TV Licence article Discussion

cw18

Stephen61 wrote: »

This is completely wrong. You require a TV licence if you own any equipment with a built-in demodulator circuit for receiving TV channels. Regardless if you watch live TV channels. Even if you never switch the TV on, if your TV has a built-in TV turner and is capable of receiving these channel you must buy a licence. If you use a computer and monitor screen without a built-in demodulator circuit, then you can watch catch-up TV for free.

No longer the case if you read the TVL website which I quoted (and linked to) in this post

bosshammer

As I own a TV which is not a TV, it is not digital ready (since digital switchover it has become a computer monitor) I do not need a licence.

The pimp from TVL came round and pointed out that my house has both aerial and dish, I just told him that I didn't have any equipment capable of decoding the signal. He asked me to confirm this, by which he meant "can I enter your home to check" I told him to pi$$ off!

Not heard anything since!

adouglasmhor

cw18 wrote: »

I wouldn't dream of turning on a TV in someone else's house without at least asking them - guess that's my upbringing!!!!!

I don't see how that is in any way relevant to my post or the case I posted about. I have never turned on a TV in someones house I was visiting, I was at a friends over the weekend and the GF of another friend wanted to watch the voice which I found weird, but I allow my dog walker to watch TV when we are out as he has to allow a break between walking and feeding my dogs, he has never asked to see our TV license either (and he is allowed to use my computers and it's on the external hard drive if he is interested.
I see your upbringing allowed you to be self righteous about some else's misfortune though. Ah well you can only expect a grunt from a pig.

cw18 wrote: »

I'm very rarely at any friends house when the TV is on though - I don't go round to watch it, and avoid times they'll be watching as we can't catch up/do whatever I've gone round for if they're glued to the screen. It's sometimes on when I go to visit my parents or my daughter, and yes I know for sure they both have. I've only ever spent time with one person I know for sure didn't have - and I refused point blank to be in the property if he was watching anything but a DVD. He actually got a knock on the door and ended up signing up for a licence in order to avoid any further trouble - and I couldn't believe how much he complained about it. It'd have been hard for him to claim he wasn't watching when he was paying for cable TV though !!!

So in what way do you consider the woman who you have no sympathy for (and a holier than thou attitude as well) to be responsible for what heppened to her?

cw18

adouglasmhor wrote: »

I don't see how that is in any way relevant to my post or the case I posted about.

I meant I wouldn't turn on in someone else's house without asking if they had a licence - especially if they weren't going to be around. If she'd asked and been told he didn't have one then she'd have known not to turn it on.

but I allow my dog walker to watch TV when we are out as he has to allow a break between walking and feeding my dogs, he has never asked to see our TV license either

Then he's very trusting. I know that the majority of households have a license, but it's not something I take for granted. No more than (in the days of any driver policies) would I drive someone else's car without seeing their insurance document to prove they had that in place meaning I was covered.

I see your upbringing allowed you to be self righteous about some else's misfortune though. Ah well you can only expect a grunt from a pig.

and i don't think that was called for - just because I was brought up to be a law-abiding citizen!

So in what way do you consider the woman who you have no sympathy for (and a holier than thou attitude as well) to be responsible for what heppened to her?

Ignorance isn't (to the best of my knowledge) every considered to be an excuse, so she should have asked him before using the TV. OK, he could have lied and said he had one - and if she could prove that I would have had some sympathy for her.

Flyingmag

"We would not want to reveal information useful to potential evaders"
1.They do not have a super sensor which can check if you're watching live television on a tv, laptop or anything else.
2. If you have a smart tv and can stream direct from the catchups they cannot detect that either.
3. Private firms do not have permission from HM Gov to carry and use monitoring equipment on behalf of the BBC, the BBC coul not even authorise this invasion of privacy, nor do they have the security clearance required to carry out such work. They have a list of names and addresses - That's it.
4. They can apply for a warrant, this is usually never given as you could turn off the live broadcast before they come back.
5. It is impossible to detect anything with a "van", this company rely on peoples ignorance of the act (not a law) to pressure and bully you into paying up.
6. This company use employees, they are not officers of the law, they are not connected to the government in any way, and they have no more right to be on your property at all.
7. Even if they were officers of the law they are not allowed into your property unless they believe a crime is being committed. The Licence is not covered by law, it is an act of Parliament. You could have any TV show playing you wanted if Police were there, they cannot enter your property.
8. If you are watching a movie on SKY and get a knock at the door, you don't have to tell them anything, it could well be a DVD you are watching, and judging by the amount of times films are repeated on SKY there's a good chance it is being shown around the same time !
9. If you have a SKY dish on the side of the house it means you are capable of watching live transmissions. However, SKY gives you access to lots of catchup tv, having the dish does not mean you are watching live tv.

