One of the most basic principles of a fair society is that the innocent should not not have to prove their innocence.

If you are accused of performing an unlawful activity, your accuser must present evidence to support their claim.

In the UK, fishing without a licence can render you liable to a fine of up to £2,500. This is over twice the fine for watching live television without a licence, yet most people would object to the idea that a "fishing inspector" should be allowed to enter their homes to check for unlicensed fishing equipment.

Similarly, stealing from a company such as Marks & Spencer is a criminal offence. If you have been stealing socks from their stores, then obviously you have broken the law. However if you have not been stealing, most people would object to an "enforcement officer" from Marks & Spencer (or any other private company) demanding access to your property to confirm this fact.

Particularly so if there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that you have been stealing socks, other than you own a pair which potentially could have been stolen (after all, most of the people who steal socks do in fact deny it).

Assisting TVL

Although you may feel it is reasonable to assist TVL, you are under no obligation to do so. Some people have found that doing so has no effect, since TVL appear to presume guilt rather than innocence.

As such, if you do not require a licence but are visited by an inspector then the most reasonable response is simply to inform them that "I do not need a television licence, now please leave".

If they refuse to leave they will be breaking their own code of conduct, and you may wish to take their name to file a complaint.