TV licence query

Buzby

On a (slight) tangent, the box on the Voter's Roll has been largely circumvented by the Govt making a late amendment that provided the Credit Reference Agencies with a copy of the full (not edited) register to assist in the 'prevention of fraud'. Sadly, it is used for all sorts of purposes - like confirmation of address, which means regardly of what you tick, the CRA's will recieve the information anf log it for evermore.

Further, if you pay Royal Mail for their mail redirection service, RM will disclose your old and new address to TVL automatically, whether you want to or not (it is shown in the small print).

Clearly if you watch live TV, then you need a licence to comply with the law, if you don't it remains a CRIMINAL (not civil) offence, so perhaps we should be questioning why if parking has been de-criminalised almost everywhere (due to the police claiming having better things to do) that TVL should lose the right to use the criminal process and majistrates court to pursue those who do not comply.

ptvw

I live in a state of constant amazement at the amount of people who will do almost anything they are told simply because "it's the law". That is how the Nazis came to power. Actually I think Hitler gets a bad rep, I actually quite like him.

I've lived in my property for 6.5 years and haven't paid a single pound to TVL. They are very inventive, coming to the gate in their various uniforms from different companies or conducting surveys for this that and the other. I enjoy the game too much to pay.

Gordon_Hose

ptvw wrote: »

I live in a state of constant amazement at the amount of people who will do almost anything they are told simply because "it's the law". That is how the Nazis came to power. Actually I think Hitler gets a bad rep, I actually quite like him.

I've lived in my property for 6.5 years and haven't paid a single pound to TVL. They are very inventive, coming to the gate in their various uniforms from different companies or conducting surveys for this that and the other. I enjoy the game too much to pay.

So you'd quite happily go out and rape children just because you think the law doesn't apply to you??

Kurtis_Blue

ptvw wrote: »

I live in a state of constant amazement at the amount of people who will do almost anything they are told simply because "it's the law". That is how the Nazis came to power. Actually I think Hitler gets a bad rep, I actually quite like him.
.

You lose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Thanks for playing.

Blue_Max

Hi
I dont have a TV. I have a radio.
Sometimes I watch TV like the BBCi on the internet.
I am on the electoral role.
Do I need a TV licence?

veganpanda

Blue_Max wrote: »

Hi
I dont have a TV. I have a radio.
Sometimes I watch TV like the BBCi on the internet.
I am on the electoral role.
Do I need a TV licence?

Nobody 'needs' a TV Licence, they're FORCED/BULLIED to have one!!

Luckily there are some of us that refuse to be scared of the bbc bullies, it's very easy really.... just take yourself out of their system (I can let you know how). I've not paid a TV licence for over 5 years & never will again!

Buzby

The answer to your query is in two parts. Do you have equipment that is capable of viewing TV broadcasrs? If the answer is yes - then you are at risk, because irrespective of TVL's advice, the law (Communications Act) stipulates that you need to a licence to receive broadcasts - and it would then fall to a judge to decide whether he believes your protestations of innicence. If you do not have the equiopment, this allegation cannot be made. Further, the liability is on the owner or renter of the property concerned the 'licensable address', not the person who views, but then they may well be one and the same.

As to viewing iPlayer, if you watch any programme 'as live' that is - streamed in near real-time, then the answer is yes. This also holds true of the iTV Player, CH4 ot CH5's streaming services IF you view at the same time as the terrestrial broadcast.

Kurtis_Blue

Buzby wrote: »

Further, the liability is on the owner or renter of the property concerned the 'licensable address', not the person who views, but then they may well be one and the same.

That is incorrect.

Stephen_Leak

This new "simulcast" clause worries me. It now makes the internet a "broadcast medium". I fear that it is only a matter of time, before this gets extended to all streaming.

Even as the legislation stands, it means that as soon as you start watching just one "simulcast", you are liable for a licence. I see no difference between this and just watching just one conventionally broadcast program.

davidlizard

Buzby wrote: »

The answer to your query is in two parts. Do you have equipment that is capable of viewing TV broadcasrs? If the answer is yes - then you are at risk, because irrespective of TVL's advice, the law (Communications Act) stipulates that you need to a licence to receive broadcasts - and it would then fall to a judge to decide whether he believes your protestations of innicence. If you do not have the equiopment, this allegation cannot be made. Further, the liability is on the owner or renter of the property concerned the 'licensable address', not the person who views, but then they may well be one and the same.

As to viewing iPlayer, if you watch any programme 'as live' that is - streamed in near real-time, then the answer is yes. This also holds true of the iTV Player, CH4 ot CH5's streaming services IF you view at the same time as the terrestrial broadcast.

Which is a very good reason for not allowing BBC/TVL into your house to do any kind of check, especially if you quite legally have a television which you use for purposes other than watching TV as it is broadcast.

The vast majority of prosecutions are by "self incrimination", so if you adopt the "no contact" policy then your chances of being caught are greatly diminished.

Also its worth remembering how many magistrates were trained in the communication act and the subsequent regulations laws - the BBC trained them.