TV Licensing - legal question

[enquirer]

I'm having some trouble with Jimmy Saville's friends at the moment.

I am legally licence free. I have no television at all, so there's no argument about what is, or is not a reciever, or whether it was in, or not in, use.

In anticipation of a Search Warrant being obtained fraudulently (purely in order to harrass and terrorise), I pose the following questions.

(1) What can be done to challenge a SW, prior to execution?

(2) What can be done to challenge a SW after execution? (I know that this has been done successfully in Scotland).

And now definately one for Bluebottle ...

The normal ploy to obtain a warrant is either 'detector evidence', or 'a flickering light was observed on the premises'.

If it is the latter (we will ignore the detector van scam), and the householder states categorically that this is impossible because there was no TV or anything that could possibly mimic one (thus precluding honest mistake), then ...

(3) If at the time of execution, the victim states the above (ie that the warrant was obtained fraudulently), what might the reaction of the accompanying officers be?

It seems to me that the TVL goons have committed Perjury and attempted to Pervert the Course of Justice.

(4) If the TVL goons exceed the terms of the warrant and the householder protests, what might the reaction of the accompanying officers be?

Thoughts?

[bluebottle]

Re: TV Licensing - legal question

In order to obtain a Search Warrant, an information has to be laid before a Magistrates Court. These normally have to be accompanied by a Statement of Witness which has a certificate attached to it that is signed by the person making the statement that they acknowledge that if they have stated anything in the statement that they know to be false or do not believe to be true, they may be liable to prosecution.

District and Deputy District Judges in Magistrates Courts aren't stupid and have heard most of the standard, stock statements, as highlighted in your post, before. If you know when and where they intend making the application, go along to the hearing and scare the **** out of them. They don't expect you to turn up and turning up does tend to change the colour of their underwear as it means their claims and statements are going put to the test before a court of law. TVL is operated by Capita PLC, on behalf of H.M. Government, and if you are aggrieved about Capita PLC obtaining and executing a search warrant when they have no grounds for doing so, my opinion is that if the search warrant has been obtained on perjured evidence, this could raise questions as to its validity. Certainly, it would be Perjury. It may also amount to other offences. Whether it would amount to trespass and give rise to a civil claim against Capita PLC is something a legal professional would have to advise on.

Search warrants tend to be very specifically worded. What a court is authorising someone to do is enter another person's home and search it against their will. The person is entitled to the protection of the law, regardless of the reason for granting the search warrant.

If you have reasonable cause to believe and/or evidence that Capita PLC have obtained or are attempting to a search warrant using perjured evidence, this should be challenged as soon as possible. This is best done through a legal professional. As for the goons exceeding the terms of a search warrant, if you can, video their visit. If they kick-off, the answer is that it is for their protection as well as your protection and if they object, they should leave immediately.

[enquirer]

Re: TV Licensing - legal question

District and Deputy District Judges in Magistrates Courts aren't stupid and have heard most of the standard, stock statements ...

Hm. I've always found lay magistrates to be a very mixed bag. Proper stipendiaries (as they were then), were a much tougher proposition.

If you know when and where they intend making the application, go along to the hearing and scare the **** out of them. They don't expect you to turn up and turning up does tend to change the colour of their underwear as it means their claims and statements are going put to the test before a court of law.

Good idea, thanks. I am certainly prepared to do this, the problem being of course that I need to know that the application is being made. I have been told that TVL does inform householders - not to inform as such, but with the intention of intimidating.

TVL is operated by Capita PLC, on behalf of H.M. Government ...

Ah. TVL is a trademark of the BBC. They licence out the brandname to their goons, who are at the moment, Capita. I gather that they are contractually required to always use 'TVL' and are on no account to mention the BBC. Thus, the BBC is able to distance itself from their 'activities'.

... and if you are aggrieved about Capita PLC obtaining and executing a search warrant when they have no grounds for doing so, my opinion is that if the search warrant has been obtained on perjured evidence, this could raise questions as to its validity. Certainly, it would be Perjury.

That's how I read it. Thanks.

It may also amount to other offences. Whether it would amount to trespass and give rise to a civil claim against Capita PLC is something a legal professional would have to advise on.

Thanks. Food for thought there.

If you have reasonable cause to believe and/or evidence that Capita PLC have obtained or are attempting to a search warrant using perjured evidence, this should be challenged as soon as possible. This is best done through a legal professional.

Agreed, I would be very interested to have cases in which this has been done. As previously mentioned, I certainly know of one, but this was in Scotland.

As for the goons exceeding the terms of a search warrant, if you can, video their visit. If they kick-off, the answer is that it is for their protection as well as your protection and if they object, they should leave immediately.

The video recorder is always to hand. Certainly their own guidelines state that where an ordinary doorstep visit is concerned, if a camera is produced, they are to leave at once.

[bluebottle]

Re: TV Licensing - legal question

I wonder why their own guidelines tell them to leave at once if a camera is produced? No prizes for guessing why.

Turning to the other points you have raised, stipendiaries are now called District Judges and, as you know, are legally-trained, either as solicitors or barristers with a minimum 7 years' practice experience. In my experience, DJs don't hand out warrants like confetti as some JPs do. They test the evidence, as I saw one do with, funnily enough, TVL, when I was in the police force, and asked the person making the application to describe the "flickering light". The person could not convince the stipendiary that the "flickering light" was a tv set and was told, "Come back when you've got some proper evidence." The look on the person's face as they hastily left the courtroom was a picture.