Allow TV Licensing Watch to introduce you to Mr Adam Russell. Mr Russell is employed by Capita Business Services in a sales capacity under the BBC TV Licensing™ contract to visit unlicensed addresses door to door. He may have responded to the (non-) job advertisement posted in “Gizza job” blogpost below.
Mr Russell and those employed by Capita Business Services under the BBC TV Licensing™ contract will no doubt have signed a contract of employment in connection with their employment. Doubtless that contract of employment will, like all other contracts of employment, have terms, conditions and clauses related to complying with the policies, procedures and protocols not only of Capita Business Services but those of the BBC as well in their overall supervision under the terms of the BBC TV Licensing™ contract.
A product of the BBC TV Licensing™ contract is the TV Licensing™ Visiting Procedures manual which people like Mr Russell will have signed up to in their contract of employment with Capita Business Services under the BBC TV Licensing™ contract.
You are invited to take another look at the posted images of Mr Russell. Please remember what you have seen. Then read what TV Licensing™ Visiting Procedures has to say about “Unacceptable Clothing”.
“4.5 Unacceptable Clothing
The following items of clothing are not acceptable and must not be worn.
• Training Shoes or Flip-Flops
• Denim clothing, Jeans / Jackets / Skirts / Dresses
• Garments with large or obtrusive advertising logos, slogans, cartoons, or “Loud patterns”.
• Baseball Caps.
• Sportswear / tracksuits / shellsuits or Crop Tops.
• Facial jewellery (except ear-rings).
• Novelty clothing.
Common sense should prevail for items not listed.”
Then decide for yourself whether Mr Russell has complied with his obligations under his contract of employment with Capita Business Services and those of TV Licensing™ Visiting Procedures.
The point is, that if Mr Russell and other employees of Capita Business Services are prepared to ignore and flout such basic rules about suitable apparel, it naturally raises legitimate questions about what else in TV Licensing™ Visiting Procedures they are prepared to ignore and flout to qualify for their “uncapped commission” payments. Who would suffer; how they would suffer; and what recourse victims would have in law to remedy such infractions of TV Licensing™ Procedures after unjust prosecution by TV Licensing™ in magistrates courts.
Questions also have to be raised about BBC failures of monitoring and supervision of Capita Business Services “operation” of the BBC TV Licensing™ contract. It should not be down to YouTube users, websites and blogs to do the monitoring that the BBC is supposed to do.
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.
"It should not be down to YouTube users, websites and blogs to do the monitoring that the BBC is supposed to do".
ReplyDeleteA very perceptive comment. The BBC wants to distance itself from the day-to-day TV licensing enforcement system it has dreamt up (read "shirk its responsibilities") as far as possible. "Nuffink to do wiv me, Guv, it's all dahn to that Capita mob".
It was a video of a particularly scruffy oik which made me wonder whether he was a Capita salesman at all, so flagrantly did he flout the visiting procedures.
The only sane approach is to treat each uninvited visitor to your door as a potential villain and act accordingly.
And by the by, did you know that a certain Mr John Smith from the BBC told a Parliamentary committee that these doorsteppers wear a uniform? "Our guys wear a uniform". Oh yes. See it here:
http://tinyurl.com/8g8vwfb
Thank you for taking the time and trouble to come here and post your comment, Watchkeeper. We're in full agreement with you about uninvited visitors. Wear a uniform? We've never seen a "uniform". Fancy misleading the DCMS Media Select Committee.
DeleteOwen Shirley says the goon was not wearing trainers. They were apparently 'walking shoes'.
ReplyDeleteI quote his email today to confirm the above.
"Dear Mr Doyle
Thank you for your email of 10 September, which has been recorded under your
complaint reference 545669. Please use this number if you wish to contact us again.
I was sorry to note your dissatisfaction with the way our visiting officer was dressed
and this has been investigated.
The officer's manager subsequently paid an unannounced visit to the member of
staff concerned. At this time the officer was wearing the same footwear, which are
walking shoes and not trainers. We feel that this footwear is appropriate given the
nature of our officers' duties.
The officer was not found to be wearing the same over garment. We do feel
though that the item of clothing worn during his visit to your address could be viewed
as unprofessional. This has been acknowledged by the officer in question.
Thank you for taking the time to bring your concerns to our attention.
Yours sincerely
Owen Shirley"
'Walking shoes'?