The BBC relies very heavily on the public perception that a TV detector van is rumbling along every other street on the prowl for TV licence evaders.
We know that because that's what the BBC told the Information Commissioner's Office when it was defending - successfully as it goes - its decision to refuse the release of TV detection statistics requested under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
In its Decision Notice (FS50154106) dated 16th October 2008, the Information Commissioner's Office said: "The BBC state that to release information which relates to the number of detection devices and how often they are used will change the public’s perception of their effectiveness.
"If the deterrent effect is lost, the BBC believes that a significant number of people would decide not to pay their licence fee, knowing how the deployment and effectiveness of vans and other equipment will affect their chances of success in avoiding detection."
The BBC's position has not materially changed since then. It still refuses to provide any information about the number of TV detector vans or their deployment, on the grounds that doing so would be prejudicial to law enforcement - namely the BBC's ability to nab TV licence evaders.
Imagine then our delight when the BBC inadvertently let the cat out of the bag with its recent Freedom of Information blunder.
According to the TV Licensing Field Monthly Performance Pack for March 2015, there were only 116 detection requests across the whole UK in the 12 months to 31st March 2015. Of those, 115 were in England and one in Northern Ireland. There were no detection requests at all made in Scotland or Wales.
The Performance Pack does not state how many of those requests were successful but we know, from comments made by previous Office of Surveillance Commissioners' reports on the BBC, that not every request is granted. Indeed the OSC has previously complimented the BBC on the way it meticulously examines every detection request before authorisation is granted.
It therefore follows, we suggest, that a significant proportion of the 116 detection requests were refused, thus reinforcing our firm belief that TV detection is neither routine nor widespread as the BBC would have people believe.
Remember also that TV Licensing only uses plain white high-topped VW Transporter vans for detection purposes. The vans have a windowed sliding door on the nearside, which has a second smaller window above it. The offside of the vans has an identical large window, but no sliding door.
You can read a bit more about the myth of detection in our earlier post on the subject.
The TV Licensing Blog is grateful to the BBC for its help in researching this article.
If you've found this article useful please consider using our Amazon link for your shopping or downloading our free ebook.
4 comments:
Note also that there's only 2 or 3 senior BBC executives who are allowed to authorise a detection visit and there's a fair amount of paperwork involved which has to be filled in correctly because they are checked by the Surveillance Commissioners every other year. Also as goons work from home and there's only a handful of vans in existence then it's very unlikely that the vans are used where long travelling times are required from their depot. I can't imagine its worth the bother taking the vans to Northern Ireland or to the highlands of Scotland for example because the goons won't be able to home for tea.
So you mean to tell me that TV Licence only use their detection vans about 100 times a year? Never at all in Scotland? Hilarious! Can't believe they were that stupid to release the figures ~MT
"The TV Licensing Blog is grateful to the BBC for its help in researching this article" --PMSL!!! :P
TV licencing who work hand in hand with Capita, do not actually meet the standards of evidence required by law when making prosecutions, the standard required is that the prosecution must have evidence, I have searched and in every instance where a case that was convicted was overturned, there had been no checks of identity, nor of the person even living at the address visited, the BBC in a letter to me dated 23/02/2017 stated, they had no reason to doubt the integrity of the person being interviewed, yet undercover filming by Mail journalists records the recruiter employed by Capita stating, you cannot trust these people to tell the truth, they will try anything. Fact, Capita were prosecuted and fined for fraud prevention by the FCA. The Human rights Act, clause 6 states that we all have the right to a fair trial and justice, those attending the courts for TV licence evasion are treated as presumed guilty until proven innocent. We now have the written admission from the MOJ that the hearing to lift a conviction did not take place because the prosecutor removed the paper work, we fought for months to get another hearing, at which their prosecutor stated, are you not satisfied the Bailiffs have been cancelled by the statutory declaration removing that threat, and later stated it's not like a really serious criminal record that would show on a DBS check. I have evidence that the court transcript was altered to a version of events that Capita now intend to base their defence on. They are getting away with breaking the Human Rights Act thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of times a year, and as it is impossible to get legal advice, no one so far has been able to stop or challenge this. Look up the law about evidence, and the right to a fair trial,
Post a Comment