Had a Visit from TV Licence Man

oldgrumpygit

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

No, if the channels are tuned in it is installed for the purpose of receiving TV.

No it isn't.

It is installed for the purpose of listening to the radio.

oldgrumpygit

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

The TV will have been installed for the purpose of receiving TV, by all means go to court and politely explain the reason you tuned the TV channels in was for some other purpose.

Merely a bi-product of the technology.

oldgrumpygit

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

Then delete the TV channels.

If that is possible then ideal.

If not, tough.

there is no "purpose" to receive the television channels so the legislation does not apply.

Simple really.

prowla

If it is a multi-function device, then it having the capability to perform each of those functions does not mean that that is its intended purpose in the given instance.

However, in the case of this particular thread, the OP stated that they do watch live TV, and therefore that is evidently an intended purpose.

oldgrumpygit

prowla wrote: »

If it is a multi-function device, then it having the capability to perform each of those functions does not mean that that is its intended purpose in the given instance.

However, in the case of this particular thread, the OP stated that they do watch live TV, and therefore that is evidently an intended purpose.

Very true and they should have a TV Licence.

Cornucopia

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

You would need to be pretty convincing.

To whom? Why would the BBC prosecute you for following their advice?

oldgrumpygit

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

Because they wont believe you, because the TVL inspectors are on commission and have targets, because maybe the guy that turns up isn't very nice..............

Since they would have to have a warrant before crossing the threshold they would have to have some serious suspicions.;)

anotheruser

prowla wrote: »

However, in the case of this particular thread, the OP stated that they do watch live TV, and therefore that is evidently an intended purpose.

To be fair though, the OP stated they "watch the odd live programme". Without any sort of scale, it's difficult to make a judgement.

Are you saying someone should pay the full fee if they watch ONE live programme in 12 months? And you think that's right?

However, if the OP means they watch at least one programme a week, then that is completely different.

If the OP uses their TV (connected to their computer) to browse the internet and watch movies through LoveFilm or something similar then surely that is their intended or primary purpose of the device, NOT for watching live TV, which would put an end to that "defence".

I wonder if my TV will allow me to delete or tune out channels individually. . .

Cornucopia

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

Now you are discussing the process rather than the clear and concise legislation.

If the legislation were clear and concise, then (a) there would be no need for the BBC to (mis)interpret, and (b) we would all agree on what it means.

Jamie_Carter

oldgrumpygit wrote: »

I think that the BBC struggle with an outdated legislation that has failed to keep up with technology.

It is easy enough to sit at home and watch many BBC programmes without the need of a licence.

The iPlayer is a great thing but it may well be one of the nails in the Licence Fee coffin

My understanding is that iPlayer is still broadcast from the BBC servers, and would therefore require a license. And that you can only watch pre-recorded media.

I know that some people will jump on this post and say that this is wrong. But it would be more constructive if people who actually know the law commented.

It is all very well thinking that you are right about something. But it's not a forum that you have to convince, it's a judge.