TV Licensing — the comedy arm of Big Brother
My kafkaesque correspondence continues, and may end up quite profitable
I have an ongoing saga with TV Licensing here in the UK, which you can read about in my previous articles here, here, here, and here. The bottom line is that I am asserting my rights, but should they wish to ignore them, then I have offered to engage with them for “pointless correspondence services” at my usual (and very reasonable) rates. Their automated systems have no way to interact with me, so I am racking up fees for my extremely articulate and widely appreciated custom prose.
Above is the latest from them in the post. Note that I requested them not to contact me at all, so every letter is a violation of my right to privacy and is a form of harassment. I have made no representation to them about my status of having a television or not — it is up to them to gain a warrant to search my home and prosecute me if I am operating a TV or watching streamed public service broadcasting without paying. As it happens I detest television and don’t watch it ever.
So they have now forced me to issue a correcting letter, at my standard billing rate. Here is my next draft response:
I note your automated undated letter that I received on 28th October 2022. I appreciate the courtesy of Jackie Garswood putting her name to it, unwise as that may be given we are dealing with a potentially criminal matter of blackmail.
As per my notices to you of 22nd September 2022 and 15th October 2022, I have requested that you cease writing to me, while offering you the alternative to engage in a contract for correspondence services. I am a professional writer, and I am happy to provide you with custom souvenir letters (at my standard rates) if that is what you desire. We formed a contract by your choice to ignore my request to desist in communicating with me, instead continuing to fill my letter box with unwanted envelopes. Consider it “public service prose” if you wish.
Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately — my letters may be valued collectible items in the near future) you have forced me to respond to you once again. You have sent a “no licence needed confirmation” that makes an assertion that I have claimed or confirmed that I do not need a TV Licence. I have purposely not done this, since this is a matter of me asserting my constitutional and human rights: to privacy in my home, freedom to contract, and presumption of innocence.
This claim is purely of your own volition, and I make no comment upon its veracity in any way or form. I am under no lawful obligation to make any declaration to you whatsoever, nor to contract with you for your services. In order for me not to be presumed in agreement with your assertion (which you need not have made), I am having to send you this further missive (under our correspondence contract).
You have once again ignored my original request saying you may write to me after two years. I remind you that you are welcome to do so, but only under the terms of our contract for premium professional correspondence services from myself. Otherwise it constitutes criminal harassment. I would prefer you cease communications permanently, barring invoice payment.
You have failed to acknowledge my original and legitimate request to desist, as well as our contract for correspondence services, plus my previous invoice. They are all completely lawful, and I am sure you are a law-abiding organisation. I hereby give you pre-action notification to pay my invoice from 15th October which is now overdue. You have a further 7 days to pay before recovery action is taken.
The good news is that you may find willing buyers for rare signed one-off original Martin Geddes work at prices well above that you yourselves paid; it is exceptional value for money, although I don’t wish to encourage you to overindulge at these generous rates.
I have also enclosed a new invoice for £750 to reflect my correspondence services and their value to you and the world at large. I trust that you appreciate my writing work every bit as much as I respect public service broadcasting in the UK.
“These people are stupid” the saying goes, and TV Licensing are the dumbest of the dumb. The funny thing is, my writing quite possibly is collectible and of value. They really are getting a bargain, but have no idea of what a good deal it is for them!
The powers that be treat us as chattel to be harvested for revenue, and ride roughshod over our individual rights, falsely claiming some kind of collective responsibility trumps them. They expect us to fight back by engaging in their rigged labyrinth of laws, which will grind us down through tiresome attrition, with few ever getting justice. I have simply made a commercial counter-offer, and letters like this force activation of my world class services.
This bypasses their defences, as it turns the tables on them, and puts them into the one-down position (which they have no way to relate to). In this case I have nothing to lose, since I clearly owe TV Licensing zilch, and they could end up giving me a nice little payout and public victory. That it is the revenue collection arm of the genocidal state propaganda service makes the prospect all the more delicious. I just have a feeling that events are going to overtake this little hobby. But at least I tried.
Maybe I should keep an eye out for my signed letters on eBay?
Future of Communications is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.