TV licensing threats

Kayak10

dave4545454 wrote: »

You've already been proved to be totally wrong by many other posters on this thread.

Dave Maybe you and others on here should read MataNui's post above your last one
O unless you like other suggest even his post is " misinformation " ?
In which case read the following received today ( Friday ) from TVL
but I'm sure like other posters on here you WILL question it and say yet again I don't know what I'm talking about.
From TVL
" I understand that you wish to find out some information regarding our handheld detectors.

Detection is a two stage process. Firstly, we identify unlicensed addresses; secondly we can use a variety of detection methods, including visiting those addresses on foot or using a detector van, to ascertain whether TV is being watched illegally.

Our detector vans use a number of detection methods, but we don’t go into the details of how these methods work exactly, as we wouldn't want to reveal too much to potential evaders.

Our database of over 28 million addresses shows which properties are licensed and which ones are unlicensed. This database is regularly updated with information from a variety of sources.

Our detector vans use the latest GPS satellite technology and can tell in as little as 20 seconds whether a TV is in use. Once the television is detected, the equipment, which works from up to 60m away, can pinpoint the actual room that the television set is in.

I should explain that hand held detectors are part of the range of detection equipment available to our Visiting Officers. This handheld detection equipment gives easy access to areas where detector vans can't go.

I hope this information helps and thank you for taking the time to contact us.

Yours sincerely

Adrian Rudley
Customer Relations "

My comment is I would rather go by the info of TVL than those that seem to take great pleasure in trying to prove I'm wrong
Finally I have replied to TVL and again asked the make and model of the hand held detectors as I don't believe that will give ANY help to potential licence doggers

dave4545454

Kayak10 wrote: »

Finally I have replied to TVL and again asked the make and model of the hand held detectors as I don't believe that will give ANY help to potential licence doggers

What's a licence dogger?
You got something you need to tell us?

dave4545454

Kayak10 wrote: »

Our detector vans use a number of detection methods, but we don’t go into the details of how these methods work exactly, as we wouldn't want to reveal too much to potential evaders.

That tells you everything you need to know. No detection device has ever been used in court. FACT Why? Because they don't exist. Only the very gullible would fall for this.

Kayak10

dave4545454 wrote: »

What's a licence dogger?
You got something you need to tell us?

I am NOT a licence dogger :mad: unlike I'm sure many posting on here ARE
Whoops another bit of " misinformation " they take advantage of a loophole in the law and watch on catch up via a PC or similar
As I don't have the luxury of any other form I watch live tv with a licence
My original thread is and was the aggressive nature of TVL's letters Especially to those with a current licence
So get off my back and stick to the original thread and ways they catch out people then may be all the so called misinformation would never have been posted :mad:

Kayak10

dave4545454 wrote: »

That tells you everything you need to know. No detection device has ever been used in court. FACT Why? Because they don't exist. Only the very gullible would fall for this.

I suggest you write to TVL AND the BBC telling them they are liars then and stop trying to prove your right and everyone else including the TVL AND BBC are gullible to even expect us all to believe they are the ones that are conning the British public
And before you write back I accept TVL may not have used the evidence in court directly But that sort of detection most defiantly exists READ their reply to me TODAY

[Deleted User]

Kayak10 wrote: »

Our detector vans use the latest GPS satellite technology and can tell in as little as 20 seconds whether a TV is in use.

Merely in use, or in use to watch/record LIVE television broadcasts?

Once the television is detected, the equipment, which works from up to 60m away, can pinpoint the actual room that the television set is in.

I actually think they are being rather conservative there.

I'm pretty sure the Mk1 human eyeball can detect a flickering light pattern, from far more than 60m.

Kayak10

dave4545454 wrote: »

That tells you everything you need to know. No detection device has ever been used in court. FACT Why? Because they don't exist. Only the very gullible would fall for this.

The evidence may not have been used But your spreading misinformation if you believe it doesn't exist as the last few posts Especially TVL's answer and I think someone said recently on here he knew somebody who got hold of an old van AND got it working
TVL are like the police they use certain means at their disposal to gain enough evidence to finally get someone in court But we as general public are not always privy to what they use

[Deleted User]

Kayak10 wrote: »

But that sort of detection most defiantly exists READ their reply to me TODAY

I've no doubt they can "detect" an operating TV, by looking for pretty light patterns, being reflected from the walls.

However, that's a far cry from being able to discriminate between an operating TV, and one which is displaying a LIVE broadcast.

Notice how their reply does not contain a single reference, to detecting a TV displaying a LIVE broadcast.

BTW. Were they replying to a FOI request from you, or merely a question?

Kayak10

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Merely in use, or in use to watch/record LIVE television broadcasts?



I actually think they are being rather conservative there.

I'm pretty sure the Mk1 human eyeball can detect a flickering light pattern, from far more than 60m.

I agree but " the eyeball " can't define if the light is coming from a live broadcast Where as the equipment TVL are referring to CAN
Whoopsy another bit of " misinformation "

[Deleted User]

Kayak10 wrote: »

I agree but " the eyeball " can't define if the light is coming from a live broadcast Where as the equipment TVL are referring to CAN

Where exactly, in their letter, did they say their detectors can tell the difference between live and non-live viewing?