Friday 6 September 2013

Never, ever talk to Capita BBC TV Licensing 3

In the first “Never, ever talk to Capita BBC TV Licensing” the central theme was that people should never, ever talk to Capita BBC TV Licensing™ because whatever people said to Capita BBC TV Licensing™ door to door scum would be misrepresented in court and later misused as “evidence” of a “crime” when no such evidence actually exists. Being discussed here is a form document in which the deliberate misrepresentation in court by Capita BBC TV Licensing™ of what people interviewed under caution say in order to generate additional revenues for both themselves and the BBC. In this blogpost the means of recording in writing, the TVL178 Record of Interview form, actually a means of self-incrimination form, is examined. Since it is likely that more than 400,000 TVL178 Record of Interview self incrimination forms were completed resulting in 181,880 prosecutions and 155,135 convictions in 2012. Therefore, it is little wonder that much mention of the TVL178 has been made in our blogposts and by TV Licensing Blogspot, Watchkeeper and TV Licence Resistance but this is the first time we have devoted an entire blogpost to this blank document.
TVL178 Record of Interview self incrimination form is the primary means of “proving” the guilt of people prosecuted by Capita BBC TV Licensing™ for alleged tv licence evasion. A blank copy of a TVL178 was published in our previous blogpost, “Never, ever Talk to Capita BBC TV Licensing™ 2” and it is again reproduced here. When completed by Capita BBC TV Licensing™ door to door scum and signed by people TVL178s are sent off to be processed in the Capita TV Licensing™ prosecution sausage machine at India Mill, Darwen where it is summarised into a prosecution statement which is produced in court along with the original TVL178. The completion of TVL178 is actually a key performance indicator (KPI) based upon numerical quantity in the Service Provision Agreement (TV Licensing™ contract) between Capita Business Services and the BBC. Our blogpost “Making Crime Pay” raised this and the Profit Share aspects of the Service Provision Agreement. Capita Business Services are paid by the number of TVL178s completed.

People might be forgiven for believing that there is a fundamental requirement for whatever is written on TVL178 Record of Interview self incrimination form by Capita TV Licensing™ door hammering scum has to be factually accurate. After all, on the basis of whatever has been written on TVL178 by Capita BBC TV Licensing™ is likely to result in successful conviction with the resulting financial consequences of fine, costs and victim surcharge non-payment of which can result with a term of imprisonment. However, upon rereading the relevant interpretation of the Service Provision Agreement any requirement for factual accuracy on TVL178 does not seem to exist. Perhaps the most appropriate approach when reading this portion of the Service Provision Agreement is to adopt what can only really be described as a systemic “warped enforcement ideology” brought about by the” payment by results” culture spelt out in the Service Provision Agreement and the “warped enforcement ideology” which Watchkeeper in his reference to the 1754 MacDaniel Scandal and Stephen MacDaniel, in his blogpost.
From Schedule 1 Interpretations, page 58 it reads:
“Prosecution Statement” means a record of interview which would provide sufficient evidence against the interviewee such as to give a realistic prospect of conviction of that person or entity for a relevant Licence related offence under the WTA 1949 anywhere in the Territory.

Note in particular the terms “a record of interview which would provide sufficient evidence against the interviewee” and “such as to give a realistic prospect of conviction of that person or entity . . .”. Of the two terms, the second term is arguably the primary objective and the first term the means by which the primary objective is achieved. No mention seems to be made of factual accuracy even though the word “evidence” is used it is not defined in terms of factual accuracy relating to actual circumstances pertaining in interviewees’ dwellings, what the interviewee actually stated and subsequently signed to. However, a great deal of care seems to be taken with interviewees’ personal details so that Capita TV Licensing™ can stitch up the right interviewees for future conviction. A real world example of “warped enforcement ideology” if ever there was one. Having revealed that TVL178 exist to “provide sufficient evidence” where no such “evidence” could possibly exist of the “crime” whereof the interviewee is subsequently prosecuted and convicted, we at TV Licensing Watch are reminded of Watchkeeper’s sage observation:

"It's a fact! It seems to me it's the only "crime" where the "criminal" provides the evidence for conviction and the prosecution has no idea whether an offence was committed at all, but they'll take the defendant's word for it."