madmuppet5

Although TV licensing (a.ka. the BBC) state in letters you can receive a fine of up to £1000, in reality, depending on your circumstances it can be less than a cost of a licence. You're not even obliged to buy a TVL then and so the cycle begins again. All the fines go to the courts' coffers and not the BBC so a nice little racket for them.

madmuppet5

Flyingmag wrote: »

"We would not want to reveal information useful to potential evaders"
1.They do not have a super sensor which can check if you're watching live television on a tv, laptop or anything else.
2. If you have a smart tv and can stream direct from the catchups they cannot detect that either.
3. Private firms do not have permission from HM Gov to carry and use monitoring equipment on behalf of the BBC, the BBC coul not even authorise this invasion of privacy, nor do they have the security clearance required to carry out such work. They have a list of names and addresses - That's it.
4. They can apply for a warrant, this is usually never given as you could turn off the live broadcast before they come back.
5. It is impossible to detect anything with a "van", this company rely on peoples ignorance of the act (not a law) to pressure and bully you into paying up.
6. This company use employees, they are not officers of the law, they are not connected to the government in any way, and they have no more right to be on your property at all.
7. Even if they were officers of the law they are not allowed into your property unless they believe a crime is being committed. The Licence is not covered by law, it is an act of Parliament. You could have any TV show playing you wanted if Police were there, they cannot enter your property.
8. If you are watching a movie on SKY and get a knock at the door, you don't have to tell them anything, it could well be a DVD you are watching, and judging by the amount of times films are repeated on SKY there's a good chance it is being shown around the same time !
9. If you have a SKY dish on the side of the house it means you are capable of watching live transmissions. However, SKY gives you access to lots of catchup tv, having the dish does not mean you are watching live tv.

Brilliant post :T

Cornucopia

mymedi wrote: »

Isn't court record public?

Not to the extent you might think. This is the Magistrate's Court - there is no court recorder/recording, and I believe that the only part of proceedings that is documented is the sentence. Even then, getting hold of that information does not seem to be particular straightforward.

Couldn't you just request all the submitted information and the judges verdict reasoning from the courts if you knew a case where a warrant was granted?

It doesn't work like that. The logic around the search warrant application is not part of the eventual trial. That's because this being a summary offence, the search warrant is not relevant to the guilt or innocence of the defendant.

Cornucopia

blackfive wrote: »

Here's a question.
You're obviously not allowed to watch or record programmes as they're being broadcast on the TV stations and all seem to be in agreement to that.
Now if sticking in strict compliance with that what would be the legality of getting someone with a TV Licence to record a programme for you on a recordable rewriteable DVD then give it to you for watching at some other time? This wouldn't be watching the programme as it was broadcast on television.
Of course you'd have to comply with the copyright requirements by making temporary and erase said recording from it once it had been watched.

This is fine (copyright permitting), and it's a solution for second home owners, too. (Take content from a licensed property to an unlicensed one on recordable media).

adouglasmhor

cw18 wrote: »

I meant I wouldn't turn on in someone else's house without asking if they had a licence - especially if they weren't going to be around. If she'd asked and been told he didn't have one then she'd have known not to turn it on.

Then he's very trusting. I know that the majority of households have a license, but it's not something I take for granted. No more than (in the days of any driver policies) would I drive someone else's car without seeing their insurance document to prove they had that in place meaning I was covered.


and i don't think that was called for - just because I was brought up to be a law-abiding citizen!


Ignorance isn't (to the best of my knowledge) every considered to be an excuse, so she should have asked him before using the TV. OK, he could have lied and said he had one - and if she could prove that I would have had some sympathy for her.

It's not normal behaviour to go round asking if someone has a license, the fact you are that sort of pushy person reinforces my opinion of you from the posts you have made, and it's not positive. I am law abiding myself - but i do not put myself in the role of looking down my nose in arrogance at people who slip up, innocently or deliberately.

What she should have done is told the TVL people to remove themselves and come back when the householder is in. Instead those slime bullied her and implied they had some authority which they do not have to obtain a prosecution for their stats. My sympathy is for her for being put in that situation in the first place.

The laws on the subject are badly drafted, unfair and probably not compliant with the ECHR or UK law in general in how
they are applied.