Tv Licence Inspector On The Iom

[woolley]

you in this clip woolley??

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiYRg8t1uMg&feature=youtu.be

 

Hello there. Another one who watches but doesn't pay I presume. Quite a dodgers' convention we have here. 3 quid a week. Dear, oh dear.

[The Border Terrier]

you in this clip woolley??

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiYRg8t1uMg&feature=youtu.be

 

The bloke @ 4:40, his Jack Russell's got more brain than he has.

 

I've just got a letter back from Crapita after last weeks visit when I (again) refused implied rights of access. It goes along the lines of:

 

Thank you for you recent contact with our visiting officer which has been recorded under complaint # 565xx1.

 

I'm sorry that you're unhappy with our visiting policy.

 

We've noted our records with your wish to withdraw the common right for tv licencing's officers to approach your property. We reserve the right to use other methods available for detection of television receiving equipment.

 

TV Licencing don't permanently stop writing to any address as circumstances change over time, and the occupier may change. We'll get in touch after a time to confirm if you still live at the address and that your circumstances haven't changed.

 

Thank you for taking the time to bring this to my attention.

 

So there you have it, now they're going to cruise up and down the street in a van with a bent coat hanger protruding from the roof in a vain attempt to get me to shell out £145.50.

 

And all this 'interrogation' costs money that is recouped from the genuine licence payers like woolley.

 

Just makes it all the more enjoyable...

[kevster]

 

you in this clip woolley??

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiYRg8t1uMg&feature=youtu.be

 

The bloke @ 4:40, his Jack Russell's got more brain than he has.

 

I've just got a letter back from Crapita after last weeks visit when I (again) refused implied rights of access. It goes along the lines of:

 

Thank you for you recent contact with our visiting officer which has been recorded under complaint # 565xx1.

 

I'm sorry that you're unhappy with our visiting policy.

 

We've noted our records with your wish to withdraw the common right for tv licencing's officers to approach your property. We reserve the right to use other methods available for detection of television receiving equipment.

 

TV Licencing don't permanently stop writing to any address as circumstances change over time, and the occupier may change. We'll get in touch after a time to confirm if you still live at the address and that your circumstances haven't changed.

 

Thank you for taking the time to bring this to my attention.

 

So there you have it, now they're going to cruise up and down the street in a van with a bent coat hanger protruding from the roof in a vain attempt to get me to shell out £145.50.

 

And all this 'interrogation' costs money that is recouped from the genuine licence payers like woolley.

 

Just makes it all the more enjoyable...

What is your problem?

If you have equipment capable of receiving 'as broadcast' programmes - pay up.

If not, show them that you don't

[woolley]

 

 

 

Just makes it all the more enjoyable...

What is your problem?

If you have equipment capable of receiving 'as broadcast' programmes - pay up.

If not, show them that you don't

 

Exactly. What a load of intrigue over nothing. Dodgers must have a really boring life if they get off on freeloading TV broadcasts and going through all of the angst to save the price of a pint a week. I have better things to do and although I don't watch a great deal of TV, I am happy to pay the fee so that I have the facility when I want it without the sneaking around and subterfuge and waiting for the knock at the door. I don't believe for a moment the majority of them only watch downloads. They are hung up on "getting one over" in their small minded way and they watch live broadcasts whilst hiding behind a nonsensical loophole that will ultimately be closed. Sooner the better I say.

[The Border Terrier]

 

The bloke @ 4:40, his Jack Russell's got more brain than he has.

 

I've just got a letter back from Crapita after last weeks visit when I (again) refused implied rights of access. It goes along the lines of:

 

Thank you for you recent contact with our visiting officer which has been recorded under complaint # 565xx1.

 

I'm sorry that you're unhappy with our visiting policy.

 

We've noted our records with your wish to withdraw the common right for tv licencing's officers to approach your property. We reserve the right to use other methods available for detection of television receiving equipment.

 

TV Licencing don't permanently stop writing to any address as circumstances change over time, and the occupier may change. We'll get in touch after a time to confirm if you still live at the address and that your circumstances haven't changed.

 

Thank you for taking the time to bring this to my attention.

 

So there you have it, now they're going to cruise up and down the street in a van with a bent coat hanger protruding from the roof in a vain attempt to get me to shell out £145.50.

 

And all this 'interrogation' costs money that is recouped from the genuine licence payers like woolley.

 

Just makes it all the more enjoyable...

What is your problem?

If you have equipment capable of receiving 'as broadcast' programmes - pay up.

If not, show them that you don't

 

>What is your problem?

 

Have you missed the last 16 pages?

 

>If you have equipment capable of receiving 'as broadcast' programmes - pay up.

 

If you have equipment that can receive an 'as broadcast' programme you do NOT need a licence; this is a BBC/Crapita directive. It's only you, Blade and woolley that think if you watch tv you should buy a licence. I know it's irksome what with you chaps shelling out £145.50 annually, but it's the law.

 

And harassing those that aren't breaking the law isn't doing your cause any favours. Besides, harassment is futile, I've had over 100 letters and there are only about 1/2 dozen variations. Once it ascends to the most threatening (you can bring this letter to Court with you as evidence...blah, blah, blah) they revert to the original (if you've recently changed address...) and start all over again. Comical to me, but an altogether more serious matter for a pensioner who only listens to the radio.

 

If you don't drive a car, truck, bus, fork lift truck, fly a helicopter, sit next to a river fishing...then you don't need to buy the relevant licence.

 

Imagine if the above respective licensing authorities all behaved in the same manner as the BBC...you'd wear the carpet out traipsing to answer the front door and there'd be insufficient time to listen to The Archers on iPlayer!