However, the clincher for us at TV Licensing Watch is what is revealed by “such as to give a realistic prospect of conviction “. The actual purpose of TVL178 is not to make a written record of “evidence” even though no such “evidence” could possibly exist. It seems to us (and not only us) that the actual purpose of TVL178 is to guarantee that interviewees are convicted by courts regardless of the non-existence of evidence that supports those convictions. Demonstrably, TVL178 Record of Interview self incrimination form is as Licence Free states “seriously flawed” as a means of recording and supplying evidence. In a word “rigged”. TVL178 is merely one of many outward symptoms that the whole rotten BBC TV Licensing™ “system” and its processes are rigged. Rigged by the BBC and Capita BBC TV Licensing™ to be in their favour on four levels at least. Firstly, rigged against interviewees who inevitably become the accused and the convicted on the basis of what Capita BBC TV Licensing™ have put on TVL178 Record of Interview regardless of factual accuracy. Secondly, by courts which do the convicting having received BBC created and sponsored TV Licensing™ Court Training sessions in which Capita BBC TV Licensing™’s collection of “evidence” is doubtless presented as unimpeachable. Thirdly, the completion of TVL178 on the basis of systemic financial reward by Capita BBC TV Licensing™ for financially rewarding both the BBC and Capita BBC TV Licensing™ leads to abuses of the system. Richard John Llewellyn and Oluwagbenga Oliniyan were both convicted for the completion and forging of interviewee signatures on blank TVL178 Record of Interview forms supplied to them by Capita BBC TV Licensing™. There have doubtless been other cases where other employees of Capita BBC TV Licensing™ have been summarily dismissed for gross misconduct in connection with misuse and abuses of TVL178 Record of Interview forms. The BBC and Capita BBC TV Licensing™ become silent when the issue is raised. Since a significant part of the financial reward culture at Capita BBC TV Licensing™ and the Profit Share scheme the BBC have created for themselves is based upon the completion of target numbers of TVL178 and the convictions arising from their completion, their collective silence is arguably in their financial vested interests. Fourthly, the burden to prove guilt is effectively removed from Capita BBC TV Licensing™ and their BBC tv licence revenue funded paymaster to the defendant having to prove their innocence a reversal and subversion of the so-called “Golden Thread” that is supposed to run through English law, innocent until proven guilty.

Having raised the issue of TVL178 Record of Interview self incrimination forms and the legitimacy problems in connection of the administration of justice arising from their completion by Capita TV Licensing™ what has it to do with the title of this blogpost. A giveaway clue is in the fact that TVL178 Record of Interview forms are blank and require handwritten completion. If interviewees exercise their right to remain silent throughout the entirety of a visit by Capita BBC TV Licensing™ then clearly none of the blank fields supplied for interviewees’ responses can be completed by Capita BBC TV Licensing™ if people never, ever talk to Capita BBC TV Licensing™. Then interviewees can be certain as they can be that if TVL178 Record of Interview self incrimination forms are completed without their knowledge then their fraudulent completion has absolutely nothing whatever to do with them and that consequently it should be none of those interviewees who will be appearing in the dock charged, convicted and sentenced for crime. Remember, TVL178 Record of Interview forms seem to have little to do with justice they are all about self incrimination of the interviewee by the interviewee to guarantee conviction and raise revenue for Capita BBC TV Licensing™ to profit share with the BBC. Consider exercising the right to remain silent as a precautionary measure; a crime prevention measure. No normal, well adjusted and well socialised person would want to become a crime statistic. If Capita BBC TV Licensing™ have actual proof that people are watching/recording live television programmes services unlicensed then let them bring prosecutions on that basis only they do not need TVL178 Record of Interview self incrimination forms. If they cannot do that then the BBC should become a subscription service.

The value of domestic cctv surveillance and handheld video camera can prove invaluable in gathering evidence of the serial abuses and misdemeanours perpetrated by employees of Capita Business Services under cover of the BBC TV Licensing™ contract. TV Licensing Watch advise anybody who has the misfortune to have face to face dealings with Capita Business Services TV Licensing™ to make an audio-visual record of those dealings in their entirety covertly or overtly with cctv and handheld video cameras.

For people who have not exercised their right to remain silent, TV Licensing Watch advise anybody who has had the misfortune to have face to face dealings with Capita Business Services TV Licensing™ and have received a summons as a consequence to contact a licensed law practitioner if: there is the slightest discrepancy between the actual situation regarding viewing habits and/or what actually happened during the interview compared with what has been written on the TVL178 Record of Interview self incrimination form.


No comments:

Post a Comment