TV Licence article Discussion

Thunderballs_2

Cornucopia wrote: »

As soon as they start lying, it becomes a bit trickier, I think. That's especially true if you are only 90% sure (or less) that you can tell them to leave.

Err... no. The whole point is that the Warrant is to enable them to search for, test and examine TV receivers. The purpose being to determine whether its likely that they have been/could be used to receive TV broadcasts.

"You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast."

Simply shut the door and say nothing if you get a visit.
If you are subject to a warrant check out the relevant vids here.


If you are watching TV as it is broadcast or recording it then the law says you need a TV licence. If you are not doing that - you dont need one. Watching Netflix or Blurays isnt watching live TV as it is broadcast nor recording live tv. It doesnt matter how many TVs you have in "your" house or how many (or realistically how few) Goons come round with a warrant.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqAhlWobiDc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ci-_QBh0o3k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxkicyM0qu4

And effective rate of circa £300 per hour.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cWGzwZ8Xyw

and in "Welsh"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tlQLR1rhn0

and in Scottish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp4sISW9oUw

It is great to see the British male standing up for his rights.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLFZ0ivIxi4

http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/

Cornucopia

Thunderballs wrote: »

And they would still have to take you to court and convince magistrates of their "findings".

In my experience, that's not particularly difficult.

Worse case scenario - you owe us £1000.

The fines are based on disposable income, so £1000 is pretty rare. The average fine is about £150 (there are other fees to be added to this).

simonne15_2

:mad:
We pay the licence fee but find it utterly unreasonable that when on holiday e.g. in Europe, we're not allowed to watch TV on the computer yet lots of British immigrants living abroad watch it apparently illegally through various schemes without paying the licence fee. In this technological society it surely cant be difficult to have some code that we xould link to the computer which confirms that we have a licence.
Can you tackle that one please Martin?

sniggings

Thunderballs wrote: »

"You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast."

"I have a TV I do not use it for recording or viewing live TV" How is that hard to say whilst some Goon is in your house with his warrant. You'd have to be a muppet to be actually watching live tv or recording it whilst allowing said Goon to enter your property with his warrant.

Magistrates hear most of these cases, many are part time so their grip on the law is not the best, also they go on a "reasonable belief " if you have a TV and a aerial in the back of it, it's not a big jump to say you have been watching, they don't have to see the act, same as a murderer doesn't have to be seen stabbing the victim to be found guilty.

sniggings

simonne15 wrote: »

:mad:
We pay the licence fee but find it utterly unreasonable that when on holiday e.g. in Europe, we're not allowed to watch TV on the computer yet lots of British immigrants living abroad watch it apparently illegally through various schemes without paying the licence fee. In this technological society it surely cant be difficult to have some code that we xould link to the computer which confirms that we have a licence.
Can you tackle that one please Martin?

You are allowed, getting a workable solution is the problem here.

Not sure what you are having difficulty with, once the site detects where you are, you should e allow to access the same channels as anyone else in that country.

Thunderballs_2

sniggings wrote: »

Magistrates hear most of these cases, many are part time so their grip on the law is not the best, also they go on a "reasonable belief " if you have a TV and a aerial in the back of it, it's not a big jump to say you have been watching, they don't have to see the act, same as a murderer doesn't have to be seen stabbing the victim to be found guilty.

It is a long rd before someone gets to this point. TV licensing need "evidence" to get a search warrant. Not having a licence isnt that evidence nor is someone shutting the door.

It is also not a big jump to argue many other points reasonably either IF one got to that position.

Someone "starting out" is highly unlikely to even get to this point if they follow the simple advice here http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/

sniggings

Thunderballs wrote: »

It is a long rd before someone gets to this point. TV licensing need "evidence" to get a search warrant. Not having a licence isnt that evidence nor is someone shutting the door.

It is also not a big jump to arb
gueb
many other points reasonably either IF one got to that position.

Someone "starting out" is highly unlikely to even get to this point if they follow the simple advice here http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/

oh please...I was answering the point of why you don'thave to e caught watching TV to be found guilty,not how many steps it takes to get to court..

Unless you can convince a court why you need a aerial in aTv and not watching Tv, then yes it's quite a small jump for the court to make.

Cornucopia

Thunderballs wrote: »

TV licensing need "evidence" to get a search warrant....

(Why do I start so many replies on this subject with "However"?)

