3 ms·

These were most definitely a scam. They have/had some sort of database of addresses (especially ones where a license had previously been at that address and the

These were most definitely a scam. They have/had some sort of database of addresses (especially ones where a license had previously been at that address and then had expired) and they just used to pressure people who are at an address that didn’t have a license by sending (very) threatening letters and insisting on coming around for an inspection saying they had detected a TV. Anecdote 1: My parents-in-law only got a television in the very last years of their life, but long before that they used to occasionally get the threatening letters etc and people coming round saying they had detected a TV. On one memorable occasion my father-in-law was so fed up he insisted on bringing the TV license inspector in the house and took him through an extremely exhaustive list of places where the TV could be, forcing him to check each one. “Perhaps it’s in the toilet cistern? We should check!” <gets TV guy to open the top of the toilet to check whether a TV is somehow hiding inside> “What about in the bread bin! You could probably get a small TV in there.” <forces TV inspector guy to look in the bread bin> etc Anecdote 2: At one point in my life I rented a flat and didn’t have a TV. I started getting the letters, including some printed on red paper, saying they were going to get bailiffs to come round because they had detected me watching TV using their sooper seekrit special detector van[1] and stating the fines and possible criminal consequences and their determination to prosecute me and bring me to justice. I wrote to them saying they had to put up or shut up - get a court order and come see whether I have a television - and I would welcome seeing them attempt in court to prove I had one. I’m a strong supporter of public service broadcasting and think the BBC is an amazing deal, but the tactics around TV license enforcement are and always have been really disgraceful. [1] Clearly impossible since I didn’t have a TV, this was before streaming to devices and in any case at that time my life in the flat comprised me coming home, exhausted, in the very early hours of the morning, going immediately to sleep, waking up a (very) few hours later and dragging my sorry ass back to work. I did nothing other than sleep and shower in that flat. It was a pretty dark period.

Daviey 3y ago
Twice in my life, I've encountered unnecessary hassle from TV Licensing (TVL). First, when I purchased my initial home, I didn't immediately get a TV. However, when I did, the retailer was obliged to inform TVL under The Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1967. The TV arrived, still boxed, and a TVL representative showed up implying he had the right to enter, which he did not. I had preemptively bought the license, but still faced this intrusion. His insinuations were met with a firm response, because it was clear they were trying to catch me off-guard. Later, during a phase where I chose not to watch or record live TV, I didn't renew my TV license after moving. This led to a barrage of letters and threats from TVL, all addressed to "Legal Occupier." I called them to halt these communications, finding them harassing. They agreed to stop only if I disclosed my name. Valuing my privacy, I declined, suggesting they use "Legal Occupier" as my identifier. This was met with reluctance but eventually processed. These experiences highlight the invasive procedures of TVL, especially for those who value privacy.
- gizajob 3y ago
  If it hasn't got your name on it, then it's not a contract and that's what they're trying to enforce. "The Legal Occupier" sounds like a pub to me, so I bin every letter wrongly addressed to my house with that name. TV licensing letters are also the only ones sent with windows on the envelope allowing you to read the threats inside, kind of defeating the point of an envelope. I'm not interested in TV but there's also zero chance I'm ever going to give money to a corporation who pays Gary Lineker thirty grand a week to talk about football for half an hour on a Saturday.
Kiuhrly1 3y ago
Indeed, I suspect this wikipedia page has been astroturfed, or at least is lacking prominent messaging that these are only for show nowadays (perhaps always were?)

Daviey 3y ago

Twice in my life, I've encountered unnecessary hassle from TV Licensing (TVL). First, when I purchased my initial home, I didn't immediately get a TV. However, when I did, the retailer was obliged to inform TVL under The Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1967. The TV arrived, still boxed, and a TVL representative showed up implying he had the right to enter, which he did not. I had preemptively bought the license, but still faced this intrusion. His insinuations were met with a firm response, because it was clear they were trying to catch me off-guard. Later, during a phase where I chose not to watch or record live TV, I didn't renew my TV license after moving. This led to a barrage of letters and threats from TVL, all addressed to "Legal Occupier." I called them to halt these communications, finding them harassing. They agreed to stop only if I disclosed my name. Valuing my privacy, I declined, suggesting they use "Legal Occupier" as my identifier. This was met with reluctance but eventually processed. These experiences highlight the invasive procedures of TVL, especially for those who value privacy.

gizajob 3y ago
If it hasn't got your name on it, then it's not a contract and that's what they're trying to enforce. "The Legal Occupier" sounds like a pub to me, so I bin every letter wrongly addressed to my house with that name. TV licensing letters are also the only ones sent with windows on the envelope allowing you to read the threats inside, kind of defeating the point of an envelope. I'm not interested in TV but there's also zero chance I'm ever going to give money to a corporation who pays Gary Lineker thirty grand a week to talk about football for half an hour on a Saturday.

Kiuhrly1 3y ago

Indeed, I suspect this wikipedia page has been astroturfed, or at least is lacking prominent messaging that these are only for show nowadays (perhaps always were?)