A question plaguing the nation for decades looks set to remain a secret, after a Tribunal ruled in favour of the BBC.
Journalist Gordon McIntosh, a fellow truth-seeker, has been embroiled in a 2-year battle with the Corporation, after it refused to release details about whether or not the Royal Palaces were covered by a valid TV licence.
The BBC, which is well-known for its evasive handling of information requests, told Gordon that the information was exempt from disclosure as it was personal to the Royal Family. Despite Gordon claiming the request was a "glaringly obvious public interest matter", the BBC refused to be moved.
For what it's worth, we're confident that the Queen does pay for her TV licence. She and the Duke of Edinburgh are entitled to £300 a week winter fuel allowance, so they can well afford it!
Of course, with Her Majesty now being 88 years-old, she could claim a "free" TV licence to cover her living accommodation.
7 comments:
thruth or a scare tactic.can the tv licence enforcers obtain a court warrant to search your property for a tv regardless of whether they have proof of you having a tv in your property.
TV Licensing can obtain a warrant to search premises, although these are extremely rare.
In theory, TV Licensing (or anyone else) can only obtain a search warrant if it convinces a Magistrate (or District Judge) that the grant of a warrant is necessary and proportionate:
- It is only necessary if TV Licensing has credible evidence that an offence is being (or has been) committed (e.g. TV programmes have been received without a valid TV licence).
- It is only proportionate if TV Licensing has been unable to gain voluntary access to the premises (e.g. the occupier has told them to go away, never come back or have issued a WOIRA instruction).
In theory the Magistrate or District Judge should scrutinise the application carefully and it should only be granted if meets the full criteria above.
In practice we know of cases where applications have been rubber-stamped and TV Licensing has been dishonest in the evidence presented.
If you legitimately don't need a TV licence, you shouldn't be overly concerned about the threat of a warrant.
Just a small point of grammar: it should be "She and the Duke of Edinburgh are entitled" - if you're ever unsure about this, always take the other person out of the equation to check (so, in this case: "Her is entitled" is obviously wrong; "She is entitled" is what you want - then just put him back in: "She and the Duke of Edinburgh are tntitled"). We don't want to give all those Capita and BBC people reading this blog any ammunition...
Thanks Maryon Jeane.
Now corrected.
That's the second time the grammar police have got us in the last two days!
No way, as long as u don't tell them then there's nothing they can do, believe me mate cos iv stayed at my home for nearly 13 years and have never paid for a TVL an I never will. Iv had numerous letters and visits but iv just shut the door. They still send the letters to " the legal occupier" cos they don't have a clue who I am lol, even if they did no my name they have 2 prove that u watch live tv. Chill mate����
Is it possible for sombody, who has been subjected to a TVL warrant executed on their premises, to obtain a copy of the evidence submitted to get the warrant?
Yes, Chris. That is perfectly possible. I think we've written about 4 or 5 such occasions in the past, the most recent of which you can read about here.
Post a Comment