However, a leaked document from BBC/TVL indicates "examples" of evidence to be used. These are:-

1.5 Examples of evidence that may be used

• Set seen but not in use. No admission, entry refused.
• Occupier admits set but no admission of use. Entry refused.
• Set denied, programme heard.
• Admission of broken set on premises. Inspection refused.
• Inspection is allowed after delay. No set is seen, but circumstantial evidence.

Obviously none of these are the rigourous evidence of possible evasion we might have expected, and "electronic detection" is notable by its absence. I put this issue to TVL in December, and I have yet to have a response. I have escalated within the BBC, and have yet to have had a response to that, either...

The law specifies that BBC/TVL should present to a Magistrate "reasonable grounds for believing ... that an offence ... has been or is being committed". I don't believe that any of the BBC's "examples" are consistent with that.

Someone "starting out" is highly unlikely to even get to this point if they follow the simple advice here http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/

Yes... although the point remains that most people won't have seen the advice here or there, some people may not believe it, or may not agree with it, and some will be taken in because the TVL doorstepper is "kind" or apparently authoritative.

None of those people should be left to become victim to BBC/TVL, and none of us should deny them help and advice just because they ignored or never even knew what the optimum advice was.

The bottom line is that BBC/TVL should not be seeking entry to people's homes unless they have reasonable prior suspicion of an offence, they should not be inveigling themselves into people's homes (it should be a matter of informed consent), they should not be riding rough-shod over people's rights under HRA and PACE, and they should not be trying to trick or coerce people into buying a Licence they do not need, or falsely prosecuting them...

... and yet they do.

TheGardenGnome

PippaS wrote: »

Thank you Cornucopia.... Further gen on my dilemna: I need to know about the "Amazon Fire TV Sticks" in particular. IF I had a TV unit with a USB slot, and bought one of these Amazon things, and used with my broadband - would I need a TV license to watch catch up? I have NO interest in "live" broadcast! Any ideas? Anyone? I know everyone says live or not live, but I have seen some stuff on internet that implies even the Amazon stick thing would incur the liability to have a license.... !! THANK YOU ALL!

Firstly, the Amazon Fire Stick (and box, for that matter) use HDMI ports, not USB.

Secondly, regardless of the source of your viewing of catch up TV, whether that be via an app on a SMART TV, tablet, iPlayer, Amazon Fire or any other Android set top box, you would not need a license.

Watch anything 'live' and you do need a license according to the scum at Capita.

TheGardenGnome

Two other points:

1) Martin mentions the use of TV Licensing detector vans and high tech hand held detection devices. Can he, or anyone for that matter, cite a single case whereby someone has been successfully prosecuted using those methods of detection alone?

2) I was recently summonsed to appear in 'court' for not having a TV license after my wife foolishly engaged one of Capita's goons at the front door before Christmas (I was out at the time) and she signed the 'confession-a-gram' form to say we were unlicensed after she had been cautioned by the goon. I replied to the summons with a not guilty plea and requested a court hearing with the goon present. I received a letter saying I'd been given a court date and with it, the goon would be present. Happy days.

To my absolute anger and disappointment after preparing my defence against said charges, I received a letter from TVL saying they were now no longer going to proceed with the prosecution and the case against me was closed.

A mere four weeks after that letter arrived, another Capita goon showed up trying to get me to give him my bank details at the doorstep so he could earn his £20 commission. As soon as I got my phone out of my pocket and prepared to record the conversation, Mr Goon made his excuses and left, walking briskly to his car and then slamming the door shut so hard I'm amazed the glass didn't break!

The lesson here is that regardless of whether or not you sign their confession form, ALWAYS go to court and ALWAYS insist on having a hearing in front of a magistrate. A huge proportion of these cases (and council tax arrears) are heard in side rooms of court buildings that are hired out by TV Licensing in order to give some credibility to their scam. Remember your summons states quite clearly that you are to appear in front of magistrates, not some clown from TVL in an office.
The first line of my defence was to question the goon on how they introduced themselves at the door and when they reply 'TV Licensing', state that they in fact work for CAPITA, not TVL and if they lie at the very first opportunity, how can anyone believe a single word the goon has to say thereafter in order to convict me beyond any reasonable doubt?

Lastly, make sure you record all interactions with the goons and put them on YouTube so we can all have a laugh at their expense!