That Knock on the door TV Licensing

omen666

Goto https://www.TVlicensing.biz all your questions answered there mate great site

mountainofdebt

I always thought that if you had a tv that was capable of receiving broadcasts then you had to have a tv licence, regardless of whether you actually used the tv for this purpose.

I do think though you are trying to have your cake and eat it; after all what is the difference of you watching say Holby City as it is being broadcast and watching Holby City on the I Player? I think by saying that you are watching the programme on the i player is splitting hairs - you are still effectively watching a programme broadcast by the BBC.

However I think the arguement for getting rid of the licence fee is made far stronger by the BBC putting programmes on the i-player (with everyone around the world effectively having access to these programmes and not just those who are forced to pay the licence fee) than the row about Jonathan Ross, which in my opinion was blown out of all proportion who saw it as an opportunity to bash the BBC.

mymatebob

stevemLS wrote: »

s363 of the Communications Act 2003 makes it an offence to install or use television receiving equipment. Installation is taken to mean connection to the mains and/or an aerial.

A magistrates warrant is required to force entry - TVL officers have no power of entry otherwise.

Goodness it is an offence to install a TV - whatever next.

Purple_Sparkles

I had a knock from TVL a few months ago and they asked if I was on my own (I'm a lone parent with one child). I said that I was except for my son and they told me 'That's OK I can't come in and check as you're a female on your own' basically it looks like they would have taken my word if I had a TV or not (wish I'd have known before I said I had a TV).

Having said the above I understand that if you have equipment capable of receiving a broadcasting signal you have to pay the licence.

I had a licence anyway, they just had the wrong occupier at the address - made me think about not having one though and being a lone female forever, lol!

sad_dog_lady

well we gave up the tube and i had licencing visit... i watch i player online and use the tv with an xbox for a dvd player and my sons halo 3 addiction therapy. no problem no worries, the guy was nice and polite and confirmed that i did not need one nor had i been detected as using signal, just randomly selected in the area to get a visit. do not worry, they are only allowed in if u invite them, i love iplayer and the new itv one too. i think the bbc and brand ross affair is thin edge of a lager wedge of corruption and over played repeats and depressing soap operas sorry but thats my opinion

Halloway

Gosh. If only the second post in this thread had given a succinct and accurate answer to the OP's question. Then there would not have been a need for the subsequent plethora of tedious, pointless, badly-constructed and badly-spelt responses.

If anyone else has (a) an exciting story about TV Licensing, (b) an opinion of the quality of BBC programming, or (c) anything else they want to get off their chest then please post some more because I am literally agog.

Avina_Popp

mountainofdebt wrote: »

I always thought that if you had a tv that was capable of receiving broadcasts then you had to have a tv licence, regardless of whether you actually used the tv for this purpose.

I do think though you are trying to have your cake and eat it; after all what is the difference of you watching say Holby City as it is being broadcast and watching Holby City on the I Player? I think by saying that you are watching the programme on the i player is splitting hairs - you are still effectively watching a programme broadcast by the BBC.

However I think the arguement for getting rid of the licence fee is made far stronger by the BBC putting programmes on the i-player (with everyone around the world effectively having access to these programmes and not just those who are forced to pay the licence fee) than the row about Jonathan Ross, which in my opinion was blown out of all proportion who saw it as an opportunity to bash the BBC.

You don't need to buy a licence just because you own a TV that is capable of receiving broadcasts. You only need a licence if you use equipment such as a TV, PC or Freeview box to watch or record programmes as they are being broadcast. I checked this out last September.

I also decided that I wasn't going to watch or record live TV from 1 October 2008 and e-mailed the TV licencing people to advise them that I had made this decision and that I did not require to renew my licence which expired on 30 September 2008. They e-mailed back to say that they had noted this on their records and had cancelled my licence.

If you watch something using the i-player you are not watching (or recording) it as it is being broadcast.

Elaine_Wilson

I am always intrigued about the responses that any post about the TV licence gets. I have never really had any problem with them.

I have not had a licence for goodness knows how many years. Occasionally I received a letter asking me to confirm that I was not using a TV set. I sent this back and that was that.

I have had one visit and when the chap told me who he was I asked him if I had to let him in. He replied truthfully that he had no right of entry. I told him that because he had been truthful I would give him access. The visit was all over in a couple of minutes. He wasn't worried about searching for hidden TV sets. He said that the layout of the furniture gave enough clues as to whether a set was being used. I have three computers in a network. I told him that none had a TV card but he could check if he wished. He didn't bother.

I did have a situation four years ago because my mother died and I cleared out her house. I rang TV licencing to inform them that she had died and that I had temporarily moved her set to my house. The girl I spoke to said that it shouldn't be a problem but that if I didn't get rid of the set soon it would be a good idea if I removed the power plug. Then I couldn't be accused of needing a licence. But she did say it wasn't strictly necessary.

mymatebob

Avina_Popp wrote: »

You don't need to buy a licence just because you own a TV that is capable of receiving broadcasts. You only need a licence if you use equipment such as a TV, PC or Freeview box to watch or record programmes as they are being broadcast. I checked this out last September.

I also decided that I wasn't going to watch or record live TV from 1 October 2008 and e-mailed the TV licencing people to advise them that I had made this decision and that I did not require to renew my licence which expired on 30 September 2008. They e-mailed back to say that they had noted this on their records and had cancelled my licence.

If you watch something using the i-player you are not watching (or recording) it as it is being broadcast.

You can now watch programmes streamed as live on the iplayer so theoretically you would need a licence to watch them, although it will be interesting to see the licensing people confirm that you are watching live iplayer material as opposed to older stuff.

POSSETTE

OK..but dont you have a radio in your house or car?
you have a unit that is capable of recieving live bbc broadcasts there!