[woolley]

We're going around in circles so this is my last go at this. Of course, if you don't watch television at all, and I mean AT ALL, then you should not and do not have to pay the licence fee, and, as far as it goes, I agree that you shouldn't be harrassed for it either. I have had some of this because I get the letter coming to my company address where nobody watches television and we simply ignore it. If they arrived at the door we could simply show them that we don't have the equipment here. It isn't the big deal you make out.

 

On the other hand, if you watch television whether live or later, and in spite of the current rules, then logic says that you should pay your share. I look forward to the day when this anomaly is corrected. By the way it isn't irksome to me at all but it clearly is to you freeloaders. If you are so sure of your ground, why don't you just invite them in and show them? I suspect it is because the majority of you are liars and cheats and are watching live broadcasts behind your twitching curtains. Whatever turns you on.

[The Border Terrier]

Whatever turns you on.

 

>We're going around in circles so this is my last go at this.

 

Yeh, right...just like the BBC/Crapita say they won't call again. They said that in 1988 and over 100 letters and 1/2 dozen visits later their quest continues.

 

>and, as far as it goes, I agree that you shouldn't be harrassed for it either.

 

Get this, if you buy a B&W licence - approx. 28k viewers still do - they still send Crapita around to dish out the same hassle that a non-licence payer receives. What a way to treat your customers.

 

>If you are so sure of your ground, why don't you just invite them in and show them?

 

And show them what exactly? The space where the tv set would be if I had one. And if I did let them in and they found said vacant space, would they stop sending letters/not call again? Or would the whole charade continue again in a year or twos time?

 

Have you any problems with DAFF calling to ask to check whether you have a fishing rod, their database confirms that you don't have a fishing licence, so perhaps they enter your premises at their convenience to confirm that you don't own a rod.

 

Crapita - "Ello, ello , ello what have we got 'ere then... a fishing rod"

 

woolley - "Yeh, but i don't use it"

 

Crapita - "oh, that won't do sir, that won't do at all, do you realise all the other fishermen pay more as a result of you not licensing this 'ere rod"

 

Or how about the CAA calling after hours to check your garage for an errant helicopter?

 

>I suspect it is because the majority of you are liars and cheats and are watching live broadcasts behind your twitching curtains.

 

Suspect away, now all you have to do is prove it. Don't tell me, now you're going to prowl the streets in 'coathanger' van or maybe employ your patented 'hand held digital detecting device'.

 

Get wrighty on alert pronto, I think my sides are gonna split.

 

TBT

[ballaughbiker]

They are hung up on "getting one over" in their small minded way

There is certainly bound to be a portion of these. My son's next door neighbour is one of them. He is a teacher and also sells 'fine art' at around £3k a pop but seems to have a life mission to get one over on everyone he can for his financial benefit.

 

Not only does he brag about not needing a tv licence as he allegedly watches all programs on iplayer he also openly brags about having one over on his landlord as he is a protected tenant paying about £350 pcm for a very nice furnished flat in a beautiful Georgian building in one of the most expensive villages in a UK National Park. He sees it as being very clever but I think he has too much time on his hands.

 

'Getting one over' seems to have become a way of life for him and he loves it. Mind you it probably explains why he's still single in his mid 50s.

[Lonan3]

The amazing thing is that they all, like TBT, think they're really clever and fail to realise that they're really just total wankers.

[The Border Terrier]

The amazing thing is that they all, like TBT, think they're really clever and fail to realise that they're really just total wankers.

 

Wrong room matey, idiots are along the corridor.

[Lonan3]

 

The amazing thing is that they all, like TBT, think they're really clever and fail to realise that they're really just total wankers.

 

Wrong room matey, idiots are along the corridor.

Stay there - I'm not coming to join you.

[BeachBoy]

We're going around in circles so this is my last go at this. Of course, if you don't watch television at all, and I mean AT ALL, then you should not and do not have to pay the licence fee, and, as far as it goes, I agree that you shouldn't be harrassed for it either. I have had some of this because I get the letter coming to my company address where nobody watches television and we simply ignore it. If they arrived at the door we could simply show them that we don't have the equipment here. It isn't the big deal you make out.

 

On the other hand, if you watch television whether live or later, and in spite of the current rules, then logic says that you should pay your share. I look forward to the day when this anomaly is corrected. By the way it isn't irksome to me at all but it clearly is to you freeloaders. If you are so sure of your ground, why don't you just invite them in and show them? I suspect it is because the majority of you are liars and cheats and are watching live broadcasts behind your twitching curtains. Whatever turns you on.

Why should someone who does not watch TV at all, not have to pay for the upkeep of the “GREAT BBC”.

But someone who would quite happily not watch the BBC, but say pay for sky and watch just sky channels, have to.

 

And yes I pay my licence fee but would willingly give up the BBC, "and I mean completely” and not pay the licence fee.

 

If it is, as one or two seem to feel, a great British institution to news etc, then all should pay not just viewers.

 

And finally

 

Why not start a Manx shopping tax and pay it all to Shoprite, then all those people that only shop at Tesco’s, Spar, M&S or any of the other many private grocery establishments will still be able to fund Shoprite.

[Lonan3]

So you only watch Murdoch's stuff? You mean, you never watch any of the shows and dramas that were originally made for and shown on the BBC - with licence payer's money?

To be honest, other than the rolling news programmes, they're the kind of repeats that keep Sky going.

[Merkin]

Do you still need a licence if there is a television in an unoccupied property which isn't connected up?

[BeachBoy]

So you only watch Murdoch's stuff? You mean, you never watch any of the shows and dramas that were originally made for and shown on the BBC - with licence payer's money?

To be honest, other than the rolling news programmes, they're the kind of repeats that keep Sky going.

Where are these BBC repeats to be played, on a BBC Channel, that I have said I would be happy to avoid, or a pay per view channel who will have already paid the BBC.