It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


UK - The TV License Conspiracy

page: 8
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 01:35 PM
reply to post by ThePeopleParty

But, according to some people, there's nothing wrong with the BBC's representatives in the "enforcement" company lying to people in order to extort money out of them.

They engage in criminal behaviour with the full knowledge of those who sub-contract enforcement, but this is not a conspiracy at all...

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 02:53 PM
reply to post by budski

I'd be most annoyed if someone came to my door from Consignia demanding to see my tv licence, especially since Capita replaced Consignia as agents for the BBC in 2002.

But hey, don't let facts get in your way, Budski, let's just damn the employees of some other company, huh ?

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:09 PM
reply to post by Niall197

Or hey, why not do as you do (not investigate properly and understand that they CHANGED THEIR NAME) and make excuses for the thuggery, lies, extortion and bullying all overlooked by the BBC hierarchy in the name of making more money to empire build

Just what is your agenda here?

Do you work for the BBC or their enforcement sub-contractor?

You can see by reading the thread that there is only one dissenting voice - yours.
And that says to me that you have a vested interest.

So which is it?
BBC or hired thugs?

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:33 PM
reply to post by budski

In the OP you so regularly exhort me to read & read again, you state as follows :

"The worst thing is that this is run, on behalf of the BBC by a private company, called Consignia (Customer Management) Ltd".

I'd better quote that again for fear it disappears in an edit.

"The worst thing is that this is run, on behalf of the BBC by a private company, called Consignia (Customer Management) Ltd".

Consignia PLC took on most of the functions of the old Post Office, including Royal Mail & Parcelforce, in 2001. The re-brand was a dismal failure, the company changed name again in 2002 to Post Office Holdings Ltd. That's what we have today, they're the guys who deliver your mail.

And that's who you named in that OP ... Consignia ... in the OP you keep telling me to read & read again. Because I'm stupid & lack comprehension skills.

Tragically, for you & your OP, the BBC floated off the whole tv licensing scheme in 2002 to a private company called Capita Business Services Ltd ... otherwise known as Capita. Or Crapita, if you read Private Eye. It's a private company & it's had that 10 yr contract to run the tv licensing scheme since 2002. And it doesn't deliver your mail & parcels.

Now, don't you dare sit there kidding on that you knew that all the while & that I'm just playing semantics. You didn't know that at all, you've probably read some ancient article online somewhere which mentioned Consignia, you've put 2+2 together and got 5.

But, hey, you're quite happy to come here and slag off Consignia & it's employees. That's your prerogative. But by doing so you're dissing the Royal Mail & it's employees, not Crapita and theirs. And I think I'm quite entitled to point that out. You've picked the wrong target. At least be man enough & admit it.

Hey, star & flag for you. You deserve it. Well researched OP's are always such a pleasure.

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:41 PM
reply to post by Niall197

It's an offshoot - it was re-invented as a private arm in order to ensure that the "good name" of consignia wasn't tarnished

regardless, there are still "enforcement officers" otherwise known as state sponsored thugs, still carrying consignia badges.

The BBC is full of left wing trendy wannabe champagne socialists, acting as the propaganda wing of the so-called labour party.

They are scum, they are extortionists, and they are too busy empire building and sucking on the public teat to bother with little things like licensed thuggery.

There's your conspiracy, right there.

Your arguments hold no water, and your pathetic attempts to justify (your own salary?) the existance and stealth tax of this bloated corporation against the WILL of the majority of the British people os nothing more than a pathetic attempt to justify the part you play in this charade.

Do the BBC produce good programmes?

Are the value for money?

Are they sponsoring thuggery, lies and extortion?

edit on 21/2/2011 by budski because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 04:27 PM
reply to post by budski

Capita isn't an offshoot of Consignia/Post Office Holdings Ltd at all. Capita is one of the largest outsourcing companies in Europe. They were the preferred bidder for the BBC contract to run the tv licensing scheme. Consignia lost that contract to Capita.

Perhaps I can help you out here, considering you're floundering all over the place.

Capita was one of New Labour's favourites. Rod Aldridge, then executive chairman of Capita, he donated over £1 million to New Labour during their glory years. Nice arrangement, New Labour gave them contracts, Capita returned the favour in hard cash, bit of old left wing backscratchery going on.

Tbh I don't know why New Labour were so enchanted with them, well, apart from the obvious financial advantages to Labour in that cosy arrangement. Because Capita's performance in everything it touches is downright miserable. It's arsed up Housing Benefit contracts all over England, leaving tenants massively in arrears with the threat of eviction hanging over their heads. They so buggered up the Individual Learning Accounts system that the whole scheme got scrapped. They've been fined by the FSA because of poor internal security systems which led their own employees stealing millions of pounds from them.

There one of the most shambolic companies on the go. Yet still Capita were a fave company under New Labour. Why ?

I guess we'll never know. You didn't see fit to include any of that in your OP, probably because you didn't have the faintest idea what you were talking about when you mentioned Consignia instead of Capita.

Instead you concentrate on the little men who knock on doors to see if people have tv licences. To that extent your OP sets a new low standard by which missing the real conspiracy can be measured. That plus it's factually incorrect too.

Still, have another star. God loves a tryer.

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 04:37 PM
reply to post by Niall197

Of course they were.

It's OK mate, you keep spouting the party line - one day someone will believe you.

In the meantime, they are state sponsored thugs, who lie, extort, entrap illegally and act like they are cops when they are just glorified questionnaire clerks.

The BBC hire them, put up with their tactics, and that makes them just as bad.

edit on 21/2/2011 by budski because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 04:57 PM
reply to post by budski

Heavens, do I have to be even more explicit ?

