Why we're here:
This blog is to highlight the unjust persecution of legitimate non-TV users at the hands of TV Licensing. These people do not require a licence and are entitled to live without the unnecessary stress and inconvenience caused by TV Licensing's correspondence and employees.

If you use equipment to receive live broadcast TV programmes, or to watch or download on-demand programmes via the BBC iPlayer, then the law requires you to have a licence and we encourage you to buy one.

If you've just arrived here from a search engine, then you might find our Quick Guide helpful.

Wednesday, 10 December 2014

Update: TV Licensing Abandons Care Worker Prosecution

In October we wrote about Radhika, a West Midlands care worker who had been summoned to court after what she considered an uneventful TV Licensing visit to her home.

You might recall that a TV Licensing goon had visited her property, engaged her in conversation in the kitchen and surreptitiously completed a TVL178 Record of Interview form with inaccurate information.

Radhika did not legally need a TV licence, as she never used equipment to receive TV programmes within the property.

On our advice Radhika responded to the summons and indicated a not guilty plea. She attended Coventry Magistrates' Court on Monday, 8th December to deliver that same not guilty plea to the bench in person.

Well what do you know? The TV Licensing Court Presenter scuttled across the greet Radhika outside the courtroom and told her that the charges against her were being withdrawn. No further explanation was given.

Speaking in an email, she told us: "Just the thought of going to court made me so stressed and took over 3 months of my life, just thinking about the same thing again and again when you haven't done anything wrong. 

"I think most of the people just find it easy to plea guilty because just of the thought of going to court."

Radhika is on the button with that observation. TV Licensing thrives on the fact that many people just roll over and accept their fate for an easy life. As her case demonstrates once again, anyone who isn't guilty shouldn't be afraid of taking the fight to TV Licensing.

In all likelihood it'll be TV Licensing that rolls over, rather than have its sordid little secrets exposed in court!

8 comments:

Hughie said...

That is excellent news,well done to you. It's just a pity that TVL can't be brought to account over these very dodgy prosecutions.

Chris said...

"Just the thought of going to court made me so stressed and took over 3 months of my life, just thinking about the same thing again and again when you haven't done anything wrong."

Good result, but Capita have wronged her and should answer for that wrong. I hope Radhika finds the strength to start a claim against Capita for the damages, loss and stress which they have caused her.

Anonymous said...

The stench that is Capita.

Fred Bear said...

TVL have a compensation scheme when they mess up. The amount given depends on the impact their blunder has on the person concerned. This case would seem to be either a "Very High Impact Complaint" which offers £75 or an "Extremely High Impact Complaint" which offers £145.

Anonymous said...

I concur with Chris.

She needs to go barbaric on their arses!

Anonymous said...

My case is a classic one because I live in Scotland, but received a letter from bailiffs demanding an unpaid TV licence fine of £500 in relation to use of a colour television at a Birmingham address which I never lived. The summons are signed and my name and date of birth used. I have appealed to the crown court, but still angry how a conviction can exist when I have never met a TV enforcement officer in my life and to add to insult case relate to a Birmingham address.

Bernard said...

"Unfortunately she paid very little attention to what was actually written on the form before signing it."
I'm sure this really is a very sad state of affairs?
1) Never let them in.
2) Never, ever, ever sign anything.

Fred Bear said...

This shows how the whole TV Licensing system is rotten and must either be abolished or radically changed.

What we have is a powerful organisation -the BBC- running a door-to-door prosecution service with cash on offer every time someone is dragged before the courts.

The BBC management have attempted to distance themselves by creating the trademark 'TV Licensing' but they cannot elude their responsibility.

It's a perfect example of the corrupting power of money.