Applying for a search warrant... what do they need?

[steve50]

How to get rid of the Tv licence
http://www.rodcollins.com/wordpress/how-to-get-rid-of-the-tv-licence
edit; I do understand you now require a licence to watch iplayer.

http://www.bbctvlicence.com/Tips for avoidng TVL-BBC harassment.htm
To prevent TVL/BBC approaching your property, write to them, stating that you have withdrawn their implied right of access. There is no need to indicate whether you have a television, and you do not need to give your name. You can withdraw access in the name of "legal occupier".

 

[glasgowcyclist]

What would be achieved by obtaining a search warrant and searching the premises?
Perhaps things have changed, but it used to be the case that the householder had to be caught in the act of watching the tv, ie actually using a device to receive a tv signal. Most people cave in to the threats or incriminate themselves with careless words.
I'll be pleased to be updated if things have changed.

If it's installed i.e. connected to an aerial and power and is capable of receiving live broadcasts then you need a licence for it. It doesn't need to be switched on.

GC

 

[Roadrider48]

Because they've never knocked on my door. All they do is send me threats.

Ok, fair enough.

 

[Roadrider48]

As mentioned, I used to jump through their hoops. I filled in the form and posted it back in the first instance. This made no difference. I logged into their website and ticked al the boxes. This made no difference either. I rang them up, ranted about them ignoring my previous correspondence, they apologised and said they'd hold off the letters for three years, after which point they'd assume I've moved, send a letter and I simply notify them again. I'm happy to tell them every three years that i don't have a telly... but it didn't work out like that. I guess around nine months later, the letters started again so i rang them up, asking what happened to the three year thing. It's my post code apparently, high risk so the letters start sooner.

This is when I decided to ignore them. No more hoop jumping. I'm not obliged to continuously inform an agency of items i don't posses. I don't get letters from the DVLA saying You don't have a driving licence, these are the penalties for driving illegally.


I have got a telly BUT... it's an old analogue one which i bought of Ebay after the analogue signal was turned off, and is used for my playstation (used to use a CRT video monitor, but that was really fuppin heavy). This telly can't receive a signal in the UK, but I'm worried they might see it as the evidence they're looking for, when it ain't.

The only time this 'telly' comes out of the closet is when i play video games (can't remember the last time). I watch DVDs and dodgy downloads on a pc monitor.

The other reason this is on my mind is the new 'any device' ruling such as smart phones, computers and tablets. I don't want them coming round going "you've got a smart phone/laptop, so you could easily watch iplayer." I don't know if i could prove that i don't... where would that leave me vs. a 'jobsworth' officer???

Oh, and the other reason is, many of my dodgy downloads are old BBC programmes... but that copyright infringement is well out of the jurisdiction of TV licensing, right?

edit...


definitely an 'ex' one? I may have said too much

That's fair enough.
As @Nibor says, they probably won't bother anyway.
Just don't open the door or anything.

 

[User6179]

It's a civil matter so the warrant is issued to the agents of the BBC, not the police. Police are asked to tag along in case there's a breach of the peace but really to create a bit more of a threatening effect on the occupier. The police have no involvement in the warrant although may try to convince otherwise.

GC

I thought it was a criminal matter or has it been changed ? If it is civil then I believe you have no obligation to let them in as you cant force entry on a civil matter !?

 

[MontyVeda]

I thought it was a criminal matter or has it been changed ? If it is civil then I believe you have no obligation to let them in as you cant force entry on a civil matter !?

the word 'criminal' is stated on their latest letter:

An Officer may interview you under caution in accordance with national criminal law.

I presume they mean a Police Officer... because a licensing officer won't be able to caution anyone, surely?

 

[MontyVeda]

...
Not only police officers can question under caution. Quite a wide range of people from investigatory and prosecutors agencies can do so.

does that include the goons (sorry @Nibor) who work for whatever agency TV licensing send out?

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Ach, it happened to me too, never had a tv for years, they would not believe me by any method of communication,
Finally they found me at home, of course I let them in to see for themselves.
No more letters, hurray!

 

[MontyVeda]

Ach, it happened to me too, never had a tv for years, they would not believe me by any method of communication,
Finally they found me at home, of course I let them in to see for themselves.
No more letters, hurray!

how long ago was that?

 

[Pat "5mph"]

how long ago was that?

January 2015

 

[MontyVeda]

January 2015

Don't hold your breath!

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Don't hold your breath!

What do you mean? They inspected, the letters have stopped since.

 

[Wobblers]

Ah, TV licensing....

You might think, @Nibor, that the nasty letters "work". Well, if they didn't threaten me, tell me that "I'M A CRIMINAL!!!1!", promise LARGE FINES AND PRISON!!!11!1!!! I'd actually have a TV license. Hell, I'd go nuts and even get myself the television to go with it. Because actually the BBC, though it's not the bastion of quality it once was, is still better than the competition. But no. If your business model is to threaten people, you're not getting my money. Instead, I just don't bother with the BBC. Let's face it, if you or I were to start firing out threatening letters with demands for payment or else, how long would it be before we'd be up before the beak explaining ourselves?

 

[Shaun]

I'd second giving www.bbctvlicence.com a read. Make a cuppa and see just how long it's been going on with no visit, no summons, nothing but more letters. What's interesting is the changes that are noted with each new letter and how the 'approach' has subtly changed over the years.

 

[EnPassant]

I don't like the fact that somehow they have the right to demand that you have to have a tv licence to watch any live broadcast, not just theirs. They may not have the technical wherewithal to discriminate, but they get to make that our problem not theirs. Pfft.

That and the dumbing down to the lowest possible lowest common denominator for the bulk of their content. Don't watch any of it now.