You're bandying about "conspiracy" and "conspiracy to defraud". Yet I've just presented you with the possibility of a real conspiracy. New Labour, via it's agents in the BBC (and don't forget, it's a government minister, the Culture Secretary, who sets the BBC's agenda by controlling it's pursestrings) ... New Labour arranges for Capita to get the contract and in return they get financial donations to the Labour Party itself.

Conspiracy - an agreement between two or more people to break the law at some point in the future.

Don't you consider New Labour & it's relationship with Capita, the tv licensing agents of the BBC, to be the real conspiracy here ?

And an ongoing conspiracy ? Because Capita have also donated nearly £2 million to the Conservatives in the last 5 yrs ? What's the chances that Capita will retain their tv licensing contract in 2012 ? And win the NHS Direct outsourcing contract ? Pretty high, I reckon.

Still toeing the party line, am I ?

Nevermind. Just you concentrate on the little people who knock on your door to see your tv licence. They're just so worthy of our attentions, nicht wahr ? And we'll just forget about the bigger picture in all this.

Have a final star. Well deserved.

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 05:10 PM
reply to post by Niall197

No I consider BBC and their agents to be the real conspiracy - hence the thread title

posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 07:17 AM
Maybe some cold comfort:

The 'detector vans' could maybe detect and isolate the source of an oldstyle TV's local oscillator because they were horrendously 'noisy' (spurious radiation) but the van would just about have to be parked outside your window. But that was in the days before regulations regarding spurious emissions were enacted and also it was the days of AM video/FM audio transmission and CRT's with EHV flyback circuits (even known to emit X-rays when EHT is too high) which are currently coming to an end and being replaced with all-digital signals and receivers with plasma (possibly a little 'noisy') and LED (very quiet) screens. Regulations require any parts of a device capable of generating RF interference be effectively screened to contain it, even down to placing ferrite chokes on the mains cable to contain it. I'm sure everyone has seen those lumpy little plastic cases on mains and even signal cables these days which contains a ferrite choke to dissipate any high frequency trying to exit via the conductors

A detector has buckleys chance of picking up anything from modern compliant digital receivers even within a few feet of most. So if you get a knock at the door and it's the inspector, they're just taking the 'odd stab in the dark' based on the fact that virtually all residences now have at least one receiver. Of course the antenna on the roof is a dead give-away just as it always was but I'd be hard-pressed to find a house in an Oz city without a TV and no antenna outside simply means they have rabbit-ears and are close to the transmitter tower (or cable of course)

posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 11:08 AM
reply to post by Pilgrum

Television Detection Equipment - Buckman Hardy Associates designed and manufactured a range of television detection equipment for the BBC. A hand held two channel detector picks up small signals emitted by the television, and by using a combination of analogue and digital signal processing techniques the detector is able to display distance and direction to the nearest television.

Buckman Hardy

Apparently THESE guys equip TV Licensing Detector Vans.

posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 11:35 AM
My grandfathers had arguments with TV licensing, he didn't have a TV but he reached the age were he could get a free licence so he decided to get one. He wrote to them with his proof of age requesting his free licence.
They wrote back telling him they needed his national insurance number before they would give him a licence.

He wrote back telling them that it was confidential information.

They told him they wouldn't issue him a licence (if you know my grandfather BIG MISTAKE.)

My grandfather looked the law up found out that they couldn't legally refuse his TV license on those grounds and contacted OFCOM.

Suffice to say OFCOM came down hard on the TV licensing and now he's got his free licence.

My grandfather's a corporation troll, he enjoys picking fights with tptb and he usually ends up winning.

posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 05:59 PM
reply to post by quackers

Their greatest weapon is fear
err - fear and surprise - that's 2 greatest weapons..
ruthless efficiency?

British governments have had this ingrown characteristic of hanging on to outdated laws like this one for centuries past their use-by date. This thread is evidence of an uprising against the licensing so maybe the government will eventually get the message and yield to public pressure.

Even without the licensing fees you'll still be paying for the BBC through income tax, sales tax, VAT etc but it hurts a lot less than having to pull a couple of hundred out of your pocket at short notice on a regular basis. And those guys running around waving detectors and banging on doors could be doing some far more useful for the public in general plus the administrative cost savings would be significant.

posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 06:29 PM
reply to post by Pilgrum

Next thing you know, they'll be prosecuting young men for not practicing the longbow - an extreme example, I know, but it's still on the books...

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 01:52 PM
right which one of you just tried to burn down the beeb
edit on 23-2-2011 by monkofmimir because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 11:50 AM
5 minutes ago a TV license guy called. He was looking for some one else and I told him he didnt live here. So he then said Im a TV licensing man and I have you down as not having a license. I said thats right, I dont watch TV as its social programing. So he then said, I will mark you down as not having a TV. So I replied that I did own a TV, but that I only use it for games or DVDs. Its not conected to an aerial. So I let him into my home to see for himself. I told him that I only watch recorded things which are on the net, movies ect. He said Iplayer? as you need a license to watch some of the programs on that site. Any way Im now marked down as not needing a license. So they will stop hasseling me with silly letters and people knocking on my door. Not that I watch TV any way. Social programing. Another cog of the propaganda machine of the govt.

posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 01:57 AM
License fee direct debit cancelled , im not paying to support the BBC who were rumbled for supporting a peadophile ring !

they can do one!

I dont watch tv at home and the only thing decent about the BBC was Sir Richard Attenborough and BBC radio 6
everything else is complete gash !

if they come to my door they are kindly being asked to leave my property as I did not invite them !


* any chance of a refund for supporting criminals ?

top topics

<< 5  6  7   >>

log in