The BBC extortion racket here has some question marks over it.
A former BBC Scotland lawyer is suing TV Licensing chiefs after claiming he was falsely accused of not paying for a licence.
Alistair Bonnington, 71, said he has been ‘hounded’ with the threat of prosecution after moving to his new house, despite having a licence.
TV Licensing threatened to take him to court and said it could apply for a search warrant for the property – while a fine of up to £1,000 could be levied ‘plus any legal costs’.
Mr Bonnington, who was head of legal at BBC Scotland for 16 years, is taking court action demanding compensation for his ordeal, which began more than a year ago.
The retired lawyer, who has four grandchildren, said: ‘They have hounded me and made threats but because of my legal background I wasn’t intimidated, although it was unpleasant.
Firstly, welcome to the real world. Secondly, you don’t need a licence if you don’t watch broadcast TV. So his having a licence thing is a bit moot. How do they have enough evidence to put before a court that he is watching broadcast TV without a licence?
Assuming for a moment that he does not have a licence and ruling out their incompetence – the only way they can get the necessary evidence is if he provides it by letting them in or confessing to a goon. If neither of these things happen, they haven’t enough evidence to get a warrant, let alone enough to convince a court. Hence, I read the article with some anticipation.
I really shouldn’t have got my hopes up.
As, upon reading the article, none of this has happened. All that has happened is that he has received the usual threatening letters that most people just chuck in the bin and ignore. Still, it would be nice if he takes them to court over it and wins.
Did he actually tell them his previous address for which I assume he had a licence? It does not say.
They have been falsely accusing non TV owners of watching the BBC’s online video output when they hadn’t. They claim that they can tell if you have been watching content online, which may or may not be true. I remember a TV licence resistance organisation being contacted by a number of people asking for advice over the issue. I don’t think that anything came of it because the licensing authority were definitely committing fraud and were probably unable to take anyone to court because if that.
Won’t the detector van be able to tell what’s on his TV based on the radiation emitted? I mean, LCD TVs still output a load of radiation don’t they?
The detector van is 100% bullshit, just a scare tactic. There has never been a conviction based on detector van evidence.
As LR says, don’t let them in and keep your mouth shut and they’re screwed.
I think Joe was being sarcastic.
No, dead serious (honest).
As Alex says, the detector vans are bullshit.
Whhoosh! Went straight over my head ?