The author, who has no legal need for a TV licence, had been on the receiving end of TV Licensing threats and intimidation for several years.
She moved home and was greeted by a pile of TV Licensing threatograms, which spurred her decision to withdraw the errant organisation's implied right of access to her new property (read our earlier post about WOIRA). Two days later, in direct contravention of her lawful WOIRA instructions, a TV Licensing employee trespassed onto the property regardless.
That's about where we left the story back in November 2011.
In the intervening year thedailynag's author has moved home again. This caused her to issue a fresh WOIRA instruction to TV Licensing, which again refused them access to her new property. As you've probably guessed by now TV Licensing, who like to pretend they respect WOIRA instructions, displayed contempt for her lawful wishes by trespassing yet again.
She takes up the story in a recent blog post: "Springing to the door with a pen and paper, I politely took the man's details and informed him that he is now trespassing, as he is not actually allowed to attend the property since I withdrew his implied right of access a few weeks ago.
"This obviously phases him less than the idea of losing his commission so he stands his ground nonetheless, ignoring my complaint and continuing to ask if he can enter my property or not. I again explain that legally, he's not even allowed to be standing where he is and politely inform him that on that note, he's most certainly not coming into my house.
"I then tell him that I will have to contact the police to discuss this matter and he stands up (now a bit more confrontational) and tells me not to worry about contacting the authorities as he will be doing so himself.
"Of course, I go on to say I don't actually require his help in doing so and he tells me that it's actually to obtain a search warrant to enter my property. "Knock yourself out" I reply, shutting the door."
The author was rightly incensed by this stage, that some minimum wage jumped up little Hitler was standing on her doorstep issuing legally baseless threats. She contacted TV Licensing several times by email and their response was lethargic to say the least.
Just then an email arrived, seemingly acknowledging that TV Licensing's actions had caused her inconvenience and offering £30 as a gesture of goodwill.
She wrote back explaining that their offer was unacceptable: "I would be prepared to discuss a more reasonable figure which takes into account the sustained harassment I feel I have received from your company, including 3 breaches of a right of access restriction, constant threatening letters, threats of court action, threats of covert surveillance and threats of a police search warrant."
TV Licensing wrote back and offered her £75 instead, which they emphasised was their final offer.
The author is currently discussing matters with her solicitor and deciding if it's worth pursuing TV Licensing through the courts on a point of principle. After all, TV Licensing's own letter and subsequent cash offer appears to acknowledge their shortcomings: "That said if we have made an error, and feel that inconvenience to someone could have been prevent, we would consider a monetary amount as a goodwill gesture."
We'll be glued to this one to see how it turns out. There are thousands of other people that have withdrawn TV Licensing's implied right of access and had their wishes ignored, so this case could set a very significant precedent.