they can't detect it with there detector vans.
But yes you should have a tv license as it's live tv from the bbc.
Just got virgin box in my room
. Yay loads of channels.Official warning :|
- Thread starter DavidB
- Start date
they can't detect it with there detector vans.
But yes you should have a tv license as it's live tv from the bbc.
Just got virgin box in my room
. Yay loads of channels.
You're misunderstanding the purpose and working practices of the TVLA.
You are assuming that they operate on a merely unreasonable basis, requiring at least some evidence of unlicensed use before threatening people as their preferred course of action (as opposed to being reasonable about it first and threatening only if necessary).
That is not the case.
Not only do they threaten as a first response, they do so without any evidence of unlicensed use at all.
They haven't detected that TV you aren't using as a TV. If one of their people comes to your home, they might lie about having done so, but they probably won't because they don't care if you're using a TV or not. Their job is to extort money from you by threats. Whether you do or don't watch TV is irrelevant.
All that has happened is that their database does not show a TV licence at your address.
That's it. That will trigger the presumption of guilt and the threats.
Also, if you go to any of these universities:
Check out this site: http://www.freewiretv.com/totaltv.html
It's basically freeview TV on your PC/laptop with no additional hardware required. I tried connecting to it on my sister's laptop at her uni last night, but I couldn't receive anything.
My cycnical view is that the TVL lot are behind that somehow - sign up to it and there's no denying that you watch TV, you'll be on a list unable to escape paying for a license. That said if you watch TV pay up
P
My cycnical view is that the TVL lot are behind that somehow - sign up to it and there's no denying that you watch TV, you'll be on a list unable to escape paying for a license. That said if you watch TV pay up
Well, that would be baiting and is illegal as far as I know.
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 4,001
- Location
- Rhone-Alpes, France
There's a good article here which tells you all you need to know about TV license laws.
I don't intend on getting a TV license as both my analogue and digital tuners are de-tuned (can't get freeview here anyway). I only use my TV for DVDs, gaming and internet. They can't really know that I have a TV here at uni anyway since I bought it when I was still at home.
I don't intend on getting a TV license as both my analogue and digital tuners are de-tuned (can't get freeview here anyway). I only use my TV for DVDs, gaming and internet. They can't really know that I have a TV here at uni anyway since I bought it when I was still at home.
Last edited:
Could you cite a reference for that statement because I don't believe you.
Are you basing what you're saying on a story you heard?
Nonsense. TVL won't apply for a search warrant just for not having a tv licence or not co-operating with TVL. TVL would need very good evidence to even consider applying for a search warrant. The say so of an "enforcement officer" is not sufficient. Imagine the outcry and resultant bad publicity if TVL obtained a search warrant for somebody who didn't have a television set.
The fact is that the vast majority of evaders are prosecuted because they don't know their rights and sign a "confession statement" at the door to an "enforcement officer". Of course a lay magistrate will find you guilty on the basis of such a statement.
Evidence from the mythical "detection equipment" has never been presented in court.
TVL refuse to say how many search warrants they apply for each year. From this you can infer that the number is zero or so low that they don't want to admit the number.
So surprise me and tell me exactly how many search warrants have been granted to TVL.
So long as you don't communicate with TVL (e.g. respond to their silly letters) and never answer the door to unexpected callers then you won't get "caught" by tv licensing.
This was my point. TVL don't need "very good evidence", just "reasonable suspicion" that an offence is being committed. If entrance is initially refused, then that is most likely enough to give "reasonable suspicion". Given that TVL will be able to present evidence to a magistrate that there is no licence held at that address, then I cannot see a magistrate refusing to issue a warrant.
I know personally of two people who don't own television sets. Both have allowed entry to TVL at first request. I would imagine the majority of people would, if only just to rub it in to the officer somewhat.
I'm sorry but I just don't believe this. TVL are under an obligation to reveal such information upon receipt of a Freedom of Information request. It's more likely that they don't hold records of how many warrants are applied for. I don't recall such records being formally kept in my area of work. The Court should be able to provide that information.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 6,712
TV licensing seem to be pretty understaffed from my experience. No one ever visited me despite numerous bulk scare letters, and a friend who told them she doesn't own a tv 2 years ago still hasn't had a visit from an enforcement official.
TVL will reply to an FOI request with:
They also say:
The only circumstances in which I can think that disclosing the number of search warrants obtained would increase licence fee evasion would be where that number is zero or a single figure not much more.
If TVL were being granted the large numbers of search warrants with such ease that you think then they would be prepared to reveal that figure as a deterrent to licence evaders.
They readily boast about how many licence evaders are "caught" in their monthly junk mail shots so why avoid revealing how many search warrants they get?
Last edited:
Very interesting.
Actually it annoys me that they are hiding behind an exemption. Has anyone taken it to the Information Commissioner? If the Police have to reveal in-depth figures relating to crime, then there should be no reason why TVL cannot reveal similar figures.
Ninja-edit: I see where you got the info from. Badly worded question imo.
Actually it annoys me that they are hiding behind an exemption. Has anyone taken it to the Information Commissioner? If the Police have to reveal in-depth figures relating to crime, then there should be no reason why TVL cannot reveal similar figures.
Ninja-edit: I see where you got the info from. Badly worded question imo.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 6,712
Same here.
OK here's how to solve this very difficult situation:
1. Throw letter in bin (recycling bin preferable).
2. Repeat step 1 for any other letters.
3. If "scary" TV man comes to visit you (I'd say this is a 0.0001% chance) then tell him he can't come in and close the door.
Sorted. Why waste your time writing letters/making phone calls? This way is so much easier.
1. Throw letter in bin (recycling bin preferable).
2. Repeat step 1 for any other letters.
3. If "scary" TV man comes to visit you (I'd say this is a 0.0001% chance) then tell him he can't come in and close the door.
Sorted. Why waste your time writing letters/making phone calls? This way is so much easier.
Is it really
name
Address
I don't require a tv license as it's only hooked up to a computer acting as a monitor. Stop bugging me
Thanks
Name.
How hard is that?