Act?
Or the Disability Discrimination Act?

I might start going around racially discriminating, make it impossible for disabled people to get places and advertise some jobs saying 'no women betwren 20 and 30 as you're too likely to get knocked up'.

After all, they are just acts not law.
Grin

Smeaton · 31/12/2017 10:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

DeepanKrispanEven · 31/12/2017 10:32

All court cases in criminal courts involve allegations of breaking the law.

Vitalogy · 31/12/2017 10:33

The word "free" provoking so much anger, makes you wonder why.

Yeah I mean all those court listings must just be propaganda right? Unfortunately these are people that have engaged with Crapita

DeepanKrispanEven · 31/12/2017 10:33

And, of course, the question is what it is that civil courts are enforcing if not legal principles set out in Acts of Parliament and statutory instruments.

LloydSpinjago · 31/12/2017 10:34

Not all court cases revolve around the breaking if a law. Majority are civil cases brought by private companies and individuals and involve non payment of money or other civil matters

Not in a criminal court they won't be, which is where non payment of tv licencing is heard.

Regardless to be heard in court, civil cases brought by private companies will still involve laws being broken (civil or otherwise)

DeepanKrispanEven · 31/12/2017 10:35

It's fantastic value for money no doubt. It should not, however, be imposed without real choice.

But there's a massive amount we pay for without a real choice - it's what taxes are for. At least we have a choice whether to have a TV or not.

LloydSpinjago · 31/12/2017 10:36

Vitalogy

How are acts optional?

DeepanKrispanEven · 31/12/2017 10:38

Certainly the BBC produce cheap dross. But they also produce and commission a lot of very good TV and radio that would never see the light of day on commercial channels. Citing Channel 4 doesn't really help the argument, because it's publicly owned and has a public service broadcasting statutory remit.

paniconthestreetsofdreams · 31/12/2017 10:38

But there's a massive amount we pay for without a real choice - it's what taxes are for. At least we have a choice whether to have TV or not.

Please read my post where I explained why I didn't think that was an appropriate choice.

The licence fee is not tax.

DeepanKrispanEven · 31/12/2017 10:39

Vitalogy, I haven't seen any posts on here evincing anger at the word "free"? What are you referring to?

DeepanKrispanEven · 31/12/2017 10:40

The licence fee is not tax.

That's exactly my point.

Vitalogy · 31/12/2017 10:40

But there's a massive amount we pay for without a real choice Yes, and this needs to change.

paniconthestreetsofdreams · 31/12/2017 10:41

Citing Channel 4 doesn't really help the argument, because it's publicly owned and has a public service broadcasting statutory remit.

Are you kidding? That's exactly why I cited it. As a model of public service broadcasting done appropriately. Did you read my post?
Hmm

paniconthestreetsofdreams · 31/12/2017 10:43

Certainly the BBC produce cheap dross. But they also produce and commission a lot of very good TV and radio that would never see the light of day on commercial channels.

Pure conjecture. Like what?

Smeaton · 31/12/2017 10:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

runningoutofjuice · 31/12/2017 10:44

Are you Mrs X? No
Do you have a TV? Yes
Do you have a licence? No

Why would the person need to push their way in?

Vitalogy · 31/12/2017 10:44

DeepanKrispanEven "Yessssssssss! Freeman on the land bullshit."
I know not from you.

Notlabeled · 31/12/2017 10:50

People still watch live TV??????
Why even speak to these Capita scum. I don't even waste the breath to swear at them I just shut the door in their face.

Detector vans are, and always have been a total scam. BBC only have about 4 or 5 in the entire country, all liveried but empty.
BBC is only able to get a warrant if they can provide evidence of an offence. The have no legal powers to collect such evidence. Almost all court cases are bought as a result of people incriminating themselves.

People only pay this regressive tax through fear and lies. About time people wised up and told BBC to piss off.

StolenPumpkins · 31/12/2017 10:51

I have televisions (hooked up to DVD players and consoles) no live tv, I just shut the door on the tv inspectors cba with the bullshit that they come out with and the aggression of some of them.
I know I'm abiding by the law and I don't let any sales people in to mooch about my house, so not going to let the tv license salesmen do that either.

Swipe left for the next trending thread