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.

Sunday, 9 March 2014

TV Licensing Goon Reciprocal Filming Strategy

We find it absolutely fascinating every time a TV Licensing goon is captured on film in the greedy pursuit of their next commission payment.

Watching their doorstep encounters is a marvellous insight into the behavioural characteristics of one of the nation's most despicable creatures.

It is perfectly legal for the occupier of a property to film/record TV Licensing goons that visit. The BBC has acknowledged that fact on several occasions, but it appears that their enforcement contractor, Capita Business Services Ltd, strongly objects to people exercising their legitimate right to film.

Capita, the outsourcing equivalent of septic tank sludge, would understandably prefer the public not to see the dubious conduct of some goons, so make regular attempts to expunge TV Licensing critical content from YouTube.

Just as rats eventually develop immunity to warfarin, it would appear that TV Licensing goons are evolving to combat the increasingly prevalent threat of the being filmed. We have previously mentioned a new goon trick of reciting the occupier's address in the misguided belief it would prevent them from publicly sharing their video footage.

It would appear that TV Licensing has adopted a new anti-filming strategy, which involves the threat of filming the occupier back. We have now seen two instances of the threat of reciprocal filming, as we'll call it. Back in January lemming-like Northern Irish goon Paul Beale, allegedly not a man to drive your car next to, threatened to fetch his camera (and the police) when he saw that he was being filmed. Last week a second thus far unidentified TV Licensing goon, shown in the video above, threatened to reciprocate when he saw that he was being filmed by the occupier.

There is no doubt at all about how much TV Licensing goons despise being filmed. We would encourage anyone visited by TV Licensing to passively film the encounter in full. The occupier should keep the video recording safe, as it provides a full and accurate account of everything that is said on the doorstep. This will prove invaluable if there is any disagreement over the circumstances of the visit later on.


Anonymous said...

Problem here is, whereas the occupier is well within their legal/lawful rights to film anyone on THEIR property or out in public, the Goon DOES NOT have the legal/lawful right to film the occupier whilst on private property. So if Crapita Goon Services are instructing their paedo tax collecting Goons to do this, the they are in the shit, as it were.

If I'm wrong, please feel free to correct.

admin said...

Indeed you are absolutely correct. TV Licensing goons have no right whatsoever to film the occupier when visiting (or trespassing) on their property.

However, experience shows that TV Licensing play fast and loose with the rules. Their minimum wage goons think that possession of their magical Blue Peter style ID card allows them to do pretty much anything they like!

Anonymous said...

Just ref my last comment, what if any, are the legal remedies the LO can use against Goons who start filming the LO whilst on their private property?

Anonymous said...

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

68 Offence of aggravated trespass.

(1)A person commits the offence of aggravated trespass if he trespasses on land and, in relation to any lawful activity which persons are engaging in or are about to engage in on that or adjoining land , does there anything which is intended by him to have the effect—

(a)of [b]intimidating[/b] those persons or any of them so as to deter them or any of them from engaging in that activity,

(b)of obstructing that activity, or

(c)of disrupting that activity.

(3)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or both.

admin said...

If the goon starts filming then the occupier only has one real option - slam the door on them.

Our advice would be to slam the door on them as soon as their goon status is confirmed.

Yamini MacLean said...

Hari OM
I have recently repatriated from Australia - where telly is free, even the ABC. I had forgotten all this licencing nonsense. I am not a live tv viewer; prefer instead to DVD, You Tube etc. I shall be obtaining a television and dvd player to facilitate this.

This very day (my third week in residence in my new home!) I rec'd one of the threatograms written about so eloquently elsewhere here. Have spent quite some time dredging your articles as well as checking out in other spots also. I thank you for all the work and advice.

I intend not to respond to this first letter. I am now forewarned and therefore forearmed to deal with whatever transpires after the implied deadline of march 25th. To film any possible uninvited caller would be difficult for me. It occurs to me however, that using my 'walkman' voice recorder might be as effective - your thoughts on that??

admin said...

Thanks for your message Yamini.

Our advice would always be to film. Audio-only can be misconstrued, whereas video records exactly what happens. Video also serves to permanently identify and hopefully shame the goon, whereas audio can't do that.

Yamini MacLean said...

Hari OM
Thank you and food for thought... I can understand why most cave in!!!

Anonymous said...

The goon appears to be coughing up phlegm during the walk of shame. Wants to cut down on the Woodbines by the sound of it.

Anonymous said...

Capita are real scum. They are massive private company set up by ex-civil service; no doubt with inside contact into the government. They administer an increasing amount of the country without any democratic accountability. Gradually a lot of our state is becoming privately administered.

I thought the comments on
were particularly interesting. Using 'telling the council you've burned down your own house' was a particularly contrived, poor example. More like a company who you have no connection repeatedly requesting you confirm you don't use their services in a threatening manner. And the commenter had no more proof that people are lying than they do of telling the truth.